Canon RF 28-70mm f/2L USM

AntonLargiader wrote in post #19429744
I need to visit Mark.

Any idea what this lens would be like for sports? I'm gearing up to get an indoor 24-70 sort of lens. Was thinking EF-S 17-55, then EF 24-70, then RF 24-70, and then I see this thread...

Anton,

My opinion is that while the RF 28-70 would have the optical performance to photograph sporting activities, its great mass/ weight may make a much lighter lens (in the similar focal length range), a better choice for sports.

I used to participate in the shooting sport USPSA/IPSC, where the weight and balance of the pistol had a huge influence on the speed that targets could be engaged. If the pistol's front end was too heavy, they would not
"stop on a dime" and a shooter would have to counteract a heavy pistol's momentum. If you look at the first post in this thread, you can see that the RF 28-70 is a big lens for its focal length range, and spec sheets will indicated its great weight. For sports photography, my opinion is that the RF 24-70 would be better suited in dynamic situations; less momentum.

This lengthy review states that the RF 28-70 is 30% heavier than the RF 24-70:
https://www.littlecarp​hotography.com …vs-rf-28-30-aka-the-beast

Agreed, love it for candids, portraits and still image situations, but I prefer my RF35mm 1.8 as a wider angle option for my days shooting at the track.

So as not to clutter up a photo thread I'll pick up the conversation here.

I am currently using this lens as my general purpose, walk-around lens.

These were taken in pretty bright, and direct, sunlight.
They also look sharper, on Flickr.

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/2nRz​63o

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/2nRy​hTd

Mark A. wrote in post #19433628
I am currently using this lens as my general purpose, walk-around lens.

These were taken in pretty bright, and direct, sunlight.
They also look sharper, on Flickr.

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/2nRz​63o R3_24705_LR5 by Mark A. photo, on Flickr

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/2nRy​hTd R3_24717_LR5 by Mark A. photo, on Flickr

On a scale of 0-10, how obnoxious are you finding the size of this lens as a walk-around?
I have been so close to buying the RF-24-70, but this lens keeps making me pause on the purchase.

No problem at all unless I'm working all day at the track, then weight matters. Then I typically use my Tamron 15-30 sp, or my rf35 1.8

mannetti21 wrote in post #19436659
On a scale of 0-10, how obnoxious are you finding the size of this lens as a walk-around?
I have been so close to buying the RF-24-70, but this lens keeps making me pause on the purchase.

On such a scale, and for my tolerance level, perhaps a solid 5?
It is smaller than a "Big White", like a 300 or 400 f/2.8.
It is smaller than a EF 70-200 f/2.8 L.

In size, it is reminiscent of the EF 85 f/1.2 L.

It is a big, fat heavy lens, but it works great and, I like the possibility of f/2.
For me, it simplified my life by eliminating an:

EF 35 L II
EF 50 L
EF 24-70 L II
EF 85 L II

Yes, I know that each of those had a niche, and some may have been able to do some things that the RF 28-70 probably can't do, but simplifying, was really great.

If I find some point where don't like the 28-70, I can always liquidate it.
Right now, with their scarcity, I believe that they hold their value better than those lenses I listed above.
Those lenses above, depreciated much more in percent (%) of their original purchase price, than I feel that the RF 28-70 would do at this time.

The RF 28-70 is a better lens, than I am as a photographer.
The lens is not, the limiting factor around here.

I used it as a walk-around lens at an outdoor festival last Sunday.
Used this $3K lens to photograph what else: Tacos and Pulled Pork

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/2nTE​Vs1

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/2nTF​Tkj

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/2nRm​G1V

I did use it while walking around an outdoor festival in Sturbridge, Massachusetts, for conventional tasks.

My old version of Lightroom 5 will not (attractively) clone out those power lines, but, I love the colors coming out of this lens and camera body:

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/2nTG​bsJ

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/2nTG​bz7

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/2nTD​wmf

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/2nTF​SdQ

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/2nTA​Yqw

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/2nTD​vBE

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/2nTA​Vn2

does the long mic help it not pick up focusing noise? my videomicro picks up all the focusing noise

Shot a small wedding using this lens for everything

Sharing one from this past weekend.

The strangest thing happened. All I did was goto the Canon website to review some specs on this lens and 3 days later it showed up on my doorstep. I must have accidentally added it to the cart and checked out.

First 3 shots...No color, saturation, clarity adjustments. Just corrected exposure and tweaked the basic highlights/shadows/whi​tes/black levels. There is definitely something slightly unique in how the images get rendered SOOC. Maybe it is the combo of color and contrast (I can't quite put my finger on it), but things seem to have an extra pop yet still look extremely natural/accurate to the original scene.

You get some looks walking around the city with this thing.

A monument to Bob Cousy, installed in front of the DCU Center in Worcester, Massachusetts

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/2o4J​3EX