Canon RF 100-500mm F4.5-7.1L IS USM Review

Dustin Abbott

March 22nd, 2022

When the Canon EF 100-400mm F4.5-5.6L IS II released in the beginning of 2015 it effectively ended the question of what the best telephoto zoom in or around this focal length was. The 100-400L II was a clearly superior lens, with a fabulous build, some new innovative design elements, great autofocus, and amazing image quality. It released at a time when my own photography budget was much smaller, but I still found a way to buy one after reviewing it because it was so good. It has remained in my personal kit since that point even though I sold my last DSLR a few years back. I only own mirrorless camera bodies at this point but have kept the lens because it is excellent and adapts seamlessly to Canon’s mirrorless bodies like my Canon EOS R5. I’ve been wanting to get my hands on Canon’s new RF equivalent – the Canon RF 100-500mm F4.5-7.1L IS – for a long time, but here in Canada supply chain shortages have made loaners (and retail copies!) few and far between. The RF 100-500L (as we’ll refer to it for brevity in this review) ups the ante in terms of zoom range (an additional 100mm) but at a physical cost ($2900 USD – $500 more than the EF lens) along with a maximum aperture cost (more on that in a moment).

Canon has managed to squeeze out a longer ratio (5x zoom) while reducing the weight of the lens (1365 vs 1650g), making this a truly manageable lens in terms of weight for a focal range like this. It’s unusual to get this degree of reach from such a (relatively) compact package, but Canon has accomplished this in part by allowing the lens to drift to a smaller maximum aperture than we saw on any Canon lens prior to the mirrorless era. All Canon lenses in the EF mount were constrained to a maximum aperture of F5.6 for the simple reason that this was the smallest maximum aperture that many camera could focus effectively at. There were a few cameras towards the end of the era that could focus at smaller maximum apertures, but Canon had to maintain compatibility with their whole camera lineup. The switch to mirrorless has unshackled Canon, though, as mirrorless cameras can autofocus with much smaller maximum apertures and they no longer had the need to ensure compatibility with legacy cameras. We quickly saw lenses with a maximum aperture of F6.3, and then F7.1, and even the quirky 600mm and 800m F11 primes. I will say that it seems very strange to type L after F7.1 (F7.1L); it feels a little sacrilegious. The image quality from the lens assures me that this is a genuine L series performer, however.

Let’s get the bad new out of the way: the new RF isn’t as “light efficient” as the older EF lens. It doesn’t hold the brighter apertures as long with one minor exception. The new RF lens does hold F4.5 a little longer (151mm vs 135mm) but doesn’t hold F5 or F5.6 nearly as long (the new lens is at F6.3 by 363mm, whereas the older lens was obviously at F5.6 until the end of the zoom range. The RF 100-500L doesn’t hit F7.1 until the last little bit (472-500mm). This handy chart from Cameralabs.com illustrates it well:

While the slower aperture is a bit disappointing, there is an alternate way to frame this. The EF lens required a 1.4x teleconverter to hit 560mm, whereas the RF 100-500L will hit 500mm with the bare lens. Adding the 1.4x to the F5.6 lens creates a maximum aperture of F8, so in a sense you gain 1/3 stop of light at 500mm. Nonetheless, this is is going to be a lens that works best with adequate light, though fortunately cameras and focus systems have gotten much better at dealing with lower light situations. I saw good autofocus with still subjects even in very dim lighting.

This is an expensive lens, obviously, but it is also a very high performing lens that utilizes a dual Nano USM focus system to give even better autofocus results along with outstanding optical performance. It isn’t a lens that will fit everyone’s budget, but it may just be the lens that should be added to your wish list. To help you determine if this is a lens for you, check out either my long format definitive or quick video review below…or just keep reading.

Thanks to Camera Canada for getting me a loaner of the RF 100-500L. If you’re in Canada, check them out for a reliable online retailer. *The tests and the photos shown in this review have been taken on my 45 MP Canon EOS R5.

Canon RF 100-500L Build and Handling

Those familiar with Canon L series telephotos will find the Canon RF 100-500mm F4.5-7.1 IS instantly familiar. It has the familiar build materials, white(ish) finish, and a basic arrangement of controls and features much like the EF 100-400L II, though with some updates to the fine details that make for a better looking, more modern lens. As noted, the RF 100-500L is slightly lighter relative to the EF lens (1365g/3lb vs 1640g/3.61lb). That’s obviously going to be very welcome when you also get the longer focal range relative to the EF lens. That weight, while not light, is very moderate for a long telephoto and makes for a lens that is relatively portable.

It has grown a bit in length relative to the EF lens (207.6mm vs 193mm), though the diameter of 94mm is the same across both lenses, giving you a very common 77mm front filter thread. The lens hood is a little deeper on the EF lens, though, so the difference in length with the hoods attached (above) is less than with them attached (below):

The 100-500L comes with both a zippered, padded storage case along with a quality lens hood, which, as you can see above, has a very welcome matching finish. The older EF lens had a black hood that always looked like it was borrowed from another lens! The hood does reverse for storage, has a locking mechanism, and also features the sliding window in the lens hood to allow access to filters. I found this feature clever when I reviewed the 100-400L II (where it debuted), but have soured on it since. It seems to always be open (which defeats some of the purpose of the lens hood itself) and the hood is wide enough that you could rotate a filter fine without the window.

One change relative to the EF lens is the tripod collar design, which, rather than having a removable foot (like the EF version), the entire tripod collar is removable in the traditional style. I do like being able to completely remove the tripod collar as the lens is light enough for handheld work, though if you carrying the lens on a strap you may find it balances better if you attach one end to the tripod foot. There are no strap attachment points on the collar, unfortunately, so you would have to attach via a third party attachment to the tripod foot plate (I use Peak Design’s Capture plates). There are two disappointments on the tripod collar/foot design, however. The first disappointment that is a regular one for Canon lenses is that the tripod foot is not Arca-compatible. You will have to use a quick release plate or something similar if you are going to put the lens on a tripod. The second disappointment is that there are no detents on the tripod collar when rotating it. These help you align properly at the primary points of the compass, so you’ll have to rely on visually aligning the markings on the collar with one on the lens barrel.

Canon has designed the lens with the RF control ring very close to the lens mount. This allows space beyond for the tripod collar. The Control Ring has the familiar diamond pattern texture and can be assigned a variety of functions from within the camera. I typically use it for aperture control. It does have detents/clicks, though it can be “declicked” for a cost through Canon.

There are three other rings on the lens, with the next closest to the mount being the manual focus ring. Like most autofocus mirrorless lenses, the manual focus is “focus-by-wire” where input on the focus ring is actually routed through the autofocus motor to move the focus group. This means manual focus is actually an emulation of mechanical manual focus, and the performance is fairly typical for Canon RF lenses. Focus is smooth, but resistance is very light, so you have to be careful at the final fine-tuning stage to not go past your intended target. Canon’s Focus Guide is available, and it works well for helping achieve proper focus.

The next ring is the tension ring that debuted on the EF 100-400L II lens. It is designed to combat zoom creep and hold the desired focal length. The advantage of the tension ring is that you can set it at any focal length. You can use it in a secondary fashion to set your desired amount of friction while zooming. I have found that the “tight” setting doesn’t lock down as tightly as my 100-400L II; you can still move the zoom ring without heavy resistance. There’s less variability in the zoom friction in general relative to the older lens, but it does have enough friction to eliminate lens creep.

The widest ring here is the zoom ring, which is located near the front of the lens. The ring is finish in a rubberized surface and moves smoothly (depending on friction setting, obviously). There is roughly 130 degrees of rotation between 100mm and 500mm and the inner barrel of the lens extends about 90mm at the 500mm position.

In between the manual focus and tension rings is a bank of switches. The top one is a two-position focus limiter, with the option of the full range or 3 meters to infinity (essentially eliminating the close focus possibilities). You can use the latter position if you don’t need close focus options and want to eliminate the possibility of focus racking if you don’t initially acquire focus. I do find this happens less often on the superior focus systems of modern cameras. The second switch is a basic AF/MF switch (always welcome), followed by an ON/OFF for the IS (Image Stabilizer). The fourth switch allows you to choose an IS mode. There are three options, including 1 (standard), 2 (panning), and 3 (dynamic, which only activates at capture and allows you more freedom for tracing erratic action). The IS is rated at 5 stops, though if you have a camera equipped with IBIS (like my EOS R5), the rating climbs to 6 stops.

IS is hugely beneficial in a lens like this, and the system works well overall, though 500mm is a very long focal length to stabilize. I still saw a little movement in the viewfinder even with both lens IS and body IS (IBIS), but I was able to get both fairly low shutter speeds for photos (with still subjects) along detecting a massive difference for video when IS was enabled. This shot was taken handheld at 500mm and with a shutter speed of 1/40th of a second.

That’s about 4 stops of assistance, but it is possible to push it a bit further, though getting stable images at 1/8th of a second at 500mm (six stops of stability) seems unlikely to me unless you happen to have supernaturally steady hands.

It is possible to get fairly stable video even at 500mm, though I could easily see the rise and fall of my breathing (small movements are exaggerated at that focal length).

There are nine rounded aperture blades inside that will help keep a circular shape to the aperture as you stop down a bit.

The 100-500L receives Canon’s higher grade of build as a “L” series lens. This includes a tough, durable body and thorough weather sealing throughout the lens. I count 15+ seal points according to this diagram, and there is also a fluorine coating on the front and rear elements to further help the lens be resistant to the elements.

This is a serious lens built to serious standards.

The lens is (somewhat) compatible with Canon’s RF 1.4x and 2x extenders (tele-converters). I say somewhat because it is only compatible from about 300mm on where enough space is created in the rear of the lens for the extender to mount:

As the lens retracts beyond 300mm the rear elements move into that space and occupy it, leaving no room physically for the extender to be attached:

You cannot fully retract the lens with the extender in place (there isn’t room for it to be retracted), so that also means that you won’t be able to access the 100-300mm range with the extender attached. So, with the 1.4x extender attached you have a 420-700mm F8-F10 lens, and if you attach the 2x extender you have a 600-1000mm F11-F14 lens. I didn’t have either extender on hand, but Bryan Carnathan reports good results with the 1.4x attached and fairly good results with the 2x extender. I tend to view 1.4x extenders as the limit with most lenses (moving to the 2x often involves too many compromises), but there are probably applications for the 2x extender. Obviously you are going to need good light for either combination, but particularly for the 2x extender. Storing the lens in its retracted position will obviously require the extender to be removed first. This is one disadvantage relative to the EF 100-400L II lens, which is fully compatible with the MK III EF extenders.

All told, this is a feature rich, well built telephoto zoom lens that is a professional grade lens despite its slower aperture rating. It builds on the foundation of the excellent Canon EF 100-400mm F4.5-5.6L IS II in several areas, though there are a few areas of minor disadvantage relative to that lens. As has become the norm, however, we have a fairly significant price increase with the new RF lens. It retails for $2900 USD, a price increase of $600 over the EF version, but that’s only because Canon has increased the price of the EF version from $2200 to $2400. The price increase from retail launch to retail launch is thus actually $700, which is a significant premium. There’s a pretty big psychological gap between a lens that retails for slightly over $2000 to a lens that retails for nearly $3000, and I suspect that this will result in a number of people who hang onto their EF lens and use it adapted (it works very well adapted) if they perceive that the cost of making the switch is too high.

Canon RF 100-500mm F4.5-7.1L IS Autofocus

The Canon RF 100-500mm F4.5-7.1L IS employs dual Nano-USM focus motors to help achieve fast, quiet autofocus. This is incredibly important in a lens designed for telephoto use, as many of the subjects that people want to use such a lens for (birds, for example) are fast moving.

If you are new to the genre, there are a few tips worthy of consideration. The first and most important will be shutter speed. If you are tracking birds, for example, you’ll want to keep that shutter speed up near 1/500^th second or faster. Going underneath that threshold will result in motion blur in some shots. That will often mean moving up to higher ISO values to achieve that. You’ll probably also want to set Eye AF to animal priority, though I do find Canon more forgiving than Sony in this regard. Sony is fairly rigid, and I’ve had a few videos where I mistakenly left Eye AF in Animal mode and had a video with the wrong focus for the whole segment even though I was the obviously primary subject in the frame.

The RF 100-500L proved a very capable lens for tracking birds in flight and staying focused during erratic movement. I had more trouble keeping birds and animals properly framed (moving with them) than I did keeping things in focus during sustained 20 FPS bursts on my Canon EOS R5.

I also had no problem when using the lens for portraits (a secondary purpose of a lens like this, but still a fine application). Eye AF worked best with the subject occupying more of the frame, but I was able to achieve good results even when my portrait subject was strongly backlit by the rising sun over the Atlantic Ocean.

When the subject is smaller in the frame like this, you might be likely to get face or body detection rather than eye detection, but what matters most is that the subject is properly in focus.

Focus speed was generally excellent, though I did see some delay when going from very close focus to a medium or distant subject. More minor focus changes were essentially instantaneous. I also had no problem acquiring subjects on the fly when they caught my eye and I needed to focus quickly.

I heard little focus noise during standard use, and I didn’t feel there is enough noise to be picked up by the on board mics in video applications.

Nano USM is my favorite of Canon’s focus technologies, and the dual application was the right choice here. It allows the lens to be competitive in terms of focus speed and noise. The disadvantage here is the smaller aperture of the lens, so expect some focus speed slowdown in poorer light. The improved autofocus systems in the modern mirrorless cameras will help with this, though, so the lens will remain usable in more situations than we would have expected in the past. It is important to keep your expectations realistic, however: this lens isn’t going to focus like the RF 400mm F2.8L IS at dusk; there’s a reason why pros will pay $12,000 for a lens like that!

Canon RF 100-500L Image Quality

The EF 100-400L II set the bar very high with a truly outstanding optical performance that I’ve really not seen bested by subsequent 100-400(ish) lenses that I have tested. That high bar creates some challenges for Canon, as they are expanding the zoom range and ratio (5x vs 4x zoom). By that standard, however, I’m very impressed by the optical performance from the lens. I found a comparison of the MTF charts from the internet, and I feel like it pretty fairly represents what I’ve seen in my own personal comparison tests.

