Is this the Canon RF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM Z?

I kind of want it but the other one is already pretty good and compact. I'd rather see another 2.0 zoom. Are their any benefits to this lens (besides internal zooming,servo,iris) or there any issues with the other 70-200 that this wouldn't have?

Some shooters, especially people I know that shoot sports don't like a lens that extends and the location of the zoom ring. Beyond the video stuff, it's simply more choice out there.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0
At least this one seems to be easily replaceable, as opposed to the 200-800 one.

The 3rd party collar for my 100-500L with built in arcs-swiss should arrive later this month :)
If it’s like the 24-105/2.8 (which it likely is), the tripod ring does not come off, but the foot can be easily removed. I’ve pre-ordered the RRS replacement foot for the 24-105, I suspect it will also work on the 70-200.
 
Upvote 0
Some shooters, especially people I know that shoot sports don't like a lens that extends and the location of the zoom ring. Beyond the video stuff, it's simply more choice out there.

The biggest one I've heard in the sports/news business is the "throw" of the zoom being too long on the RF lens, as it take a good amount of twist to get from 70 to 200, while the EF lenses were super tight throws that were faster to zoom. Shooting sports it's a lot easier to react when action suddenly comes towards you if there's a shorter throw on the zoom, so I get it.

I personally much prefer the compactness of the current RF 70-200 for my personal kit, but I won't complain if the newspaper buys me one of these Z in the future.

That said, when size isn't a matter, a 100-300 or 200-400 and a 24-105 would probably be my choice over the 24-105 and this 70-200 Z, but for a lot of sports photographers this lens is going to sell like hotcakes even if it ends up being $1000 over the current RF 70-200.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 users
Upvote 0
Some shooters, especially people I know that shoot sports don't like a lens that extends and the location of the zoom ring. Beyond the video stuff, it's simply more choice out there.
I do not seem to mind the extending part, but can agree completely on the location of the zoom ring. I have a f4 70-200 as well and really prefer the zoom ring location on that lens vs the 2.8.
 
Upvote 0
EF 80-200 f2.8 L vibes! :love:
Exactly my thoughts too...it looks like a new re-run of the Magic Drain Pipe of yester year. Wouldn't it be a suprise if the rumoured retro styled Camera is actually a EOS 650 homage! :ROFLMAO:

We really are living in crazy times...Canon releases white non L's (RF 200-800) and now an all Black L? What is the world coming too?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0
The real question on this will be the weight of such a lens. Sony has shown that a 1kg internal zoom 70-200 2.8 can be made. If the weight of this Canon clocks in at 1.3kg or above it will be a missed opportunity for photographers.
 
Upvote 0
The biggest one I've heard in the sports/news business is the "throw" of the zoom being too long on the RF lens, as it take a good amount of twist to get from 70 to 200, while the EF lenses were super tight throws that were faster to zoom. Shooting sports it's a lot easier to react when action suddenly comes towards you if there's a shorter throw on the zoom, so I get it.

I personally much prefer the compactness of the current RF 70-200 for my personal kit, but I won't complain if the newspaper buys me one of these Z in the future.

That said, when size isn't a matter, a 100-300 or 200-400 and a 24-105 would probably be my choice over the 24-105 and this 70-200 Z, but for a lot of sports photographers this lens is going to sell like hotcakes even if it ends up being $1000 over the current RF 70-200.

That makes a lot of sense. I've had EF 70-200s in the past, but never really used them all that much. Now that I have actually shot basketball the last couple of years, I guess I have "trained" on the little RF 70-200, so I don't have years and years on the internal zoom design. I think I'll keep it that way, I swore I'd never sell and then re-buy a 70-200 again.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
Upvote 0
Exactly my thoughts too...it looks like a new re-run of the Magic Drain Pipe of yester year. Wouldn't it be a suprise if the rumoured retro styled Camera is actually a EOS 650 homage! :ROFLMAO:

We really are living in crazy times...Canon releases white non L's (RF 200-800) and now an all Black L? What is the world coming too?
The world is doomed! :ROFLMAO:
 
  • Haha
Reactions: 1 users
Upvote 0
As a wedding guy I absolutely loathe the compact 70-200 because of the throw. I used to use the old 70-200 for ceremonies, especially walking down the aisle during long churches, but I no longer use it because it's so difficult to crank from 200 - 70 and 70 - 200. Whoever allowed that lens to go out like that should be fired. My buddy who's an avid hiker loves the compact size of the 70-200, though, however, he too hates the throw.
I think this long throw was a tribute paid to compactness.
But don't fire the engineer, I guess he had to design it that way! :)
 
Upvote 0
Exactly my thoughts too...it looks like a new re-run of the Magic Drain Pipe of yester year. Wouldn't it be a suprise if the rumoured retro styled Camera is actually a EOS 650 homage! :ROFLMAO:

We really are living in crazy times...Canon releases white non L's (RF 200-800) and now an all Black L? What is the world coming too?
I'd love a 650 style camera, would be a day one purchase :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0