But Canon claims the "stops" stabalization between the two is the same. I chose the f2.8 for my R5. I think if I was doing a lot of headshots I would get the 85mm f1.2 in addition to my 24-70. Though commiting $2500 would be a heartbreak. There is a 85mm f2 at $550. You can put all the numbers in a DOF calculator.
12-26-2019 11:05 AM. "The EF 70-200 f/2.8 or the RF 50mm f/1.2 ". I have both for DSLR cameras. So, this is based on that fact. The choice isn't even a debatable, the Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS III USM Lens as a first lens. It is by far more friendly and will be tons more useful. Not simply portraits. The Canon RF 70-200mm f/4L IS (left) and RF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS (right), at 200mm Both lenses feature optical image stabilization, and both are sealed against dust and moisture. The larger f/2.8 version comes with a tripod collar for better balance while tripod mounted.
I have the rf f4 which I wanted for portability (vs adapted ef f2.8 is model) and quickly found that it just isn't enough reach. Now the 70-200's both collect dust on a shelf and the 100-500 is my go-to. I really do love this thing.
\n canon rf 70 200 f4 vs f2 8
RF 70-200 F4 EF 70-200 F4 EF 70-200 F2.8 Version II used EF 70-200 F2.8 Version III used (if I find a good deal) Would be using this lens primarily for sports, but also a good take-a-long for hiking. My encounters with low light have been limiting w the EFS 55-250 f4-5.6, which is why I listed the 2.8 versions. The RF 70-200mm F2.8 L IS USM lens uses two NANO USM focus motors, which is a first for Canon autofocus lenses. Close-focus performance is enhanced thanks to the RF 70-200mm F2.8 L IS USM lens floating optical system. A high degree of quietness, power saving, and high-speed operation can be achieved without sacrificing the compact size of the lens. Intro. In this review I’m testing the two biggest and most expensive lenses for Canon’s EOS R mirrorless system to date: the RF 400mm f2.8 which costs $12000 or 12500 pounds, and the RF 600mm f4 which costs $13000 or 13400 pounds. Yep, that’s a ton of money, but actually no different from the latest EF Mark III versions of the same lenses UNy6B5s.
  • 5024utykoa.pages.dev/215
  • 5024utykoa.pages.dev/840
  • 5024utykoa.pages.dev/271
  • 5024utykoa.pages.dev/895
  • 5024utykoa.pages.dev/312
  • 5024utykoa.pages.dev/130
  • 5024utykoa.pages.dev/176
  • 5024utykoa.pages.dev/138
  • 5024utykoa.pages.dev/881
  • 5024utykoa.pages.dev/197
  • 5024utykoa.pages.dev/79
  • 5024utykoa.pages.dev/248
  • 5024utykoa.pages.dev/754
  • 5024utykoa.pages.dev/153
  • 5024utykoa.pages.dev/633

    • canon rf 70 200 f4 vs f2 8