If you don’t “read MTF”, these charts suggest the RF 100-500L performs at a similar level to the EF lens while adding that additional important 100mm of reach. What I found is a lens that delivers an incredibly consistent performance at every tested focal length with no real drop-off at a certain focal length. I also found that the lens had a nicely even performance across the frame with only a minor fade towards the corner and that there was little improvement to be had by stopping the lens down. This is a lens that delivers most of its performance at its maximum apertures, which is helpful in a lens that doesn’t excel in having large maximum aperture values. Here’s a shot at 500mm, F7.1:

So let’s break it down. You can get an even deeper dive by watching the image quality section of the Definitive video review.

First, a look at vignette and distortion. Neither is a significant problem. Here’s 100mm:

There is negligible amount of barrel distortion (+1 to correct) and about 2 stops of vignette in the corners (+50 to correct). This is actually one of the best RF performances I’ve seen for vignette. Things are better still at 500mm in the vignette department.

There’s a mild amount of pincushion distortion (+3), but the vignette is down to just a little over a stop (+33 to correct) and is very linear in nature. The Canon correction profiles clear everything up nicely, though there’s a good chance you wouldn’t see any of these defects in most real world images even without correction. All good to start!

I was likewise happy with what I saw for chromatic aberration control. I didn’t spot issues with Lateral Chromatic aberrations (these typically show up along the edges of the frame regardless of aperture), and you can see from this deep crop from my test chart that the transitions from black to white near the edge of the frame are clean and without color fringing:

Likewise Longitudinal Chromatic Aberrations (depth of field fringing that shows up before and after the plane of focus) were also well controlled. In this deep crop from an action shot at the beach you can see the strong backlighting of the gull (in focus) along with foam and water droplets suspended in the air. All of these are very neutral with no signs of fringing.

All good!

So how about resolution and contrast? Because of the length of the lens, I use a slightly different test chart from my typical one. It is smaller to allow me to continue to frame it in my basement testing space. Here’s a look at the whole chart that we will be looking at crops from.

All of these tests have been done with the Canon EOS R5 (45MP), a very solid tripod (Robus RC8860), and using a 2 second delay to eliminate any vibration. Here’s a look at nearly 200% crops from the center, mid-frame, and bottom right corner (100mm, F4.5):

You can see a consistently excellent performance all across the frame. How does this compare to the 100-400L II? A few general observations based on looking at many more samples than I’ll show in the review:

The EF lens delivers a slightly brighter image throughout the range even with equal settings
The RF lens delivers slightly higher levels of contrast at some settings
The EF lens tends to be more competitive in the center, while the RF is sometimes sharper in the corner

You can see a few of the things I mention by looking at these comparisons from the center, mid-frame, and bottom right corner:

Not a big difference between the two, obviously.

As a general rule I noticed very little difference between the wide open performance from the lens and when it was stopped down. In some cases there is a very slight uptick in contrast, but you largely get maximum performance wide open. Here’s a look at F4.5 vs F8:

Not much difference at all. The biggest difference is that better contrast makes for a slightly brighter looking image. That one sample is pretty representative of what I saw throughout my tests.

Minimum aperture is very small with this lens. At 100mm it is F32 but as small as F51 by 500mm. I would avoid anything beyond F16 at all costs (particularly on a high resolution body like the R5), as diffraction causes a tremendous amount of image softness. Look at maximum aperture (F4.5) vs minimum aperture (F32):

Ouch! This isn’t actually the lens’ fault; you can blame this one on physics!

Moving on to 200mm we see a similar performance with strong resolution and contrast across the frame. Maximum aperture is now F5:

A similar story awaits at 300mm, where maximum aperture is now F5.6:

Checking back in with the 100-400L II finds the EF lens enjoying its biggest advantage. It has a bright maximum aperture (F5 vs F5.6) and delivers a slightly better performance across the frame, as shown by this corner crop:

It’s not significant, but it does exist.

Moving on to 400mm we continue to see the incredibly consistent performance from the lens. I want to highlight this, as in my experience it is rare for a zoom lens to deliver such a consistent performance across the zoom range. Usually there is a dip somewhere, if not at the extremes (like the telephoto end) then at least somewhere in the middle of the range. That is absolutely NOT the case with the RF 100-500L. I’ll also highlight that the copy I tested was very well centered, delivering equivalent results on both sides of the frame. I’ve taken my corner crop from the upper left corner to illustrate this for you. This is 400mm, F6.3 (now the maximum aperture):

At 500mm I noticed a few interesting things. First of all, we see that continued consistency in a strong performance all across the image frame. Canon’s engineers were able to gain that crucial extra 100mm of reach without compromising image quality, which is a big deal!

Maximum aperture is now F7.1, which is disappointing, but the performance is not. Ironically, though, this is actually the place where the RF wins the aperture battle. To get to 500mm on the EF lens, I had to use a 1.4x extender (Canon Extender 1.4x III), which means that my maximum aperture was F8. There wasn’t a significant difference in performance between the two lenses, though I felt the RF lens had the slightest advantage in resolution and contrast.

What really jumped out to me, though, was the framing. You might have noticed that the EF lens combo registered 504mm, so, in theory, I should have had to be slightly further away from the target to achieve the same framing. I wasn’t. I was closer. In fact, I was closer with the EF lens at its maximum length with the extender of 560mm than I was with the RF lens at 500mm. Why?

Focus breathing. Not the video kind, but the kind that relates to photography where lenses sometimes only achieve their true rated focal length at further distances. If we were to move outside and choose a target 20+ meters away, the 100-400L + 1.4x extender (560mm) would allow for closer/tighter framing than the RF’s 500mm, but at closer distances, the EF lens obviously focus breathes significantly more than the newer RF lens. I’ve long noted that about the EF lens, but it is nice to see that Canon has improved on this flaw and that you can expect to get the full focal length at most all focus distances.

Case in point would be this portrait, where at 500mm, F7.1, you can see that I got amazing compression of the background (Atlantic Ocean) along with beautiful detail on my subject’s face.

You’ll note from the crop that the focus is excellent, and even at that distance the depth of field is quite small (the front edge of her hair is clearly out of focus).

I could also then zoom out to 100mm and get a completely different kind of portrait that has much more context in it but has similarly excellent focus and detail:

A lens like this can also make for a very interesting landscape lens, as it delivers great detail and no real optical flaws.

Zooming in compresses scenes and does very interesting things with the rising or setting sun.

This also works to draw distant objects closer. The giant Ferris wheel you can see in the distance looks like it is fairly close to the pier in the foreground, but they are actually more than 10 kilometers apart (and this is only at 324mm):

At 500mm the two points would seem closer still. This illustrates how you can create visually interesting landscape shots by bringing different aspects closer together in a shot. As an aside, it is also used sometimes by advertisers to make a property seem closer to the ocean or some other attraction than it actually is.

Flare resistance was fairly good, with direct shots into the sun showing little ill effect. I did manage to get some loss of contrast in a few shots where the sun was perhaps in the corner or a certain position where some flare occurred.

The effect in my images was more artistic than destructive, however, as there weren’t big noticeable blobs of false color that marred the image.

One area where I think the RF 100-500L is slightly behind the EF lens is when it comes to bokeh. I didn’t feel like the quality of the out of focus areas were quite as smooth and suffered from a bit more outlining. In this shot, for example, the subjects are nice and crisp, but the out of focus trees beyond have more outlining than what I would like.

In this shot of seabirds you can see that the ocean beyond isn’t particularly “creamy”.

I’ve owned the 100-400L II since 2016 (six years), so I have a pretty strong sense of its rendering. I felt like it was less prone to outlining, so I set up a test with various complications in the background. While the difference between the two lenses isn’t radically different on a global level, you can see on the pixel level that there is less outlining on the 100-400L II and the bokeh is a little smoother/creamier.

Of course, you may be looking at the same thing and saying, “What are you talking about?” Bokeh is subjective, and suffice it to say that there isn’t a radical difference between the two lenses. The RF 100-500L is capable of producing lovely images with beautiful bokeh.

There really isn’t any optical weakness for me to criticize. This is a very consistent (and consistently strong) lens. If you would like to see more images, check out my image gallery here.

Conclusion

If Canon had priced the RF 100-500mm F4.5-7.1L IS USM somewhere near $2500, I think that most people would consider it a great value. It certainly builds on the very strong foundation of the EF 100-400L II while offering some real improvements. Most notable is the additional 100mm of zoom range. The fact that the RF 100-500L reaches 500mm makes it a bit of a unicorn, somewhere between the 100-400mm and 150-600mm lens range. That extra 100mm of reach means that more photographers will feel like they can get sufficient reach without resorting to using a teleconverter and allows them to benefit from the smaller, more portable body style of the 100-400mm type lens.

All other aspects of performance are generally excellent. The build and handling is good, the autofocus is excellent, and, as noted, there aren’t really any flaws in the optical performance. My chief criticisms center on the surprisingly small maximum aperture on the telephoto end and the only partial compatibility with extenders (from 300-500mm only). I suspect both of these flaws are probably the sacrifices that were made at the altar of keeping the lens compact. But the price point of about $2900 is going to be the primary gatekeeper. It is high enough to make for a different psychological threshold for those looking to purchase, and is likely to keep a lot of owners of the EF 100-400L II holding onto their lens because of concerns over the price of upgrading. While the retail difference in price is currently $500 USD, the actual cost of upgrading after selling the 100-400L II are more likely to approach $1000+.

Things are a little rosier if you are a new buyer, however, as the extra 100mm you gain in reach would take purchasing a 1.4x extender to use with the EF lens, and that extra $500 closes the retail gap. Canon’s pricing still feels steep here, though. The Sony FE 200-600mm F5-6.3 G OSS lens provides similar levels of performance while costing nearly $1000 less. If you are a Canon RF user, however, it is probably wisest to stop thinking about the price as soon as possible and instead enjoy the excellent performance of the Canon RF 100-500mm F4.5-7.1L IS. It is an excellent lens that continues Canon’s legacy of being a top manufacturer of telephoto lenses.

Pros:

Increase of 100mm
5x zoom range vs 4x zoom range (EF 100-400)
Lighter weight (1365g vs 1640)
Addition of control ring
Matching lens hood
Slightly better handling
Improved autofocus (dual Nano-USM vs USM)
Great tracking capabilities
Slightly higher magnification (0.33x vs 0.31x)
Fully removable tripod collar
High performing lens optically throughout the zoom range
Very consistent performance at different focal lengths and across the frame
Excellent control of aberrations
Also works as a nice portrait lens
Reduced focus breathing

Cons:

Increased price ($2900 USD vs $2400/2200)
Slower maximum aperture
Not fully compatible with extenders
Image quality not significantly improved over the 100-400L II

Purchase the Canon RF 100-500L @ B&H Photo | Amazon | Camera Canada | Amazon Canada | Amazon UK | Ebay

Purchase a Canon EOS R5 @ B&H Photo | Amazon | Camera Canada | Amazon Canada | Amazon UK | Amazon Germany | Ebay

Purchase a Canon EOS R6 @ B&H Photo | Amazon | Camera Canada | Amazon Canada | Amazon UK | Amazon Germany | Ebay

Buy DA Merchandise https://bit.ly/TWIMerch

Purchase a Sony a7C @ B&H Photo | Amazon | Camera Canada | Amazon Canada | Amazon UK | Amazon Germany | Ebay

Peak Design Leash Strap: Peak Design Store | B&H Photo | Amazon | Amazon Canada | Amazon UK

Adobe Photoshop Creative Cloud 1-Year Subscription
Exposure Software X6 (Use Code “dustinabbott” to get 10% anything and everything)
Visit Dustin’s Amazon Storefront and see his favorite gear

Purchasing your gear through B&H and these links helps fund this website and keeps the articles coming. You can also make a donation here if you would like. Visit my Amazon page for some of my gear of choice! Thank you for your support.

Great News! I can now offer a 5% discount on all purchases at Amplis Foto, Canada’s Leading Photographic Supplier. Please enter discount code: AMPLIS52018DA in your cart. It is good for everything in your cart, and is stackable with other coupons, too! It will take 5% off your entire order! Proceeds go towards keeping this site going and providing you with new reviews!

Keywords: Canon RF 100-500mm, Canon RF 100-500L, 70-200, 70-200mm, RF, 100-500L, L, IS, Canon RF 100-500mm F4.5-7.1L Is USM, USM, Canon EOS R5, EOS, R5, EOS R5, EOS R6, mirrorless, full frame, EOS R5 Review, Canon R5 Review, Canon 100-500 Review, Dustin Abbott, Real World, Comparison, Handling, Tracking, Focus, Burst Rate, Tracking, Sports, Portraits, Resolution, High ISO, Image Quality, Myrtle Beach, Sample Images, Real World, Macro, 45Mp, Canon, Letthelightin

DISCLAIMER: This article and description contains affiliate links, which means that if you click on one of the product links, I’ll receive a small commission. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.

Canon RF 100-500mm F4.5-7.1L IS Image Gallery

Dustin Abbott

March 22nd, 2022

When the Canon EF 100-400mm F4.5-5.6L IS II released in the beginning of 2015 it effectively ended the question of what the best telephoto zoom in or around this focal length was. The 100-400L II was a clearly superior lens, with a fabulous build, some new innovative design elements, great autofocus, and amazing image quality. It released at a time when my own photography budget was much smaller, but I still found a way to buy one after reviewing it because it was so good. It has remained in my personal kit since that point even though I sold my last DSLR a few years back. I only own mirrorless camera bodies at this point but have kept the lens because it is excellent and adapts seamlessly to Canon’s mirrorless bodies like my Canon EOS R5. I’ve been wanting to get my hands on Canon’s new RF equivalent – the Canon RF 100-500mm F4.5-7.1L IS – for a long time, but here in Canada supply chain shortages have made loaners (and retail copies!) few and far between. The RF 100-500mm ups the ante in terms of zoom range (an additional 100mm) but at a physical cost ($2900 USD – $500 more than the EF lens) along with a maximum aperture cost (more on that in a moment).

