Home Photography Canon 28-70mm f2 R Review: Greatest Zoom EVER (for Canon EOS R)

Canon 28-70mm f2 R Review: Greatest Zoom EVER (for Canon EOS R)

Advertisement canpers.com

Win a Canon EOS R or Fuji X-T3: http://freesdp.com The Canon 28-70 f/2 R (http://sdp.io/c28) is a full stop faster than the standard 24-70 f/2.8 that many pros use …


Facebook Comments
Advertisement canpers.com


  1. Tony sports photographers like myself will not care if it is stabilized. We shoot at 1/1000 sec where image stabilization is meaningless and may actually slow focus acquisition. My Canon 24-70 f2.8 is currently my go to lens for shooting basketball under the net. .

  2. Do you know your main problem? that people are testing the camera, its objectives. And it's not like a few months ago that they had no choice but to hear you because for themselves, they couldn't have an opinion. And now that they have the Eos R in their hands and are testing the RF targets, they know like me, that there is something out there, some interest, some puppeteer that moves each of the reviews you do. That by system you speak badly of Canon, of Nikon not so much, obviously you have to go for the objective that is doing more damage to Sony. It shows, and it shows a lot. The best objective (for Canon eos R), do not fool anyone. You have not had a goal with that quality in your hands in your life. Around here one less subscriber. There is a limit of garbage that we can all endure but yours already touches the rot.

  3. Lens is only worth buying for a high MPIX body with IBIS. But for that it is perfect. Canon, are you listening?? Take my money soon or I will give it to you-know-who….

  4. Next time you see a Canon rep let them know their pro lenses need IS and the R and Rp and future bodies need IBIS, if not Canon will lose sales to the competition. I'm ready for mirrorless but not until the IS/IBIS situation is resolved. Getting back the the lens I've yet to see or read a bad review of the lens optically but it's not the first constant aperture f/2 lens, that honor goes to the Sigma 24-35 f/2 Art.

  5. Hi Tony, sorry I take to long to flow you guys, but I try to get the most information possible before I start spend money in a camera, it’s going to be my first oficial camera, I always used somebody else or when I was filming take some shot for my ex boss, I’m watching every scenario possible to make the right choice, I see the lenses are spectaculars and I know for fact the lenses always you can use in the future, the cameras is other history at the end get old and you replace with something new, but the glass still perfect, I said that because I’m a cinematographer and we replace cameras over the years, I start with film, so, the lenses still amazing. Anyway my first question is what is your choice or your best selection form the then3 ring, aperture, iso, shutter speed.

    And my last 2 short questions, do you recommend an M6 as a second portable camera to have.

    Reading about the new canon R, if come enough Pro after listening to the cons of the first mirrorless, so can have body stabilization and compensate the lenses this lenses,

  6. i love you guys and your videos – but i can’t help wonder why you keep talking about the eos r with such disdain. it isn’t pro? a tool is only as good as the user – no? i recently switched from the 1dxmkii to two eos r bodies with battery grips. i’ve been shooting with the 1dxmkii for almost five years – and loved it – but remember when everyone ripped it for only having one cfast slot!? it seems no camera is good enough – doesn’t have IBIS? when did shooters in the 60’s shooting film have stabilized cameras? i think although i know where you’re coming from comparing one camera against many, i still think it’s important to talk about the basic photographic skills from time to time – remind people how lucky they are with all the bells and whistles. ps – i can’t WAIT to get my hands on the 28-70 f2 as it’ll be my first rf lens. keep on keeping on guys!

  7. A fabulous lens. But…size matters, and I don’t think the bulk is worth it, not being a wedding or similar photog. I suspected the larger mount would equal heavier lenses and in fact it is being borne out. No IBIS and no IS makes this a puzzling lens. Great for low light…maybe. The only real claims for this lens over others is Bokeh and sharpness. Is that worth $3k? For 1/2 the price you can get the Sigma 105 f/1.4. Also a monster, but gets the job done. It seems to me that if you are using a fast zoom you are valuing speed of operations with mobility, and thus valuing size/weight. I think it is a marketing lens that will not get wide acceptance.

Leave a Reply