LFingar Loc: Claverack, NY

Just got a Canon RF 28-70mm F/2 L USM lens for on my R5. So far I'm really happy. Produces very clear shots and the F/2 does very well in low light.
This was shot JPEG SOOC while just sitting around. No flash and not great lighting. F/2 at 1/15 sec and ISO 200. Handheld. Not a stabilized lens but the R5's IBIS works well.
Going to shoot basketball next weekend at the local community college. Eager to see how it does compared to the RF 85mm F/1.2 L that I have been using.

(Download)

Mac Loc: Pittsburgh, Philadelphia now Hernando Co. Fl.

Congratulations on you new lens. Have fun.

UTMike Loc: South Jordan, UT

You and that lens have a bright future.

NMGal Loc: NE NM

Enjoy it.

Curmudgeon Loc: SE Arizona

Perfect subject to test the lens

LFingar Loc: Claverack, NY

Thank You!

LFingar Loc: Claverack, NY

Let's hope so!

47greyfox Loc: on the edge of the Colorado front range

Nice image! I kind of remember when you first introduced your R5. I think you came a 5d variant? Assuming that you had EF lenses and maybe the 24-105 f/4L? What logic did you use in replacing them? I bought the R5 about a year and a half ago. And am starting to look at gradually swapping the EFs for RFs, but seemed wrapped around the axle in picking what order.

LFingar Loc: Claverack, NY

I had a 5D before buying an R and then selling that and getting the R5. I had an EF 24-105 f/4 L and a number of other EF lenses. The first lens I replaced was the EF 24-105. If I remember correctly I bought the R as a kit with the RF 24-105 f/4 L, since that is such a handy lens. I had no particular pattern of buying new lenses. If I saw an RF that I liked I would buy it and sell whatever EF lens I had that it would replace. I also went for faster lenses than what most of my EFs were. An RF 85mm f/1.2L, then an RF 50mm f/1.2 L, as well as an RF 16-35mm f/2.8 L and now this 28-70. I kept my EF 100mm f/2.8 L Macro and my EF 100-400 L II. I don't see where there is anything in the RF lineup that is a noticeable improvement over the EF 100-400.
I just sent the RF 50mm f/1.2 and the Macro off to KEH since I just don't use the Macro and in the 50mm range the 28-70 f/2 should do everything I want.
I have been distracted from photography for a while now so I figured a new lens would be a good jump-start. Seems to be working so far!

47greyfox Loc: on the edge of the Colorado front range

Thanks for sharing your logic.... I've been thinking it's about time to do something similar. I bought the R5 body refurbed from Canon without a lens, and until mid last year, I used the EF 28-70 f/2.8L for about everything that my 100-400 ii didn't cover. I bought a RF 24-105 f/4L from a UHH user. Occasionally, I'll use an EF 16-35 f/4L, but the nifty 50, 70-400 f/4L and 100 f/2.8 languish. I haven't been distracted; I've been just plan lazy and use a G1x iii, G3x, and LUMIX compacts for everything. Time to get serious again. And yes, the 100-400 ii is a definite keeper. Even works well with the 1.4 iii extender.

Bubalola Loc: Big Apple, NY

47greyfox Loc: on the edge of the Colorado front range

70-200mm f/4L NOT 70-400

LFingar Loc: Claverack, NY

Need more coffee!