Canon has managed to squeeze out a longer ratio (5x zoom) while reducing the weight of the lens (1365 vs 1650g), making this a truly manageable lens in terms of weight for a focal range like this. It’s unusual to get this degree of reach from such a (relatively) compact package, but Canon has accomplished this in part by allowing the lens to drift to a smaller maximum aperture than we saw on any Canon lens prior to the mirrorless era. All Canon lenses in the EF mount were constrained to a maximum aperture of F5.6 for the simple reason that this was the smallest maximum aperture that many camera could focus effectively at. There were a few cameras towards the end of the era that could focus at smaller maximum apertures, but Canon had to maintain compatibility with their whole camera lineup. The switch to mirrorless has unshackled Canon, though, as mirrorless cameras can autofocus with much smaller maximum apertures and they no longer had the need to ensure compatibility with legacy cameras. We quickly saw lenses with a maximum aperture of F6.3, and then F7.1, and even the quirky 600mm and 800m F11 primes. I will say that it seems very strange to type L after F7.1 (F7.1L); it feels a little sacrilegious. The image quality from the lens assures me that this is a genuine L series performer, however.

Let’s get the bad new out of the way: the new RF isn’t as “light efficient” as the older EF lens. It doesn’t hold the brighter apertures as long with one minor exception. The new RF lens does hold F4.5 a little longer (151mm vs 135mm) but doesn’t hold F5 or F5.6 nearly as long (the new lens is at F6.3 by 363mm, whereas the older lens was obviously at F5.6 until the end of the zoom range. The RF 100-500L doesn’t hit F7.1 until the last little bit (472-500mm). While the slower aperture is a bit disappointing, there is an alternate way to frame this. The EF lens required a 1.4x teleconverter to hit 560mm, whereas the RF 100-500L will hit 500mm with the bare lens. Adding the 1.4x to the F5.6 lens creates a maximum aperture of F8, so in a sense you gain 1/3 stop of light at 500mm. Nonetheless, this is is going to be a lens that works best with adequate light, though fortunately cameras and focus systems have gotten much better at dealing with lower light situations. There are limits, obviously, but this is a lens that performed well in the various situations I put it in.

This is an expensive lens, obviously, but it is also a very high performing lens that utilizes a dual Nano USM focus system to give even better autofocus results along with outstanding optical performance. It isn’t a lens that will fit everyone’s budget, but it may just be the lens that should be added to your wish list. To help you determine if this is a lens for you, check out my detailed video review or read the text review.

Thanks to Camera Canada for getting me a loaner of the RF 100-500L. If you’re in Canada, check them out for a reliable online retailer. *The tests and the photos shown in this review have been taken on my 45 MP Canon EOS R5.

Photos of the Canon RF 100-500mm F4.5-7.1L Build and Handling

Photos taken with the Canon RF 100-500mm

Purchase the Canon RF 100-500L @ B&H Photo | Amazon | Camera Canada | Amazon Canada | Amazon UK | Ebay

Purchase a Canon EOS R5 @ B&H Photo | Amazon | Camera Canada | Amazon Canada | Amazon UK | Amazon Germany | Ebay

Purchase a Canon EOS R6 @ B&H Photo | Amazon | Camera Canada | Amazon Canada | Amazon UK | Amazon Germany | Ebay

Buy DA Merchandise https://bit.ly/TWIMerch

Purchase a Sony a7C @ B&H Photo | Amazon | Camera Canada | Amazon Canada | Amazon UK | Amazon Germany | Ebay

Peak Design Leash Strap: Peak Design Store | B&H Photo | Amazon | Amazon Canada | Amazon UK

Adobe Photoshop Creative Cloud 1-Year Subscription
Exposure Software X6 (Use Code “dustinabbott” to get 10% anything and everything)
Visit Dustin’s Amazon Storefront and see his favorite gear

Purchasing your gear through B&H and these links helps fund this website and keeps the articles coming. You can also make a donation here if you would like. Visit my Amazon page for some of my gear of choice! Thank you for your support.

Great News! I can now offer a 5% discount on all purchases at Amplis Foto, Canada’s Leading Photographic Supplier. Please enter discount code: AMPLIS52018DA in your cart. It is good for everything in your cart, and is stackable with other coupons, too! It will take 5% off your entire order! Proceeds go towards keeping this site going and providing you with new reviews!

Keywords: Canon RF 100-500mm, Canon RF 100-500L, 70-200, 70-200mm, RF, 100-500L, L, IS, Canon RF 100-500mm F4.5-7.1L Is USM, USM, Canon EOS R5, EOS, R5, EOS R5, EOS R6, mirrorless, full frame, EOS R5 Review, Canon R5 Review, Canon 100-500 Review, Dustin Abbott, Real World, Comparison, Handling, Tracking, Focus, Burst Rate, Tracking, Sports, Portraits, Resolution, High ISO, Image Quality, Myrtle Beach, Sample Images, Real World, Macro, 45Mp, Canon, Letthelightin

DISCLAIMER: This article and description contains affiliate links, which means that if you click on one of the product links, I’ll receive a small commission. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.

Canon RF 70-200mm F4L IS USM Review

Dustin Abbott

March 8th, 2021

I was very impressed with the size Canon’s surprisingly compact RF 70-200mm F2.8L IS USM. when I reviewed the lens (my review here). It spoke to a new design philosophy at Canon which values compact size and reduced weight over internal zooming and the ability to use extenders. That latter point in particular was the most commonly cited negative in my audience’s response to that review. Little did I know, however, that the 70-200 F2.8 was soon to be the BIG brother of an even smaller F4 version. The Canon RF 70-200mm F4L IS USM is a full 26mm shorter and nearly 400g lighter than the F2.8 version, and as someone who has either owned or spent extensive time with all the EF F4 variants, I found the resulting package shockingly compact. It is only 14mm longer than my Canon EF 35mm F1.4L II prime, and is actually 65g lighter than the 35mm prime! The 70-200 F4L (as we’ll call it for brevity in this review) is a full 56mm shorter than the EF 70-200mm F4L IS USM II (my review here), which creates a completely different reality for storing and transporting the lens. I can mount the 70-200 F4L on my Canon EOS R5, and easily fit it in in my 8L Messenger Bag (I reviewed it here) that I prefer for carrying a light kit, so that will certainly make this an attractive option for those who want a telephoto travel option.

The RF 70-200 F4L is smaller aperture alternative to the bigger, more expensive ($2699 vs $1599 USD) F2.8 lens. My first L series lens personally was the original Canon EF 70-200mm F4L, a lens that is still the cheapest point of entry into the L (Luxury) series. That lens lacked stabilization and so was a little harder to use, but it was a revelation to an amateur photographer like myself at the time as it provided a degree of image quality that nothing I had owned to that point matched. I eventually replaced it with 70-200mm F4L IS before moving on to the F2.8 versions in my own kit. The F4 versions of these lenses are recognition that not every photographer needs the faster F2.8 aperture nor wants to deal with the additional bulk, weight, and expense that comes with it. That focal range is an extremely desirable one, going from this:

To this:

That’s obviously useful for a lot of different subjects, and the reality is that depth of field remains very shallow even at F4 over most of this zoom range, allowing you to continue to get very shallow depth of field if so desired.

Some of the earliest lenses to come in the RF mount were the RF 15-35mm F2.8L IS, the RF 24-70mm F2.8L IS, and the RF 70-200mm F2.8L IS, as these constitute the common tools of the trade that many photographers who actually earn a living by photography will use. But many, many photographers are perfectly happy to utilize Canon’s F4 alternatives to these larger, more expensive lenses, as they often provide equally good image quality in smaller packages and at smaller prices. We haven’t yet seen the F4 alternatives to the wide and standard zoom ranges, but this telephoto option is a most welcome addition to the ever-growing RF catalog. While the 70-200 F4L is more expensive than the last EF lens covering this aperture and focal length combination, it is a full $1100 cheaper than the RF 70-200mm F2.8L IS, and the incredibly compact size is going to make this a very attractive option for both amateurs but also professionals who want to travel light. There is one major sacrifice at the altar of compactness, however, and that is that this lens (like the RF 70-200mm F2.8L IS), is incompatible with extenders (teleconverters). It’s a bit of a sad irony, as the EOS R5 and R6 bodies can autofocus well even with very small maximum aperture configurations, but many of the telephoto options released to date for RF have been incompatible with extenders. That kind of defeats the purpose, does it not?

Beyond that, however, there really isn’t much to complain about. Join me as we break down the performance and reality of the RF 70-200 F4L IS in detail. If you would prefer to watch your reviews, you can choose either my long format definitive review or shorter standard review below.

Thanks to Camera Canada for getting me a loaner of the RF 70-200mm. If you’re in Canada, check them out for a reliable online retailer.

Canon RF 70-200 F4L Build and Features

As noted, the headline feature here is how incredibly compact this lens is. I knew it was small, but I was surprised at just how compact it was in person. This is constant aperture telephoto zoom, and yet it is only 83 (D) x 120 mm (L), or 3.3 x 4.7″ and weighs only 695g (1.5 lb). That makes it smaller than many of the primes I’ve tested. Here’s a look at the specification breakdown along with comparisons to both the last EF version and the F2.8 variants.

The only area it is larger than its EF counterpart is in diameter and the front filter thread, which is 77mm. It ships with a rather large lens hood, which has a familiar pro-grade feel to it. One nice change on RF is that the lens hoods on the white telephotos now match the lens body rather than being black. That never made much sense, and this new hood looks like it belongs rather than being a random hood you picked up and put on the lens.

The lens hood does have a locking mechanism, but, surprisingly, on my first hike with the lens, I noticed the hood was missing. Fortunately I was able to retrace my steps and found it like this in the snow:

I’m not quite sure how it came off…and fortunately it hasn’t been a recurring problem.

As noted in our introduction, the major redesign decision does bring the negative of losing compatibility with extenders. There is a rear glass element that is almost flush with the back of the lens at 70mm (it moves forward maybe 2 centimeters at 200mm), which means that there is no physical room for a teleconverter (either 1.4x or 2x) to be added. This is a serious loss, as many people have treated the EF versions of the lens as their main telephoto option if they occasionally need longer reach. Adding a 1.4x or 2x TC meant that they could also have a 280mm F5.6 lens or 400mm F8 lens, and Canon’s 70-200 variants have always handled TC’s fairly well. That flexibility is now lost, and one must just use the lens in its natural zoom range alone. I can see this being on the primary reasons why some might hang onto their EF lenses even with the other advantages this RF lens has.

The other thing that will bother some purists is that this lens is no longer internally zooming, as the RF 70-200 F4L will extend about 5.5cm when zoomed to 200mm.

This, of course, is what allows the smaller dimensions, and I also find that it helps with the weight distribution, as the majority of the lens’ weight is near the camera where it is more easily supported. The problem is that there is a fairly common perception that an externally zooming lens is not sealed nearly as well. The fear is that a lens that zooms externally is going to be more prone to issues with dust and moisture. I don’t think this is a valid concern, however, as Canon has clearly designed this lens for professional use. Here’s the language they use about the weather resistance, “Feel confident shooting in almost any weather condition, from rain to snow, thanks to dust- and weather-resistant construction in the lens mount, switch panel, lens barrel extension and all rings. Sealing is applied to lens joining sections, and switch panels to help prevent water and dust from entering into the lens. The RF70-200mm F4 L IS USM lens features fluorine coatings on the front and rearmost surfaces to help prevent water and oil from sticking to the lens, making it easy to clean off smudges and fingerprints.”

So, despite the extending barrel during focus, this is a lens designed for both professional use and for travel. I count at least seal points in the sealing diagram.

The lens does come with a pouch and hood, but there is no tripod collar. Frankly the lens is so compact that A) there is no room for one and B) it’s too small and light to need one.

There is a bank of four switches on the left side of the barrel. The first is a two position focus limiter where you can eliminate close focus distances if required. I never used the focus limiter, as I found autofocus fast enough in all situations that it was unneeded. Second down is an AF/MF switch (always useful), followed by two switches dedicated to the IS system. The first is a simple On/Off for the IS, which is followed then by a three position mode switch. Mode 1 is the standard, multipurpose option. Mode 2 is employed when panning, and the IS will shut down one axis of stabilization to allow you to better track lateral action. Mode 3 is sometimes referred to as a “dynamic mode”, as it focuses less on stabilizing the viewfinder and prioritizes stabilization at capture. This often provides the highest level of stabilization, but also makes looking through the viewfinder more turbulent.

I found the stabilization to be very effective on the 70-200 F4L, though I’ve never been successful at handholding ridiculously low shutter speeds. Canon touts a 5 stop stabilization with the lens IS alone, and a 7.5 stop IS combination with the EOS R5 and R6 cameras (because of their IBIS). The latter would imply that at 70mm I should be able to handhold a 2 second shot.

That ain’t happening, folks.

I find there’s a practical limit as you get down towards a one second exposure where just the slow movement of the shutter introduces enough vibration where I don’t get successfully stabilized shots, and that has been true across all platforms. But that doesn’t bother me, as I don’t see a lot of practical value for something like that. What I can say is that I had a fairly easy time capturing this stable image at 200mm with a shutter speed of 0.3 seconds, which is a full six stops of assistance.

But that was with a static subject indoors. In most environments there is going to be at least a little movement of your subject, so it is much better to keep that shutter speed up at more reasonable levels to help stop the motion of your subject. If I am shooting events, I treat somewhere around 1/125th of a second the bare minimum and prefer 1/200th of a second with a telephoto lens like this. Using Mode 3 will give you the best stability results in the actual capture (that’s what I used for the shot above) even though the viewfinder will feel very unstable.

Stabilization can also be useful when shooting in AV mode or something similar and your shutter speed drops a little lower than you anticipated. I shot this wintry scene very early one morning in the predawn gloom. My shutter speed dropped to 1/10th, but I used it as an opportunity to see how stabilization did in the real world. I took a couple of photos to be sure I got a clean one, and, as you can see, this photo is very crisp even at 45MP on my EOS R5 and at 1/10th of a second.

Where I also saw a lot of value in the stabilization was when shooting video. I could handhold video effectively even at 200mm, and if I turned the IS off, the video immediately starting jumping and bouncing. There’s no question this is an effective stabilizer, but, as always, you do need to have reasonable expectations of what a stabilizer can and cannot do and utilize good technique when trying to operate at its limits.

