EF 70-200mm 2.8 L IS II USM vs RF 70-200 F2.8 L IS USM Z

[bendre18]

Got a question regarding this lens on a ‘r’ camera. Like the r5 (for example). How does the lens compare with the new r 70-200 2.8 z lens? I’m sure the new lens is better but is it 3 times better? (Found the Canon 70-200mm 2.8 L IS II USM used for less than 1000). I own the very old 80-200 2.8… but it is showing its age. It works… but not sure if I can rely on it during a paid gig. Just curious what those with experience have to say….

[ebiggs1]

You have to decide if you want to be able to take full advantage of the new features of the new R series cameras. Older lens may not have that ability so whether it is worth "3 times" is your decision. Not mine nor anybody else's just you. The IQ of all these lenses is similar but the newer ones have a minimal advantage as it should be expected.

However, the lens you have is always better than the lens you wish you had.

[justadude]

I use the original version (non IS) of the EF 70-200mm f/2.8 on my R6 Mk ll for paid sport gigs, and it works flawlessly.  Most events I'll take thousands of shots, athletes in constant motion.  While the lens may not take advantage of every single new feature like the RF lenses (like Briggs! already mentioned) the focus is a lot faster than it was on my older Canon DSLRs.  

I have tried the newer RF version of this lens.  I was at a triathlon and another photographer was using one.  He let me try it for about an hour while he used my EF.  We both agreed either lens kept up with what we needed it to do.  Optically, during editing I can't say that the end results were better on either lens.  Both produced great images.

Personally, I don't feel the need to upgrade as long as the EF is still working, but that's just me.

[jrhoffman75]

The website thedigitalpicture-dot-com has a tool that displays images of lens test patterns and you can compare how they look for each lens and make your own conclusions.

[justadude]

It's a good site, but the one annoyance I have is if you want to compare the RF version of the lens to the EF version of the same lens, the results are using a mirrorless camera on the RF and a DSLR on the EF.  It would be nice if you could compare the results of both by using the same camera (the EF with an adapter, of course).