Speaking really generally, the 70-200mm f/2.8 is a widely used workhorse. I'd wager that nearly every photojournalist has one. It great for nearly any event, lecture, wedding, reception, portraiture, even some sports. The 85mm f/1.2 strikes me as an ideal lens for portraiture, but fairly limited for other things.
小編自己平常工作還在用中望遠變焦鏡就是 EF 版的小小白 IS 一代，因此更能體會 f/4 恆定光圈所帶來的便利度，雖然沒有 f/2.8 的背景虛化能力，但輕巧畫質又穩定，長時間追焦體力負擔也不會過大，所以 RF-Mount 的 RF 70-200mm f4L IS USM 自然也是備受期待！
RF 70-200 F4 should be very compact & lightweight.. No need to « downgrade » to another « white elephant of the EF era.. » That elephant is quite compact and nice, actually, like a cute baby elephant. Just wait for its cute baby the soon to be released RF 70-200 F4. The RF f/2.8 was disappointing to me and a few people, at least
I use EF 70-200/2.8L IS II with my R5, and I would not move to RF f/4 or even 2.8, because I can accept the huge weight the EF lens, and also it's so good that I don't care for RF anyway. I shoot quite often at 200/2.8 for compression and background separation, so no f/4 for me (althrough it's not as big difference, but I already minmax it so
Why is Tamron SP 70-200mm f/2.8 Di VC USD G2 better than Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS III USM? 0.25m shorter minimum focus distance? 0.95m vs 1.2m
A 70-200 lens is not only a staple in any portrait photographers kit, but also one of the more expensive lens purchases you may have to make. In this video I
OvWoDvR. 3w9en3q34g.pages.dev/1053w9en3q34g.pages.dev/4073w9en3q34g.pages.dev/2253w9en3q34g.pages.dev/2453w9en3q34g.pages.dev/3483w9en3q34g.pages.dev/1073w9en3q34g.pages.dev/533w9en3q34g.pages.dev/189
canon rf 70 200 f4 vs f2 8