There are three rings on the lens, with the largest being the zoom ring, and it is wide and nicely damped. Like many recent Canon lenses, there is a bevel in the ring towards the front third of it, and this creates a very natural place for your fingers to rest. The zoom action is very smooth. There is a zoom lock on the right side of the barrel that will lock the lens in its retracted 70mm position to keep the lens from “creeping” while carrying it. I needed this a bit less than on the F2.8 version, mostly because the zoom ring is closer to the lens mount and less likely to be bumped or encounter friction when you are walking or moving with the lens/camera on a strap. I went out hiking with it several times and found that there were a few times that it had extended a bit while moving, but that it mostly stayed retracted.

The middle ring is a very slender manual focus ring, which moves smoothly but with fairly low resistance and not a lot of feel. Like other mirrorless lenses, this is a focus by wire arrangement where input on the ring is routed through the focus motor, so the lens must be attached to the camera and the camera must be powered on and the correct focus mode engaged for the ring to do anything. Fortunately many of the EOS R bodies have Canon’s “Focus Guide” which is a clever, innovative approach to manual focus that I really enjoy. I suspect that the focus ring will be rarely used by most people, however, as the focus system on both the lens and most of the cameras it is made for are very sophisticated.

The RF 70-200mm F2.8L IS moved the unique RF mount control ring from the front of the lens to the point nearest the lens mount, which I lamented because it was different than most other RF lenses and would mess with your “muscle memory” in reaching for it. Canon has put the control ring on the 70-200 F4L back in the traditional spot near the front of the lens. It has the unique diamond pattern texture on the control ring that makes it easy to distinguish by feel from the other rings.

The control ring can be assigned a variety of different purposes in the camera body. Some will set it for aperture control, others might like exposure compensation, etc… Canon will “declick” the control ring for a fee if you request it.

The aperture iris has nine rounded blades, which helps keep a nice circular shape to bokeh highlights when the lens is stopped down. Here’s a look at F4, F5.6, and F8:

The RF 70-200 F4L can now focus down considerably closer than the previous EF L II lens, which was limited to an MFD of 1 meter. The new lens can focus as close as 60cm (2 feet), which does give one a little more flexibility in tight spaces. Also improved is the magnification figure, which is now a very useful 0.28x at 200mm, which is higher than any of the other Canon lenses covering this zoom range. Here’s what maximum magnification looks like:

It’s worth noting that there is clearly a bit of “focus breathing” taking place at MFD, as while the lens can focus considerably closer (60% of the MFD of the last 70-200mm F4L IS lens), it only has a small bump in magnification (0.28x vs 0.27x). I didn’t feel like the lens breathed much at normal distances, however.

The RF 70-200 F4L performs better up close than did the RF 70-200mm F2.8L, as close up performance is excellent. At F4 there is some obvious vignette (more on that in the IQ section below), but the plane of focus is nice and flat, contrast is strong, and fine details are rendered quite well. Things look better still at F5.6. Depth of field is tiny at this focus distance, so stop down a bit if you want more than a hair or two in focus.

All in all, we’ve got a beautifully made lens with great handling that is also incredibly compact and portable. It will fit in spaces for transport that none of Canon’s earlier 70-200mm lenses would fit in. That, to me, is the most compelling argument for the RF 70-200 F4L, with the lack of compatibility with teleconverters the most compelling argument against it.

Autofocus Performance

Canon has employed dual Nano USM motors to drive autofocus in this lens, and after spending extended time with it, I think this was an excellent choice. Canon has typically employed ring-type USM motors in their L series lenses because these focus motors have a lot of torque and deliver good focus speed. Canon started experimenting with STM (stepping motors) in 2012 about the time they started to employ their Dual Pixel AF technology in Live View, which, in many ways was the precursor to mirrorless. The point of STM was to allow for smoother, quieter focus transitions particularly for video. Early STM wasn’t particularly impressive in other ways, as, while smoother, there wasn’t a lot of torque there and focus tended to be slower. STM has steadily improved, however, and when Canon introduced Nano USM, it was an impressive blend of the two types of focus, giving both the quiet, smooth performance of STM along with the speed of USM. Nano USM was mostly employed with lenses with smaller, lighter elements (like variable aperture zooms) because larger, heavier elements needed more torque. Canon has followed the path of other companies like Sony and Fuji by employing multiple Nano USM motors to get that torque and speed while keeping focus smooth and quiet. Sony and Fuji often call these type motors “Linear Motors”, and I’ve seen configuration with triple and even quad linear motors to give both speed and smoothness. Canon has really hit the sweet spot here (as they did with the F2.8 version), as the dual Nano USM motors really get the job done here.

First of all, the speed is impressive. Even major focus changes happen near instantly, with zero drama in the process. Focus just jumps from one point to another. The nature of the weather and timing during my review period did not allow me to shoot any action (we have been facing both deep snow and COVID restrictions during my review period, so there are no indoor sports), but I have no question that autofocus speed and accuracy is easily up to tracking action just like it was on the RF 70-200mm F2.8L IS.

Both human and animal eye detect work well, and help you get well focused results.

I had excellent real world results while out on my hikes, with focusing quickly grabbing (typically) what I wanted and locking on with precision. Even this very slender subject against a very bright, monochrome background produced highly accurate focus.

In this shot of pine needles, you can see that focus locked accurately and delivered beautiful results.

Focus is also extremely quiet, with no apparent sound in ordinary work. Even when recording video focus pulls in a completely silent environment and using the on-board microphone, I basically could could not hear any kind of focus noise at all. Focus pulls were smooth and confident, which is a big part of why this technology was developed. I did note a bit of a stepping action with smaller focus pulls, with larger pulls (surprisingly) being the smoother one. This is an excellent lens for video work because focus doesn’t get in the way. During my video tests the RF 70-200 F4L showed absolute confidence tracking my face without any drama.

Eye tracking was very good for an event setting, and meant that it is simple to get great results when shooting in a church, concert, or wedding venue.

Eye Detect worked very well with both human and animal subjects. You can see from this shot that although all the lighting was at the back of our new kitten, Loki, and his eyes were in shadow, eye detect grabbed the eye and accurately focused on it.

The focus system in the RF 70-200 F4L is one of its major strengths and further extends the accessibility of this lens to photographers of all skill levels.

Canon RF 70-200 F4L Image Quality

I had a little bit of a difficult time with the RF 70-200mm F2.8L IS in this section, as there were parts about the lens that I loved and others that I was disappointed by. I found the rendering to be perhaps the nicest I’ve ever seen from a 70-200mm lens (to date), but I was less than wowed with the acuity of the lens in the corners, which were a little weak, and I wasn’t always blown away with real world sharpness. There is some possibility that I got a less than exceptional copy of the lens, however, and I’m interested in taking a look at a second copy in the future. I’m less ambiguous here, however, as I find the real world performance of the RF 70-200 F4L to be quite excellent.

I am generally more critical of very expensive lenses optically than I am of inexpensive ones. I believe that consumers should be able to expect that if they pay a premium price, they should receive a premium performance. The RF 70-200 F4L is more expensive than the Sony 70-200mm F4 G OSS, but in this case it is only a $100 premium. There isn’t a Z-mount alternative from Nikon yet, but looking at the pricing trends suggests that such a lens wouldn’t be any cheaper than the Canon. But what really helps the F4 lens, to me, is that it is a full $1100 USD cheaper than the F2.8 version, and, while more expensive than the Canon EF 70-200mm F4L IS II (by about $300), it is considerably more compact than that lens and delivers a slightly better optical performance. You can debate as to whether or not that justifies the price premium, but suffice it to say I’m a bit less conflicted over the price to-performance ratio of the 70-200 F4L IS. I think it delivers strong performance across the zoom range with just a minor dip in the corners at 135mm.

Now, to the specifics.

There is a mild amount of barrel distortion (+3) at 70mm along with a moderate amount of vignette (+41). Both of these correct easily either in camera for JPEGs and/or Video or via the correction profile in your software for RAW files.

By 200mm the distortion flips to some mild pincushion distortion (-3) and a much heavier amount of vignette (+81). Everything is linear and corrects fine, though that’s enough vignette on the long end that it will show up in certain real world images if left uncorrected.

In many situations a bit of natural vignette is actually desirable, though I personally would rather add vignette to taste rather than have to correct for it.

I saw very little real world chromatic aberrations. There is a bit of lateral CA along the edge of the frame, but nothing severe. Longitudinal CA is even better controlled. You can see from this shot with bright sunlight and different depths of field that there are essentially no visible CAs.

So, the basic optical flaws are all fairly well controlled and shouldn’t be an issue. So how about contrast and resolution?

Here’s a look at my test chart. All of these tests are done on a 45 MP Canon EOS R5.

Here’s a look at 70mm crops from the center, mid-frame, and lower right corner. You can see that the performance across the frame is excellent…right into the corners.

Stopping down to F5.6 delivers exceptional results even in the far corners. A lens like this can be surprisingly useful for landscapes due to being able to compress the image and pull distant layers closer.

The lens reaches a truly small minimum aperture of F32 at all points of the zoom range, but I think this should be avoided because of the effects of diffraction will start to really reduce contrast and sharpness to what I consider unacceptable levels.

The lens followed a fairly similar pattern at 100mm, delivering very strong results across the frame wide open, but with a noticeable improvement in contrast when stopped down to F5.6. This is particularly true in the mid-frame and in the corners, which are shown below:

You can see that real world is excellent, as this wide open 100mm shot of a very tired me shows (morning after a day of 16 hours of travel!)

Unlike the sample of the RF 70-200mm F2.8L IS that I tested, which was strongest at 135mm, the RF 70-200 F4L IS is actually weakest at 135mm. The center and midframe only lag a bit, with slightly less contrast, but the corners were definitely softer and don’t really reach excellent levels until F11.

For context, however, the most important parts of the frame are still very sharp at F4. You can see that this portrait shot is composed with the face slightly beyond the rule of thirds zone, and yet the crop will show that sharpness is still excellent.

So finally we reach the arguably most important point in the zoom range – 200mm. For many people this will be the most-used spot on the zoom range, and having strong 200mm performance is imperative to having good up close performance. I’ve seen 70-200mm lenses that “faded” down the stretch and lost some performance at 200mm, but that’s not the case here. The RF 70-200 F4L maintains a similar level of performance at 200mm, with good center performance, excellent mid-frame performance, and strong corners.

Like the 70 and 100mm points, excellent corner performance is available by F5.6:

A look at a crop at 200mm shows that real world sharpness and contrast, while not off the charts, is very good.

At least in the copies that I reviewed, the F4 lens produced more consistent results than the F2.8, but I do think that I reviewed a weaker copy of the F2.8 lens, as some other sources show the two lenses performing very similarly.

The RF 70-200 F4L is similar to the F2.8 lens in the quality of the bokeh. The RF 20-200mm F2.8L IS will have the advantage in the amount of blur, particularly as you move further away from your subject, but the F4 lens does have a very nice balance of softness and blending of out of focus colors that just make for really pleasing images.

Up close, the bokeh is gorgeous, allowing backgrounds to melt away in a creamy fashion. In the first two examples, we can see first F5 and then F7.1, and, while more is in focus in the second shot, both show a nice quality of blur.

In this second series, you can see that I’ve varied the ratios (distance from camera to subject to background) a bit to show the bokeh in different situations. I think it all looks quite good.

The lens showed little susceptibility to flare artifacts in my tests. Any ghosting or veiling is very minimal, so between the ASC (Air Sphere Coatings) and the deep lens hood, this is a lens well equipped to handle bright sources of light in the frame.

All in all, I see very little to complain about optically. They have managed to both miniaturize the lens and maintain a high level of optical performance, which makes this lens a winner. Pair that with the excellent high ISO capabilities of the EOS R cameras, and you’ve got a lens that can be used even indoors for events or weddings. This shot from a religious service was taken at ISO 3200, which allowed for a 1/320th of a second shutter speed at F4. The 200mm crop shows great detail.

If you want to see more images, you can check out the image gallery here.

If F4 is a wide enough aperture to meet your needs, I think you will be very satisfied with the optical performance of the Canon RF 70-200mm F4L IS USM.

Conclusion

The Canon RF 70-200mm F4L IS USM is a winner. It is incredibly compact, which opens up a whole new way to use the lens and a whole new market of those who wouldn’t mind the premium optics, build, and autofocus of an L series telephoto, but who were unwilling to deal with the bulk and weight of such a lens. But Canon also has not compromised on the autofocus or image quality performance of this lens, which leaves potential buyers free to purchase this lens without having to accept any major compromises.

The only area to criticize in this new design is that you have to give up the use of teleconverters, which is unfortunate when one considers that the amazing focus systems of the EOS R bodies (particularly the R5 and R6 at the moment) theoretically should make using TCs more seamless than ever before. This is a lens that must be used solely as the bare lens, though one could enable the 1.6x crop on a camera like the EOS R5 if you wanted more crop in camera. I did utilize this at an event as I wanted the framing in camera to be able to deliver results to the client without having to do post work. Just know that this is only a cropping of the full image, however, and not actually more reach like one would get using a TC.

Autofocus performance is excellent. I really like Canon’s Nano USM tech, as it delivers fast, quiet, smooth, and accurate autofocus results. The image stabilizer is also effective even with a higher megapixel body like my EOS R5. I appreciate the solid image quality as well. But what really sets the RF 70-200 F4L apart is the incredibly compact, lightweight nature of the lens that will allow you to treat it like a 24-105mm F4 lens for transport and storage. This lens would almost certainly end up in my Canon travel kit if/when I purchase this lens. At $1599 USD, it isn’t cheap, but neither does it seem unreasonably priced. If you can afford the cost of entry, the Canon RF 70-200mm F4L IS USM will certainly become a lens that you reach for often…and that versatility makes it well worth the cost of entry.

