cancel
Showing results for 
Show  only  | Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

Rf85 or Rf70-200

mishamdavan
Apprentice

For those of you that have both, which one do you prefer and why?

I will most likely get both but trying to prioritize. I already have the rf50 and the rf24-70 and just love what Canon is doing with the rf mounts. I would mainly be looking to do portraits but you have to love the versatility of a zoom lens. Is the lens at 70mm adequate for portraits? What about at 135mm? I typically use the ef 70-200mm f/4 for sports and to have a telephoto lens when needed.

3 REPLIES 3

shadowsports
Legend
Legend

Greetings,

I have both in EF, f1.8 and f2.8 respectively.  My everyday lens is a Sigma 24~70 f2.8   

 

The 70-200 is by far a more versatle lens.

 

"would mainly be looking to do portraits"

 

The 85's bokeh is phenominal, but limited as a prime due to its fixed focal length.  Great for portrats though. 

 

The 70-200 is heavy, but has more use cases possible.  Its image quality is also undesputable in the right hands.  You can do portraits with a 70-200 focal length, but you might not get the desired amount of background blur with an f4.  It won't be bad, it just can't achieve the same level of softness that a f2.8 or lower aperture lens can produce. 

 

 

~Rick
Bay Area - CA


~R5 C (1.0.7.1) ~RF Trinity, ~RF 100 Macro, ~RF 100~400, ~RF 100~500, +RF 1.4x TC, +Canon Control Ring, BG-R10, 430EX III-RT ~DxO PhotoLab Elite ~DaVinci Resolve ~Windows11 Pro ~ImageClass MF644Cdw/MF656Cdw ~Pixel 8
~CarePaks Are Worth It


@shadowsports wrote:

Greetings,

 

The 70-200 is heavy, but has more use cases possible.  Its image quality is also undesputable in the right hands.  You can do portraits with a 70-200 focal length, but you might not get the desired amount of background blur with an f4.  It won't be bad, it just can't achieve the same level of softness that a f2.8 or lower aperture lens can produce. 

 

 


You can easily add more background blur in Photoshop.  It looks best if there is already some background blur.  Makes it easy to get someone's entire face in focus by shooting at f/2.8, or even f/4 I suppose, and adding more blur in post.

--------------------------------------------------------
"The right mouse button is your friend."

ebiggs1
Legend
Legend

I don't have the RF versons but I do have the EF modles. You absolutely want the 24-70mm f2.8 and 70-200mm f2.8.  I also have the ef 85mm f1.2L.  Fantastic lens but it is a play thing compared to the mentioned zooms.  I would buy that zoom combo and use it for a while, a long while before buying the 85mil.

 

"Is the lens at 70mm adequate for portraits?"

 

Yes, you will tend to use 70mm more than 85mm. That is what is so great about the zoom. However, at times 76mm may just  be thst perfect FL.

 

"What about at 135mm?"

 

IMHO, usually most of the time it will be too long.  Of course it depends on where you are shooting from and how large the room or area is. However, I have used 200mm, with a zoom that is possible, with a prime like the 85mil, it is not.

 

My 50mil f1.2 and 85mil f1.2 are fantastic lenses but mainly because they are f1.2. Never in a 1000 years would I give up my 70-200mm f2.8L zoom for them.

EB
EOS 1DX and 1D Mk IV and less lenses then before!
Avatar
click here to view the gallery
Announcements