RF 70-200mm f/2.8L compatibility and IS performance on the EOS R6 Mark II?

[Elmoui3]

Hello everyone,

I am looking to upgrade my current setup for professional event and sports photography, and I have a quick compatibility/performance question for anyone using this specific combination.

I am planning to pair the new mirrorless body, which I am looking at here:

1.png

with a high-end telephoto zoom lens. Specifically, I am checking out this optique:

2.png

I know that since both are native RF mount systems, they are physically compatible. However, I want to ask about their real-world performance synergy.

For those who own this setup: How well does the camera's body-based Image Stabilization (IBIS) combine with the lens's Optical Image Stabilization (OIS) when shooting handheld at 200mm in low light? Do you get the full 8 stops of stabilization that Canon promises? Also, does the Dual Pixel autofocus tracking on the R6 II feel instantly responsive with the Dual Nano USM motors inside this 70-200mm?

Just want to be absolutely sure before making such a major investment. Thanks for your help!

[Commercial links removed and replaced with screenshots to serve as visual aids.]

[shadowsports]

Greetings ,

Canon states up to 8 stops is possible not that you will get 8 guaranteed every single time.  It depends on the shooting conditions and on your technique.  I think 5-6 stops is a more realistic expectation under real world shooting conditions.  Sometimes it could be more or sometimes less.  

The camera and lens combination you are considering are two of Canon's best, comprising an excellent shooting system.  

I shoot with the R5 C and the same lens.  In my experience I find the AF when using dual pixel AF is almost always instantaneous, precise and snappy.  The motors are extremely quiet and super fast throughout the entire focus range.  The RF 70-200 f2.8 non Z is one of my favorite lenses.  

Do I believe you'll be happy with this combination for event photography, absolutely.  Will it perform perfectly in every shooting scenario, no, but in the majority of situations, yes.  

[kvbarkley · Accepted solution]

Ken Rockwell tested it on an R5 and got 4 stops improvement with IS vs no IS, IBS dis not seem to help him much.

Untitled.jpg

Of course, with the R6 II, things could be different.

https://www.kenrockwell.com/canon/eos-r/lenses/70-200mm-f28.htm

[Elmoui3]

That is a really interesting data point, thanks for sharing that!

It's surprising to see Ken Rockwell only getting around 3 to 4 stops of real-world improvement on the R5, especially since the EOS RP has no IBIS at all and yielded similar results in his chart. It definitely highlights how much CIPA ratings can differ from real-world, hand-held shooting conditions depending on individual technique.

You make a great point about the R6 Mark II potentially handling it differently, though. Since it features a newer generation stabilization algorithm and a lower-resolution 24MP sensor (which can be slightly more forgiving with pixel-level micro-blur compared to the R5's 45MP sensor), I'm curious if the IBIS + OIS coordination will feel a bit more effective here.

Either way, even a solid 4 stops at 200mm is still enough to let me drop the shutter speed safely in a dark venue. Appreciate you digging up that review chart!

[JeffXB]

“Either way, even a solid 4 stops at 200mm is still enough to let me drop the shutter speed safely in a dark venue.”

Also, don’t be afraid to crank up the ISO if needed. The R6 M2 handles it quite well. Between that and noise reduction software programs such as Topaz and DXO Fotolab 9 you needn’t worry to much about it.

As a side note, I do own the R6 M2, but not the same lens you mentioned; I have the Z version of it. 

[Elmoui3]

Hi there,
Thanks for the reassuring words! You make a great point about modern noise reduction software. I’ve heard incredible things about the DeepPRIME engine in DxO PhotoLab 9—it's amazing how much detail these AI denoisers can salvage from high-ISO files nowadays. Knowing the R6 Mark II already has excellent native noise performance makes me much more comfortable with pushing the ISO limits in dim venues.
Oh, that's awesome that you have the Z version of the lens! I was actually comparing the optical layouts and form factors of both models.
For reference, I was looking at the original version's profile here: Canon RF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM, which is incredibly compact because of its extending barrel design.
How do you find the handling of the Z version? Since it has an internal zoom mechanism (and doesn't extend), does it feel significantly more balanced on the R6 Mark II body, especially when shooting handheld for hours at a time?
Thanks again for the great advice on the ISO and denoiser workflow!

[JeffXB]

“How do you find the handling of the Z version? Since it has an internal zoom mechanism (and doesn't extend), does it feel significantly more balanced on the R6 Mark II body, especially when shooting handheld for hours at a time?”

Overall the Z version is a fantastic lens. The zoom is buttery smooth, it acquires and tracks subjects effectively, IQ is exceptional and the low light performance is exceptional as well. I shoot quite a bit of video so mounting it on a fluid head or gimbal, once balanced, it maintains it without any worries. I also have the 24-105 Z version and have carried both all day long, mostly shooting street photography; I didn’t find it burdensome at all. Note I’m in my 60’s, my knees and back aren’t in the greatest shape, lol. If the extra bulk of the lens is not a hindrance, and whether or not you plan to shoot video, but especially if you do, then I can highly recommend the Z version. Naturally also if your budget allows for it as well. 

I don’t know if it’s possible in your area, but you could consider renting one or both of the lenses before purchasing.