Pros:

Significant size and weight savings over competing lenses
Extremely fast, quiet, and accurate autofocus
Very good tracking and action capabilities when paired with better cameras
Highly effective image stabilization system
Improved maximum magnification
Very easy to use and transport
Gorgeous bokeh and color
Good global contrast and rendering
Excellent optical performance across the frame
Good control of aberrations and flare

Cons:

Not compatible with teleconverters
More expensive than previous 70-200mm F4L lenses

Gear Used:

Purchase a Canon RF 70-200mm F4L IS @ B&H Photo | Amazon | Camera Canada | Amazon Canada | Amazon UK | Amazon Germany | Ebay

Purchase a Canon RF 70-200mm F2.8L IS @ B&H Photo | Amazon | Camera Canada | Amazon Canada | Amazon UK | Amazon Germany | Ebay

Purchase a Canon EOS R5 @ B&H Photo | Amazon | Camera Canada | Amazon Canada | Amazon UK | Amazon Germany | Ebay

Purchase a Canon EOS R6 @ B&H Photo | Amazon | Camera Canada | Amazon Canada | Amazon UK | Amazon Germany | Ebay

Buy DA Merchandise https://bit.ly/TWIMerch

Peak Design Slide Lite: Peak Design Store | B&H Photo | Amazon | Amazon Canada | Amazon UK
Peak Design Leash Strap: Peak Design Store | B&H Photo | Amazon | Amazon Canada | Amazon UK
BenQ SW271 4K Photo Editing Monitor – B&H Photo | Amazon | Amazon.ca | Amazon UK
Adobe Photoshop Creative Cloud 1-Year Subscription
Exposure Software X6 (Use Code “dustinabbott” to get 10% anything and everything)
Visit Dustin’s Amazon Storefront and see his favorite gear

Purchasing your gear through B&H and these links helps fund this website and keeps the articles coming. You can also make a donation here if you would like. Visit my Amazon page for some of my gear of choice! Thank you for your support.

Great News! I can now offer a 5% discount on all purchases at Amplis Foto, Canada’s Leading Photographic Supplier. Please enter discount code: AMPLIS52018DA in your cart. It is good for everything in your cart, and is stackable with other coupons, too! It will take 5% off your entire order! Proceeds go towards keeping this site going and providing you with new reviews!

Use Code “DUSTINHDR” to get $10 off ($15 CDN) any Skylum product: Luminar, Aurora, or AirMagic

Keywords: Canon RF 70-200 F4L IS, Canon RF 70-200mm F4L IS USM Review, Canon RF 70-200mm, 70-200, 70-200mm, RF, 70-200L, L, IS, USM, F4, F4L, F2.8L, F2.8, Canon EOS R5, EOS, R5, EOS R5, EOS R6, mirrorless, full frame, EOS R5 Review, Canon R5 Review, Canon 70-200 Review, Dustin Abbott, Real World, Comparison, Handling, Tracking, Focus, Burst Rate, Tracking, Sports, Portraits, Resolution, High ISO, Image Quality, Sample Images, Photography, Dogs, Ergonomics, 45Mpx, Sony a9, RF 70-200mm F2.8L IS, Canon

DISCLAIMER: This article and description contains affiliate links, which means that if you click on one of the product links, I’ll receive a small commission. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.

Canon RF 70-200mm F4L IS USM Image Gallery

Dustin Abbott

March 8th, 2021

I was very impressed with the size Canon’s surprisingly compact RF 70-200mm F2.8L IS USM. when I reviewed the lens (my review here). It spoke to a new design philosophy at Canon which values compact size and reduced weight over internal zooming and the ability to use extenders. That latter point in particular was the most commonly cited negative in my audience’s response to that review. Little did I know, however, that the 70-200 F2.8 was soon to be the BIG brother of an even smaller F4 version. The Canon RF 70-200mm F4L IS USM is a full 26mm shorter and nearly 400g lighter than the F2.8 version, and as someone who has either owned or spent extensive time with all the EF F4 variants, I found the resulting package shockingly compact. It is only 14mm longer than my Canon EF 35mm F1.4L II prime, and is actually 65g lighter than the 35mm prime! The 70-200 F4L (as we’ll call it for brevity in this review) is a full 56mm shorter than the EF 70-200mm F4L IS USM II (my review here), which creates a completely different reality for storing and transporting the lens. I can mount the 70-200 F4L on my Canon EOS R5, and easily fit it in in my 8L Messenger Bag (I reviewed it here) that I prefer for carrying a light kit, so that will certainly make this an attractive option for those who want a telephoto travel option.

The RF 70-200 F4L is smaller aperture alternative to the bigger, more expensive ($2699 vs $1599 USD) F2.8 lens. My first L series lens personally was the first Canon EF 70-200mm F4L, a lens that remains the cheapest point of entry into the L (Luxury) series. That lens lacked stabilization and so was a little harder to use, but it was a revelation to an amateur photographer like myself at the time as it provided a degree of image quality that nothing I had owned to that point matched. I eventually replaced it with 70-200mm F4L IS before moving on to the F2.8 versions in my own kit. The F4 versions of these lenses are recognition that not every photographer needs the faster F2.8 aperture nor wants to deal with the additional bulk, weight, and expense that comes with it. That focal range is an extremely desirable one, going from this:

To this:

That’s obviously useful for a lot of different subjects, and the reality is that depth of field remains very shallow even at F4 over most of this zoom range, allowing you to continue to get very shallow depth of field if so desired.

Some of the earliest lenses to come in the RF mount were the RF 15-35mm F2.8L IS, the RF 24-70mm F2.8L IS, and the RF 70-200mm F2.8L IS, as these constitute the common tools of the trade that many photographers who actually earn a living by photography will use. But many, many photographers are perfectly happy to utilize Canon’s F4 alternatives to these larger, more expensive lenses, as they often provide equally good image quality in smaller packages and at smaller prices. We haven’t yet seen the F4 alternatives to the wide and standard zoom ranges, but this telephoto option is a most welcome addition to the ever-growing RF catalog. While the 70-200 F4L is more expensive than the last EF lens covering this aperture and focal length combination, it is a full $1100 cheaper than the RF 70-200mm F2.8L IS, and the incredibly compact size is going to make this a very attractive option for both amateurs but also professionals who want to travel light. There is one major sacrifice at the altar of compactness, however, and that is that this lens (like the RF 70-200mm F2.8L IS), is incompatible with extenders (teleconverters). It’s a bit of a sad irony, as the EOS R5 and R6 bodies can autofocus well even with very small maximum aperture configurations, but many of the telephoto options released to date for RF have been incompatible with extenders. That kind of defeats the purpose, does it not?

Beyond that, though, there’s little to complain about. You can either check out my reviews here, or just enjoy looking at the photos in the galleries below.

Thanks to Camera Canada for getting me a loaner of the RF 70-200mm. If you’re in Canada, check them out for a reliable online retailer.

Images of the Canon RF 70-200mm F4L IS

Images Taken with the Canon RF 70-200mm F4L IS

Gear Used:

Purchase a Canon RF 70-200mm F4L IS @ B&H Photo | Amazon | Camera Canada | Amazon Canada | Amazon UK | Amazon Germany | Ebay

Purchase a Canon RF 70-200mm F2.8L IS @ B&H Photo | Amazon | Camera Canada | Amazon Canada | Amazon UK | Amazon Germany | Ebay

Purchase a Canon EOS R5 @ B&H Photo | Amazon | Camera Canada | Amazon Canada | Amazon UK | Amazon Germany | Ebay

Purchase a Canon EOS R6 @ B&H Photo | Amazon | Camera Canada | Amazon Canada | Amazon UK | Amazon Germany | Ebay

Buy DA Merchandise https://bit.ly/TWIMerch

Peak Design Slide Lite: Peak Design Store | B&H Photo | Amazon | Amazon Canada | Amazon UK
Peak Design Leash Strap: Peak Design Store | B&H Photo | Amazon | Amazon Canada | Amazon UK
BenQ SW271 4K Photo Editing Monitor – B&H Photo | Amazon | Amazon.ca | Amazon UK
Adobe Photoshop Creative Cloud 1-Year Subscription
Exposure Software X6 (Use Code “dustinabbott” to get 10% anything and everything)
Visit Dustin’s Amazon Storefront and see his favorite gear

Purchasing your gear through B&H and these links helps fund this website and keeps the articles coming. You can also make a donation here if you would like. Visit my Amazon page for some of my gear of choice! Thank you for your support.

Great News! I can now offer a 5% discount on all purchases at Amplis Foto, Canada’s Leading Photographic Supplier. Please enter discount code: AMPLIS52018DA in your cart. It is good for everything in your cart, and is stackable with other coupons, too! It will take 5% off your entire order! Proceeds go towards keeping this site going and providing you with new reviews!

Use Code “DUSTINHDR” to get $10 off ($15 CDN) any Skylum product: Luminar, Aurora, or AirMagic

Keywords: Canon RF 70-200 F4L IS, Canon RF 70-200mm F4L IS USM Review, Canon RF 70-200mm, 70-200, 70-200mm, RF, 70-200L, L, IS, USM, F4, F4L, F2.8L, F2.8, Canon EOS R5, EOS, R5, EOS R5, EOS R6, mirrorless, full frame, EOS R5 Review, Canon R5 Review, Canon 70-200 Review, Dustin Abbott, Real World, Comparison, Handling, Tracking, Focus, Burst Rate, Tracking, Sports, Portraits, Resolution, High ISO, Image Quality, Sample Images, Photography, Dogs, Ergonomics, 45Mpx, Sony a9, RF 70-200mm F2.8L IS, Canon

DISCLAIMER: This article and description contains affiliate links, which means that if you click on one of the product links, I’ll receive a small commission. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.

Canon RF 70-200mm F2.8L IS Review

Dustin Abbott

November 2nd, 2020

Canon has promised us that the new RF mount has created the potential for a lot of new lens innovation and development. There’s certainly been evidence of that, and one of the most intriguing applications has been Canon’s surprisingly compact RF 70-200mm F2.8L IS USM. I was fortunate enough to get to review one while I reviewed the new Canon EOS R5, and it proved an excellent match for that camera. Canon has managed to give us the performance of their typical pro-grade 70-200mm F2.8L IS, but in a package that is nearly 30% lighter and shorter. The tradeoff is that the RF 70-200mm is not internally zooming, so it does extend some when zooming, but I’m loving the tradeoff due to the unique portability I get from the lens. I’ve got an 8L Messenger Bag (I reviewed it here), and, if I skip the lens hood, I’m able to carry it upright in that bag attached to my EOS R5. That leaves room for a second lens in the bag, extending my versatility even while traveling light. That fact alone really makes the RF 70-200L (as I’ll refer to it for brevity in this review) attractive to me, personally.

The RF 70-200L is the telephoto member of the “trinity” of wide aperture, professional-grade zooms for Canon’s relatively new full frame mirrorless ecosystem built around the RF mount. It’s not by accident that some of the earliest lenses to come in the RF mount were the RF 15-35mm F2.8L IS, the RF 24-70mm F2.8L IS, and the RF 70-200mm F2.8L IS, as these constitute the common tools of the trade that many photographers who actually earn a living by photography will use. I’ve shot most weddings and events that I’ve covered using a 24-70 and a 70-200mm F2.8 mounted on two cameras, as there are few shots you cannot get with that combination. This is the first time that Canon has had all three lenses stabilized. It hasn’t been atypical for the 70-200mm to have IS (it is most needed at telephoto focal lengths), but this is the first time that Canon has given us both an F2.8 aperture and IS in their wide angle and standard zooms. And now these as further augmented by the IBIS in the new EOS R5 and R6, and the byproduct is that the RF 70-200L is rated at an incredible 7.5 stops. I saw the value of this on the day I’m working on this section of the review, as my wife had grabbed my EOS R5 with the RF 70-200L mounted on it and taken a picture of my assistant and I at church as I was honoring him. The problem was that she didn’t give any attention to the ISO setting, which turned out to be ISO 100. The shutter speed was only 1/10th of a second, and yet the image is sharp and stable.

So what’s the bad news? Well, in typical Canon fashion, the price tag is going to make you feel like having a little cry before you pull out your credit card. At $2700 USD, the RF 70-200mm is priced at nearly 30% higher than the most recent EF 70-200mm F2.8L IS III. Apparently 30% less lens is going to cost you 30% more. Also sacrificed at the altar of compactness is the ability to use teleconverters, so this lens is strictly going to be used with its existing zoom range. These negatives aside, however, I’ve found the RF 70-200mm to be a rather indispensable tool, great for tracking action, for portraits, for video work, and for general purpose photography. It’s such a flexible zoom range, and the wide maximum aperture gives one a lot of options.

If you would prefer to watch your reviews, you can choose either my long format definitive review or shorter standard review below.

Thanks to Camera Canada for getting me a loaner of the RF 70-200mm. If you’re in Canada, check them out for a reliable online retailer.

Canon RF 70-200L Build and Features

This is really the first time that Canon has reinvented this focal range in terms of their design since they first switched from the 80-200mm range to the 70-200mm range. That lens, the Canon EF 70-200mm F2.8L, was released in March of 1995, and, since that point, Canon has made revisions to that basic design by adding IS in 2001 along with MK II (2010) and MK III (2018) revisions. One would have to look closely to see the differences between the basic design over the nearly 25 years, as all of them were within 5mm of each other in length and 4mm in diameter. They were all long (typically close to 200mm or nearly 8 inches) and heavy (right under 1500g or right over 3 1/4 pounds). Each was an internally zooming and focusing design, with a fixed length.

But Canon clearly saw an opportunity to reimagine this focal range and aperture combination in a less formidable package for mirrorless. Some of Canon’s RF mount lenses have been smaller than their EF counterparts (but not all), and typically those that are smaller aren’t by an substantial margin. The F1.2 primes have been considerably larger. The RF 70-200L provides perhaps the most compelling version of downsizing that we’ve seen on the RF mount, as this is a lens that is genuinely much smaller than its predecessors. It is more than 50mm shorter (146mm vs 199mm) than the most recent Mark III version of the EF lens, and weighs substantially less at 1070g vs 1480g. This really, really changes the dynamic of how a lens like this can be used. There are many more storage alternatives. It actually fits in my messenger bag (not well, but it fits!). That reduced size and weight makes the lens less intimidating to use, with far less wincing when those not accustomed to using heavy gear. I suspect that if I owned this lens, I would reach for it more often than I would my 70-200mm F2.8 lenses of the past simply because it is easier to bring it along.

This major design decision does bring some negatives, however. The single most important is that there is a rear glass element only about a centimeter from the back of the lens at 70mm, which means that there is no physical room for a teleconverter (either 1.4x or 2x) to be added. This is a serious loss, as many people have treated the EF versions of the lens as their main telephoto option if they occasionally need longer reach. Adding a 1.4x or 2x TC meant that they could also have a 280mm F4 lens or 400mm F5.6 lens, and the 70-200L II or III actually handled TCs quite well. That flexibility is now lost, and one must just use the lens in its natural zoom range alone.

The second issue is probably less serious, though it may not be perceived as such by some. Lost is the internally zooming design, as the RF 70-200L will extend significantly when zoomed to 200mm.

This, of course, is what allows the smaller dimensions, and I also find that it helps with the weight distribution, as the majority of the lens’ weight is near the camera where it is more easily supported. The problem is that there is a fairly common perception that an externally zooming lens is not sealed nearly as well. The fear is that a lens that zooms externally is going to be more prone to issues with dust and moisture. I’m not Roger Cicala over at LensRentals (whom I consider to be the resident guru on teardowns and knowing what is going on inside of gear), but the single best comparison in lens design that I have experience with was the EF 70-300mm F4-5.6L IS. This lens was a bit of an oddball at its release because it defied a lot of Canon’s norms for L-series lenses. It was a variable aperture, externally zooming lens at a focal range that hadn’t ever gotten the L series treatment before. It was treated with a lot of suspicion. Was it really an “L” lens? Would it be robust enough for professional use, even safari conditions? I personally took a flier on one while I owned the very good EF 70-200mm F4L IS, and, after a month of ownership, I sold the 70-200mm.

I loved the 70-300L.

I loved how compact it could get while retaining a build like a tank. Because it was compact, it went on trips with me to a variety of countries in North America, Europe, and the Middle East. I loved the image quality, as it was both sharp throughout the range but also had really beautiful bokeh. The rendering from the lens kept giving me images that I really loved.

There was often an overlap where I owned both the 70-300L and a 70-200mm F2.8, but when I traveled, it was always the 70-300L that came along because it traveled so much easier. And, despite traveling often with a lens that extended when it zoomed, I never had problems with dust or moisture intrusion, because the lens was well built and well-sealed. I think this is a great point of comparison for the new RF 70-200L, because the physical design of the two lenses is highly similar. The 70-300L is 143mm (3mm shorter) and weighs 1050g (only 20g less). The weight distribution and physical dimensions are highly similar, and, like the 70-300L, the RF lens has received a high level of weather sealing to make sure it is ready for professional use in the elements.

This includes receiving a fluorine coating on the front and rear elements (resists dust, oils, and moisture and makes them easier to clean), internal seals at all switches, rings, and transition points, a substantial gasket at the lens mount, and even Canon’s new anti-vibration technology that allows the lens to absorb some of the bumps and knocks that come as a part of professional use without becoming damaged or decentered. Again, I’m no Roger, but I suspect that Canon has done its homework on sealing this new, incredibly important lens, and I think it will hold up to the rigors of professional use just fine.

As is traditional, the RF 70-200L comes with a tripod collar and case. The tripod collar is downsized a bit like everything else, and is designed above all for easy removal. It’s less smooth in rotation that other collars that are designed around staying mounted. There are no detents at the cardinal positions, and the movement in rotating it is less smooth, but this is because there is far less room in this particular design for a tripod collar. I suspect that many people will do as I did during my review and mostly leave it off. I only mounted it when shooting from a tripod, which represented about 5% of my total use, and that was mostly for video. I value the tripod collar for doing my formal chart tests, but did find that the lens was light enough and balanced in such a way that it wasn’t a big deal to not use the tripod collar for video work. The weight and balance of the lens make it an easy lens to use handheld. My only real criticism of the tripod foot was that it (in typical Canon fashion) is not Arca-Swiss compatible, which I simply do not understand. Put the groove on there so I can go right to a tripod and avoid having to use a quick release plate! Tamron does it. Sigma does it. It’s time for Canon to do it!

Besides this rant, the handling of the lens is excellent. The unique RF mount control ring is located in a different spot than is typical, moving from the front of the lens to the point nearest the lens mount. This is going to make muscle memory more difficult for many, but fortunately Canon has retained the unique diamond pattern texture on the control ring that makes it easy to distinguish by feel from the other rings.

The control ring can be assigned a variety of different purposes in the camera body. Some will set it for aperture control, others might like exposure compensation, etc… Canon will “declick” the control ring for a fee if you request it.

Next comes the manual focus ring, which moves smoothly but with fairly low resistance or feel. Like other mirrorless lenses, this is a focus by wire arrangement where input on the ring is routed through the focus motor, so the lens must be attached to the camera and the camera must be powered on and the correct focus mode engaged for the ring to do anything. Fortunately many of the EOS R bodies have Canon’s “Focus Guide” which is a clever, innovative approach to manual focus that I really enjoy. I suspect that the focus ring will be rarely used by most people, however, as the focus system on both the lens and most of the cameras it is made for are very sophisticated.

The final ring, near the front, is the zoom ring, and it is wide and nicely damped. The zoom action is smooth. There is a zoom lock on the right side of the barrel that will lock the lens in its retracted 70mm position to keep the lens from “creeping” while carrying it. I definitely found this was needed while out hiking with the lens, where either gravity or friction would definitely make the lens start to extend after a bit.

There is a bank of four switches on the left side of the barrel. The first is a two position focus limiter where you can eliminate close focus distances if required. I never used the focus limiter, as I found autofocus fast enough in all situations that it was unneeded. Second down is an AF/MF switch (always useful), followed by two switches dedicated to the IS system. The first is a simple On/Off for the IS, which is followed then by a three position mode switch. Mode 1 is the standard, multipurpose option. Mode 2 is employed when panning, and the IS will shut down one axis of stabilization to allow you to better track lateral action. Mode 3 is sometimes referred to as a “dynamic mode”, as it focuses less on stabilizing the viewfinder and prioritizes stabilization at capture. This often provides the highest level of stabilization, but also makes looking through the viewfinder more turbulent.

I found the stabilization to be very effective on the RF 70-200L, though I’ve never been successful at handholding ridiculously low shutter speeds. Canon touts a 7.5 stop IS combination with the EOS R5 and R6 cameras (because of their IBIS), but that would imply that at 70mm I should be able to handhold a 2 second shot.

That ain’t happening, folks.

I find there’s a practical limit as you get down towards a one second exposure where just the slow movement of the shutter introduces enough vibration where I don’t get successfully stabilized shots, and that has been true across all platforms. But that doesn’t bother me, as I don’t see a lot of practical value for something like that. What I can say is that I had an easy time capturing an image like the shot below, which, at 1/6th of second and 200mm, represents a full five stops of assistance.

But that was with a static subject indoors. In most environments there is going to be at least a little movement of your subject, so it is much better to keep that shutter speed up at more reasonable levels to help stop the motion of your subject. If I am shooting events, I treat somewhere around 1/125th of a second the bare minimum and prefer 1/200th of a second with a telephoto lens like this.

Where I saw a lot of value in the stabilization was when shooting video. I could handhold video effectively even at 200mm, and if I turned the IS off, the video immediately starting jumping and bouncing. There’s no question this is an effective stabilizer, but you do need to have reasonable expectations of what a stabilizer can and cannot do.

Moving up front, we find a standard 89mm diameter for the lens (that’s the one dimension consistent with earlier lenses) and also the standard 77mm filter thread. If you look inside the lens, you’ll find that the aperture blade count has been increased from 8 to 9 rounded blades, which helps keep a nice circular shape to bokeh highlights when the lens is stopped down.

Finally, the hood. The hood is nicely made of premium materials (and finally matches the lens!), and features both a locking mechanism and a window that can be opened to give easier access to rotating a circular polarizer. Some find this useful while others strongly dislike having the port potentially being open when they don’t want it to be. One of my reviewer colleagues mentions that he actually epoxies the door closed on his lenses. The hood is quite large relative to the size of the lens, but my chief objection is that it flares considerably wider than the diameter of the lens. By my measurement it is nearly 30mm wider, which means that it really increases the footprint of the lens for storage. One of the compromises I have to make if I want to take the lens in my messenger bag is to leave the hood at home, which wouldn’t be the case if the hood was more fitted to the dimensions of the lens.

The most similar lens for mirrorless right now is the Tamron 70-180mm F2.8 VXD, which is made for Sony but hopefully will be ported over to RF in the future. The Tamron is 3mm longer, but is 8mm narrower and weighs in at 260g less. To be fair, the Canon has the additional 20mm of focal length, more features, and a image stabilizer, so I think that Canon has done a pretty great job in downsizing without giving up any features. The RF 70-200mm is pretty wonderfully compact and light with all things considered, and I think that is the single biggest advantage for this lens over alternatives.

One final point to consider is that Canon has made an improvement to how closely the lens can focus. It can now focus down to 70cm rather than the older 1.2m figure, which does give one a little more flexibility in tight spaces. Also improved is the magnification figure, which is now 0.23x rather than 0.21x, though this does point to a bit of focus breathing, as the Sony 70-200mm F2.8 GM focuses down to 96cm and produces a higher 0.25x magnification. Here’s what maximum magnification looks like:

I did find that contrast and detail was lacking a bit at MFD. In this shot (200mm, F2.8), for example, the amount of magnification is impressive and useful, but the amount of detail and contrast is not.

You will see a significant improvement if you stop down to F4 in both contrast and detail, so it is worth doing.

Depth of field is often tiny with such a long focal length anyway, so moving to F4 will still give you a nicely blurred background near minimum focus distances.

All in all, we’ve got a beautifully made lens here that has really changed the reality of what a 70-200mm F2.8 has to be and how it can be used. That, to me, is the most compelling argument for the RF 70-200L, though the lack of compatibility with teleconverters (and the price!) might be the most compelling argument against it.

Autofocus Performance

Canon has employed dual Nano USM motors to drive autofocus in this lens, and after spending extended time with it, I think this was an excellent choice. Canon has typically employed ring-type USM motors in their L series lenses because these focus motors have a lot of torque and deliver good focus speed. Canon started experimenting with STM (stepping motors) in 2012 about the time they started to employ their Dual Pixel AF technology in Live View, which, in many ways was the precursor to mirrorless. The point of STM was to allow for smoother, quieter focus transitions particularly for video. Early STM wasn’t particularly impressive in other ways, as, while smoother, there wasn’t a lot of torque there and focus tended to be slower. STM has steadily improved, however, and when Canon introduced Nano USM, it was an impressive blend of the two types of focus, giving both the quiet, smooth performance of STM along with the speed of USM. Nano USM was mostly employed with lenses with smaller, lighter elements (like variable aperture zooms) because larger, heavier elements needed more torque. Canon has followed the path of other companies like Sony and Fuji by employing multiple Nano USM motors to get that torque and speed. Sony and Fuji often call these type motors “Linear Motors”, and I’ve seen configuration with triple and even quad linear motors to give both speed and smoothness. Canon has really hit the sweet spot here, as the dual Nano USM motors really get the job done here.

First of all, the speed is impressive. Even major focus changes happen near instantly, with zero drama in the process. Focus just jumps from one point to another. I had extremely good results while tracking action with the RF 70-200L in concert with the Canon EOS R5. Even when shooting at a high clip (12FPS or 20 FPS) and with a challenging target (a small, fast dog who is very dark around the eyes charging towards the camera), I was able to get one well-focused result after another.

This is a lens with plenty of speed for sports use, and quick eye detect will help even more in that kind of setting. Both human and animal eye detect work well, and help you get well focused results.

Focus is also extremely quiet, with no apparent sound in ordinary work. Even when recording video focus pulls in a completely silent environment and using the on-board microphone, I could hear only the faintest clicking after focus was locked, which seems like it is more about dispersing the kinetic energy than anything. Focus pulls were smooth and confident, which is a big part of why this technology was developed. This is an excellent lens for video work because focus doesn’t get in the way. It would be a great lens to have mounted in a venue to track the action on the stage. I used it for a number of my YouTube videos, and it showed absolute confidence tracking my face without any drama during those segments.

Eye tracking was very good for an event setting, and meant that it is simple to get great results when shooting in a church, concert, or wedding venue.

Eye Detect obviously makes getting portraits very easy, no matter where you compose.

The focus system in the RF 70-200L is one of its major strengths and further extends the accessibility of this lens to photographers of all skill levels.

Canon RF 70-200L Image Quality

My reputation is built upon fairness and objectivity, and so in the interest of fairness, I’m going to preface this section with two caveats/insights into how I approach lens evaluation. The first is that we as consumers are programmed to expect that every new lens release will be better and better optically no matter what other variables are introduced. The response to the Canon EF 70-200mm F2.8L IS III was immediately muted when the word got out that it wasn’t much better optically than the Mark II version…no matter what else might have improved and changed for the better. Sometimes our expectations aren’t rooted in reality. Canon has dramatically reduced the size of this lens, and our typical response is, “Great! Is it also much better optically?”, without really considering that those two outcomes might not logically, rationally follow. So I will preface this section by saying that while the RF 70-200L isn’t any less sharp than previous Canon 70-200 lenses, neither does it really advance the ball optically. There is one area where I think there is optical improvement which I’ll reference in a moment, but I don’t think this lens is actually sharper than previous Canon (or competing) 70-200mm lenses, despite the wide-spread notion that all RF lenses are radically better than EF lenses.

The second caveat is that I am more critical of very expensive lenses optically than I am of inexpensive ones. I believe that consumers should be able to expect that if they pay a premium price, they should receive a premium performance. Put simply, this lens costs $600 USD more than the last EF 70-200L III version released a couple of years ago. This makes it the most expensive lens in its class (Sony’s A-mount 70-200mm II is more, but is hardly a current lens as Sony seems to have largely abandoned A-mount). It seems fair that this should come with some expectations attached.

As I’ll demonstrate below, I believe that the RF 70-200L largely produces images that I really like on a global level but that I’m not necessarily wowed by on a pixel level.

Now, to the specifics.

There is a mild amount of barrel distortion (+4) at 70mm along with a moderate amount of vignette (+41). Both of these correct easily either in camera for JPEGs and/or Video or via the correction profile in your software for RAW files.

By 200mm the distortion flips to some mild pincushion distortion (-4) and a much heavier amount of vignette (+70). It still corrects fine, though I feel like the standard profile leaves more lingering vignette (at least in Adobe) than what I would like.

I felt like I could do a better job manually if the object was to completely correct for the vignette, though that’s not always preferred. In many situations a bit of natural vignette is actually desirable.

No real issues there. At 70mm I saw only the faintest hint of Lateral Chromatic Aberrations and almost no Longitudinal Chromatic aberrations. You can see in this test that there is basically no purple fringing before the plane of focus and no green afterwards.

There’s slightly more LoCa at 200mm, but not enough to really show up in most real world situations.

So, the basic optical flaws are all fairly well controlled and shouldn’t be an issue. So how about contrast and resolution?

Some of you will enjoy digging through the details to follow, but some would prefer a summary of my findings. What I found is that center and midframe sharpness were consistently quite good with contrast being good but not exceptional. Stopping down to F4 or F5.6 provides a pronounced improvement of contrast and a more mild improvement to actual resolution. In many cases slightly off center (think the rule of thirds zone) was actually more impressive than the center. Corners lag significantly behind center performance, and I only saw exceptional performance in the corner when stopped down to around F8, on average, the aperture value (at least on the R5) that I feel is best suited to landscapes or other scenes where corner to corner sharpness is valued. Performance across the zoom range was fairly consistent; this lens is optimized for sharpness in the mid-frame at wide apertures and only for ultimate corner sharpness at smaller apertures.

Here’s a look at my test chart with 70mm crops from the center, mid-frame, and lower right corner. You can see that the corner performance is considerably behind the center and mid-frame results.

F4 brings improvement to the center and mid-frame, but the corners require stopping down to F8 before they are truly sharp:

Use F8 on the EOS R5 for landscapes, as you’ll get great sharpness and contrast across the frame. Here’s a full image, then a crop from the middle and far left side.

The lens reaches a truly small minimum aperture of F32, but I think this should be avoided because of the effects of diffraction will start to really reduce contrast and sharpness to what I consider unacceptable levels.

The lens followed a fairly similar pattern at 100mm, delivering fantastic center and mid-frame results by F4, but requiring F8 to achieve greatness in the corners.

The lens reaches its zenith at 135mm where I feel like it achieves very high levels of sharpness and contrast earlier in the aperture range, though the corners still need F8 to really shine.

So finally we reach the arguably most important point in the zoom range – 200mm. I’ve seen 70-200mm lenses that “faded” down the stretch and lost some performance at 200mm, but that’s not the case here. The RF 70-200L maintains a similar level of performance at 200mm, with good center performance, excellent mid-frame performance, and corners that still need that same extra to pop.

When you test a lot of lenses, you start to get a sense of what the engineers’ priorities are with a given lens. In this case, this is a lens optimized for performance in the center two-thirds of the frame, though with the sweet spot slightly off center (as professional photographers rarely compose right in the center of the frame). Sharp corners aren’t nearly as high a priority, and so we see them sharpen up at smaller apertures where that is more likely needed. Here’s a lens that is at 100mm F2.8 and where I’ve given it some processing, and you can see from the crop that there is a lot of sharpness there in the plane of focus.

At the same time, however, I’m a little underwhelmed by the absolute performance of the lens relative to its price. Earlier in 2020 I reviewed the new Tamron 70-180mm F2.8 VXD for Sony FE, another compact telephoto that follows a similar kind of blueprint. What I saw when comparing the lenses was the the Tamron was slightly sharper in the center of the frame, the Canon a bit sharper mid-frame, while the Tamron destroys the Canon in corner performance. I’ll include comparisons here at 70mm and 180/200mm.

There are areas where the Canon has a clear advantage (features, build, inclusion of IS, 20mm of extra focal length), but optically it is not superior despite the Tamron costing some $1400 less. That bothers me mostly because the Canon is so expensive. I expressed similar concerns relative to Sony’s 70-200mm F2.8 GM. These lenses are just priced too high.

Some of you might be saying, “Wait! I read/watched another review where the reviewer raved about the sharpness from this lens. Maybe you got a bad copy…” A couple of things: first of all, I’ve happened to review this lens after the release of the Canon EOS R5 and its much higher 45Mpx of resolution, while almost all the early reviews were done on the 30Mpx of the EOS R. Higher resolution reveals certain shortcomings that lower resolution cameras conceal. Secondly, I’m not sure that my findings actually differ from that of other reviewers. I sometimes look at the raw data that reviewers produce as a part of their reviews and parse it a different way. For example, if you look at the chart testing from Bryan Carnathan’s “The Digital Picture” (a fantastic resource), you’ll find that his tests produced similar results relative to the Tamron 70-180mm even when testing the Canon on the EOS R. I think that the RF 70-200L is a very good lens, but I don’t believe that it is an improvement on what we’ve seen before optically…

…except in one area. I find the bokeh rendering from the lens to be particularly good for a zoom lens like this. Some lenses have a unique ability to produce particularly pleasing backgrounds. Call it “rendering” or “drawing”, but some lenses just find that perfect balance of softness and blending of out of focus colors that just make for really pleasing images. The RF 70-200L is just such a lens.

Again I am reminded of the EF 70-300L that really exceeded my expectations in this area. Whether at medium distances where more is in focus:

…or at very close distances, backgrounds just melt away in a really pleasing fashion.

Time and again I was really pleased with the look of the images I got from the RF 70-200L even if I wasn’t blown away by the technical performance on a pixel level. Here’s a few of the images where I thought that the quality of the bokeh really made the image:

The lens also did pretty good in flare resistance, which extends the usefulness.

In short, I actually really enjoyed using the lens for the huge variety of applications that such a lens can service. Here’s a few of those various things that came along:

If you want to see more images, you can check out the image gallery here.

I hope that I’ve been able to bring the appropriate level of nuance to this section. I don’t think it is true that every RF lens will automatically be excellent due to the revolutionary new mount; there will be exceptional RF lenses and there will be mediocre RF lenses. This RF 70-200L is optically good, but I don’t think it is exceptional. I do, however, really like the overall look and feel of the images I’ve gotten with the lens and feel that it is appropriate to the class of lens…but maybe not the price they are asking for it.

Conclusion

I was very excited for the announcement of the Canon RF 70-200mm F2.8L IS USM, partly because such a lens is incredibly important to a system. This is one of the “bread-and-butter” lenses for working professionals, and, while I don’t mind hitting the wider angles with a prime (I can do a LOT with a 35mm lens!), I don’t want anything but a 70-200mm (or similar lens) on the telephoto end when I’m shooting events. The flexibility of that zoom range cannot be overstated, and even when you are shooting portraits, it gives you so many different options for how to approach either a setting or a model.

I was mostly excited, however, because it was clear that Canon was taking an innovative approach to the lens design. I love the 70-200mm F2.8 concept, but I haven’t always loved the bulky package it comes in. The RF 70-200L traveled with me far more often during my review because of the more compact, flexible form factor, and that means it got used more often. I used it for video, for stills, and for tracking action. I took it to church, and on hikes, and to portrait sessions. There is a real value to be had in that, and I applaud Canon taking a chance and reimagining this lens.

I love the look and feel of images from the lens and loved using it. The stabilization is excellent, the autofocus is exceptional, and the weight and balance of the lens made it easy to use on my Canon EOS R5.

But there are two main disadvantages to this new lens design that will be part of the consideration process for any potential buyer. The first is that teleconverters do not physically fit, meaning that one loses an advantage/convenience that you might have heavily relied on in the past. Secondly is the reality that this lens is just too expensive. At $2700 USD ($3500 CAD here in Canada!), this lens is priced at an extreme. It is $600 USD more than the EF 70-200mm F2.8L IS III, and one has to wonder, “why?” I get a lot of comments from viewers at my YouTube channel who are extremely interested in what Canon is doing in the full frame mirrorless space, but simply cannot afford the prices. The RF 15-35mm F2.8L IS that I just reviewed costs $100 more than its EF counterpart, and that feels more appropriate. Still, at the end of the day, this is what I would call an indispensable lens for a working professional or hard-core amateur, so sometimes you just have to have that little cry, bite the bullet, and lay down the money. Or you could wait for the inevitable F4 version from Canon that will come, or maybe hope for a few third party challenger or two to come in the near future. Choices, choices.

Pros:

Significant size and weight savings over competing lenses
Extremely fast, quiet, and accurate autofocus
Very good tracking and action capabilities when paired with better cameras
Highly effective image stabilization system
Improved maximum magnification
Very easy to use and transport for a 70-200mm F2.8
Gorgeous bokeh and color
Good global contrast and rendering
Good center sharpness and excellent mid-frame performance
Good control of aberrations and flare

Cons:

Extremely expensive
Not compatible with teleconverters
Tripod foot not Arca-Swiss compatible
Not particularly sharp in corners until smaller apertures

Gear Used:

Purchase a Canon RF 70-200mm F2.8L IS @ B&H Photo | Amazon | Camera Canada | Amazon Canada | Amazon UK | Amazon Germany | Ebay

Purchase a Canon EOS R5 @ B&H Photo | Amazon | Camera Canada | Amazon Canada | Amazon UK | Amazon Germany | Ebay

Purchase a Canon EOS R6 @ B&H Photo | Amazon | Camera Canada | Amazon Canada | Amazon UK | Amazon Germany | Ebay

Purchase a Canon RF 15-35mm F2.8L IS @ B&H Photo | Amazon | Camera Canada | Amazon Canada | Amazon UK | Amazon Germany | Ebay

Peak Design Slide Lite: Peak Design Store | B&H Photo | Amazon | Amazon Canada | Amazon UK
Peak Design Leash Strap: Peak Design Store | B&H Photo | Amazon | Amazon Canada | Amazon UK
BenQ SW271 4K Photo Editing Monitor – B&H Photo | Amazon | Amazon.ca | Amazon UK
Adobe Photoshop Creative Cloud 1-Year Subscription
Exposure Software X5 (Use Code “dustinabbott” to get 10% anything and everything)
Visit Dustin’s Amazon Storefront and see his favorite gear

Purchasing your gear through B&H and these links helps fund this website and keeps the articles coming. You can also make a donation here if you would like. Visit my Amazon page for some of my gear of choice! Thank you for your support.

Great News! I can now offer a 5% discount on all purchases at Amplis Foto, Canada’s Leading Photographic Supplier. Please enter discount code: AMPLIS52018DA in your cart. It is good for everything in your cart, and is stackable with other coupons, too! It will take 5% off your entire order! Proceeds go towards keeping this site going and providing you with new reviews!

Use Code “DUSTINHDR” to get $10 off ($15 CDN) any Skylum product: Luminar, Aurora, or AirMagic

Keywords: Canon RF 70-200, Canon RF 70-200mm, 70-200, 70-200mm, RF, 70-200L, L, IS, USM Canon EOS R5, EOS, R5, EOS R5, EOS R6, mirrorless, full frame, EOS R5 Review, Canon R5 Review, Canon 70-200 Review, Dustin Abbott, Real World, Comparison, Handling, Tracking, Focus, Burst Rate, Tracking, Sports, Portraits, Resolution, High ISO, Image Quality, Sample Images, Photography, Dogs, Ergonomics, 45Mpx, Sony a9, RF 70-200mm F2.8L IS, RF 15-35mm F2.8L IS, Canon

DISCLAIMER: This article and description contains affiliate links, which means that if you click on one of the product links, I’ll receive a small commission. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.

Canon RF 70-200mm F2.8L IS Image Gallery

Dustin Abbott

October 31st, 2020

Canon has promised us that the new RF mount has created the potential for a lot of new lens innovation and development. There’s certainly been evidence of that, and one of the most intriguing applications has been Canon’s surprisingly compact RF 70-200mm F2.8L IS USM. I was fortunate enough to get to review one while I reviewed the new Canon EOS R5, and it proved an excellent match for that camera. Canon has managed to give us the performance of their typical pro-grade 70-200mm F2.8L IS, but in a package that is nearly 30% lighter and shorter. The tradeoff is that the RF 70-200mm is not internally zooming, so it does extend some when zooming, but I’m loving the tradeoff due to the unique portability I get from the lens. I’ve got an 8L Messenger Bag (I reviewed it here), and, if I skip the lens hood, I’m able to carry it upright in that bag attached to my EOS R5. That leaves room for a second lens in the bag, extending my versatility even while traveling light.

So what’s the bad news? Well, in typical Canon fashion, the price tag is going to make you feel like having a little cry before you pull out your credit card. At $2700 USD, the RF 70-200mm is priced at nearly 30% higher than the most recent EF 70-200mm F2.8L IS III. Apparently 30% less lens is going to cost you 30% more. Also sacrificed at the altar of compactness is the ability to use teleconverters, so this lens is strictly going to be used with its existing zoom range. These negatives aside, however, I’ve found the RF 70-200mm to be a rather indispensable tool, great for tracking action, for portraits, for video work, and for general purpose photography. It’s such a flexible zoom range, and the wide maximum aperture gives one a lot of options.

The photo galleries below will give you a closer look at the lens along with photos taken with it on the Canon EOS R5 camera. Stay tuned for my upcoming reviews!

Thanks to Camera Canada for getting me a loaner of the RF 70-200mm. If you’re in Canada, check them out for a reliable online retailer.

Photos of the Canon RF 70-200mm F2.8L IS

Photos taken with the Canon RF 70-200mm F2.8L IS

Gear Used:

Purchase a Canon RF 70-200mm F2.8L IS @ B&H Photo | Amazon | Camera Canada | Amazon Canada | Amazon UK | Amazon Germany | Ebay

Purchase a Canon EOS R5 @ B&H Photo | Amazon | Camera Canada | Amazon Canada | Amazon UK | Amazon Germany | Ebay

Purchase a Canon EOS R6 @ B&H Photo | Amazon | Camera Canada | Amazon Canada | Amazon UK | Amazon Germany | Ebay

Purchase a Canon RF 15-35mm F2.8L IS @ B&H Photo | Amazon | Camera Canada | Amazon Canada | Amazon UK | Amazon Germany | Ebay

Peak Design Slide Lite: Peak Design Store | B&H Photo | Amazon | Amazon Canada | Amazon UK
Peak Design Leash Strap: Peak Design Store | B&H Photo | Amazon | Amazon Canada | Amazon UK
BenQ SW271 4K Photo Editing Monitor – B&H Photo | Amazon | Amazon.ca | Amazon UK
Adobe Photoshop Creative Cloud 1-Year Subscription
Exposure Software X5 (Use Code “dustinabbott” to get 10% anything and everything)
Visit Dustin’s Amazon Storefront and see his favorite gear

Purchasing your gear through B&H and these links helps fund this website and keeps the articles coming. You can also make a donation here if you would like. Visit my Amazon page for some of my gear of choice! Thank you for your support.

Great News! I can now offer a 5% discount on all purchases at Amplis Foto, Canada’s Leading Photographic Supplier. Please enter discount code: AMPLIS52018DA in your cart. It is good for everything in your cart, and is stackable with other coupons, too! It will take 5% off your entire order! Proceeds go towards keeping this site going and providing you with new reviews!

Use Code “DUSTINHDR” to get $10 off ($15 CDN) any Skylum product: Luminar, Aurora, or AirMagic

Purchase a Canon EOS R6 @ B&H Photo https://bhpho.to/3dCt9g3 | Amazon https://amzn.to/3o0T4Tm | Camera Canada https://shrsl.com/2k730 | Amazon Canada https://amzn.to/3424pLc | Amazon UK https://amzn.to/2H9e6yj | Amazon Germany https://amzn.to/2T0BkJJ | Ebay http://bit.ly/EOSR6dla

Keywords: Canon RF 70-200, Canon RF 70-200mm, 70-200, 70-200mm, RF, 70-200L, L, IS, USM Canon EOS R5, EOS, R5, EOS R5, EOS R6, mirrorless, full frame, EOS R5 Review, Canon R5 Review, Canon 70-200 Review, Dustin Abbott, Real World, Comparison, Handling, Tracking, Focus, Burst Rate, Tracking, Sports, Portraits, Resolution, High ISO, Image Quality, Sample Images, Photography, Dogs, Ergonomics, 45Mpx, Sony a9, RF 70-200mm F2.8L IS, RF 15-35mm F2.8L IS, Canon

DISCLAIMER: This article and description contains affiliate links, which means that if you click on one of the product links, I’ll receive a small commission. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.

Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L IS II Review

Dustin Abbott

August 6th, 2018

The rumors began swirling that Canon was soon going to release a new version of one of its “bread-and-butter” focal lengths. The rumors said the f/2.8 version, or was it the f/4 version? It turns out that it was both, with Canon announcing both a Mark III version of its venerable EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS (one of the most commonly used lenses in the world by professionals) and a Mark II of the smaller-but-equally excellent f/4 lens. That lens, the Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L IS II USM, is the subject of our review here today. The f/4L II (as we’ll refer to it for brevity’s sake), is not as widely used as the bigger, more expensive f/2.8 version, but for many people it hits the sweet spot for their needs.

A 70-200mm f/2.8 lens is perhaps the most indispensable tool out there if you are an event, portrait, or wedding shooter, but there are some misconceptions. People value that larger f/2.8 aperture for a couple of reasons. The first is the light gathering potential, which is exactly double that of a lens with a maximum aperture of f/4. So, for example, in an event like a basketball game, an f/2.8 lens would allow a shutter speed of, say, 1/400^th of a second (fast enough to stop most action), while an f/4 lens would only allow a 1/200^th of a second shutter speed (which would introduce some motion blur). The only way to counteract this is by increasing your ISO to compensate, but there are, obviously, practical limits to this before your image quality is reduced by high noise, poorer dynamic range, and somewhat washed out colors.

The second reason that people value the larger maximum aperture of f/2.8 is because of the more shallow depth of field it creates, which gives that amazing “cut-out” look where your subject is completely isolated from the background, which will often become a soft blur of colors if the subject is some distance from the background. It’s a great look that gives a professional quality that cannot be matched by someone’s phone, point-and-shoot, or even a kit lens. If your subject is 10 feet from the camera, and you are shooting at the telephoto end (200mm) and f/2.8, the depth of field (area in focus) will only be 1.5” (4cm), which means that the background will be beautifully blurred.

These things are definitely true (and I use such a lens often for my own work), but I mentioned misconceptions for a reason. If someone is shooting in a well-lit setting, an f/2.8 lens may not be necessary at all. Modern cameras have also made huge strides in their performance at higher ISO settings, resulting in far less penalty for cranking the ISO up to accommodate an f/4 rather than f/2.8 lens. Furthermore, the telephoto nature of this focal length means that subject isolation is still excellent with the f/4 lens. Using my same scenario from before, the depth of field with this f/4 lens is still only 2.19”/6cm, which is really not dramatically different in real world settings. Look at the image of the bird above – that depth of field is pretty shallow, and that image was taken from closer to 20 feet away. In fact, you will have to learn to stop a lens like this down if you want to get more features of a persons face in focus, or, if you have a few people in a group, to make sure that all of their faces are in focus.

My point is that many people who think they need an f/2.8 lens at this focal length might be surprised to find that an excellent f/4 lens like this might actually suit their purposes better. The advantages of the f/4 lens are in size and weight. The new f/4L II weighs in at 1.72lb (780g) compared to the 3.26lb (1480g) of the new f/2.8L III (which is actually 10g lighter than the previous generation lens.) That means the f/4 lens is roughly 53% the weight. The difference in length isn’t as significant, as both are internally zooming lenses (nothing extends during zooming). The f/4L II is 6.93” (176mm) compared to 7.83” (199mm), though it is also slimmer (3.15” vs 3.5” or 80mm vs 89mm). For someone accustomed to an f/2.8 lens (like myself), I’m always pleasantly surprised by how “small and light” the f/4 lenses are, though that will obviously be less true for someone coming from, say, a Canon 55-250mm APS-C zoom. There are a few other areas where these lenses distinguish themselves which we will explore in this review.

So is the Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L IS II the lens for you? Read on to find out!

Prefer to watch your reviews? Check out my thorough video review here:

Canon 70-200mm f/4L II Build and Handling

Watch this video to get an in-depth look at the build and design of the f/4L II.

The f/4L II has received some significant improvements to what was already an excellent build. The lens now has more thorough weather sealing throughout and now includes premium fluorine coatings on both external elements. The fluorine helps resist scratching, but also has the added benefit of repelling water and oils, meaning that fingerprints don’t stick as much and that the lens will be easier to clean. I feel more confident in not using a protection filter personally when the lens has received these coatings. The barrel is mostly metals, and the rubber on the zoom rings feels premium. The build is now very close to that of the f/2.8 zooms, which is to say very, very good.

Many people will prefer the position of the zoom and manual focus rings over that of the Tamron. There doesn’t seem to be fixed standard for the order of these rings, as the Tamron is opposite…but so are lenses from Canon (the 70-300L comes to mind). Most people seem to be more familiar with the zoom ring closer to camera as opposed to towards the front of the lens. The zoom and focus rings are nice and wide and well-ribbed. I like the ergonomic feel of the rings themselves. One area that I really like about the design is the flaring out of the zoom ring, a rather unique touch.

Many lenses have a flare in the barrel at some point to accommodate larger internal elements, but typically that flare happens in the barrel materials and not in the ring itself. I feel like this design has some practical value, too, as it gives some tactile feedback as to what ring the hand is on when your eye is pressed against the viewfinder.

I strongly prefer the feel of the manual focus ring’s ribs on the f/4L II over those of the Tamron lens, and the MF ring is wider and easier to find, too. But there is a certain ergonomic logic to Tamron’s approach, too, as while I really like the wider and more deeply ribbed rings on the Canon, I also encountered an issue that I didn’t with the Tamron. The position of the zoom ring is that it occupies the natural place where my hand rests to support the lens. I’ve found on a number of shots where I was looking to have the full 200mm of focal length engaged that I actually have 190mm or 196mm due to a slight rotation of that ring simply by having my hand there to support the lens. There isn’t really another place to put one’s hand because the rings are so wide.

One of the updates to the Mark II version of this lens slightly more robust physical controls. The previous version had the focus limiter (which the Tamron lacks) as well as a mode switch for the IS (which the Tamron also lacks), but the f/4L II adds one more mode position to the 4^th switch on the barrel. There are now three different selectable modes for the IS (Image Stabilization) system. The first mode is the standard mode, which seeks to balance stabilizing the viewfinder and the captured image. The second mode is for panning, and it will stabilize only the vertical axis so that you can follow movement without interruption. You can also drag the shutter a bit (shoot at a low shutter speed), and, with practice, can produce sharp moving subjects while blurring the background. The third mode is the new one for this lens, and it seems to function like Tamron’s “Capture Priority” mode, which foregoes stabilization of the viewfinder and focuses on providing the best possible stabilization of the actual image capture. It allows you to have very natural movement when following action while still having the benefit of IS when you click the shutter.

The best IS mode for you will depend on your shooting preferences and also the situation you find yourself in. The IS system is improved in general, with it now rated at 5 stops (which seems to be the top of the industry standard right now). Beyond that, however, it is much quieter and smoother in operation, lacking the loud, buzzy quality of the previous generation lens. You can hear a slight noise when it begins operation, but after that you have to put your ear next to the barrel to hearing any of the faint whirring that goes on while the IS system does its thing. It is quiet enough that it shouldn’t be detectable in any but the quietest of conditions and shouldn’t negatively impact audio capture while shooting video.

The focus limiter has two options: full (no limiting) or 3m to Infinity. This is useful when you are in situations where you won’t be focusing closer than that as it will improve both focus speed (a good portion of the focus range is eliminated) and will also avoid a large focus “rack” (the AF runs through the whole focus range) when focus is missed. This has an additional benefit with the new f/4L II because the minimum focus has been reduced by 20cm on the new lens over the old lens. It can focus down to 3.28’ (1m) rather than 3.94’ (1.2m), which helps improve the maximum reproduction ratio to 1:3.7 (0.27x) rather than 1:5 (0.21x). This is very, very useful, though the Tamron’s 0.32x magnification is better still due to both being able to focus more closely and having ten extra millimeters in focal length.

Both of these improvements are incremental but add up to a more complete lens.

Canon has changed the shade of paint on it’s “white” lenses over the past couple of years, and the f/4L II receives that newer shade. It’s a little brighter and whiter looking compared to slightly yellow tinted older shade, and is arguably more attractive.

I’ve noted in times past that Canon’s L series lenses hold up very well over extended use. I’ve often used them for several years, and, when going to sell them, had buyers remark that they still looked new. Canon does a great job with the finish on these lenses. The included lens hood has a flocked exterior finish, which, while not quite as sleek as some of the smooth satin finishes of competing lenses, is much more resistant to fingerprints and, more importantly, marks and scratches from everyday use.

Also included is a lens pouch that will be instantly familiar to anyone who has purchased other Canon L series lenses in the past. It has some padding at the bottom, but little real protection value elsewhere. If you want a case with some real protection value, I would recommend purchasing this lens case. The f/2.8 variants all come with a more premium padded case, and, frankly, at the price of this lens, such a case should be included with the f/4L II. What also isn’t included with the f/4L II is the tripod collar/foot (though, again, the f/2.8 versions do include this). The reality is that many people won’t miss a tripod collar on a lens with a moderate weight and size like this lens, but, if you are one of those who do value having a tripod collar (you do a lot of tripod or monopod work, for example), then know that it will come at an additional cost.

And it isn’t cheap. The current price for the AII Tripod Mount Ring is $164.95. I recently reviewed the Tamron 70-210mm f/4 VC lens, and, while it also doesn’t include the tripod collar, the A034TM is less expensive ($139), and, more importantly is ARCA compatible. Something ARCA-Swiss compatible means that it is designed in such a way that it can mounted right on most tripods and tightened down without needing to use a quick release plate. I personally really value this feature, as it saves valuable time during the transitions where I’m often in a hurry to get a shot. Why Canon does not make it’s tripod feet ARCA-compatible is beyond me.

The aperture blade count has increased by one to nine, which better enables the lens to have a more rounded aperture iris when the lens is stopped down and can result in smoother bokeh at smaller apertures. The front filter size has increased from 67mm to 72mm, which isn’t a big deal on the filter end but will [hopefully] result in a little less vignette. The optical formula is the same in terms of element count (20 elements in 15 groups), but the change in the front element size is proof that the optical formula is changed.

I’m a fan of the look and handling of this lens. I’ve detailed some negatives, yes, but the sum total is a lens that I’ve really enjoyed using. It feels exceptionally well built and operates as it should.

Canon 70-200 f/4L II Autofocus

This leads us to one of the key areas of improvement for the f/4L II. In many ways the autofocus system in the original f/4L IS lens was very good (though some have reported an issue of the focus system failing in a specific way). I’ve owned two copies of the lens personally, however, and never had any issues with the focus system. I think that part of Canon’s logic in updating their primary zoom lenses is to address the changing nature of autofocus…and the changes yet to come. When the first f/4L IS lens was released, video AF was simply not on anyone’s radar. People weren’t really using DSLRs for video…but that has changed in a big way.

What has also changed is the advent of Canon’s DPAF (Contrast AF) focus technology in Live View, which radically changed the way that Live View could be used. DPAF technology has proliferated over essentially Canon’s whole lineup at this point, and in many ways focus is as fast with DPAF as it is with Phase Detect (viewfinder) autofocus. But the nature of Contrast AF is different, and when using it for Video Servo AF (continuous autofocus) the priorities are different. Video Servo AF values smoothness and quietness over speed, and I have often found that older USM lenses really don’t do very well when used in this fashion. The focus motors are surprisingly loud (surprising because they aren’t loud when used for stills), tend to hunt for focus constantly, and just aren’t smooth in operation. The bottom line is that they aren’t tuned well for this kind of application.

While the focus system in the new Canon zooms is still a USM-style focus motor, it has now been tuned to work better in the new hybrid-environment of modern DSLRs. It is very fast when used in Live View for autofocus in stills, with autofocus in Live View roughly as fast as when using the viewfinder.

When shooting video, the behavior of the focus motor is vastly improved. It transitions smoothly and confidently, and the noise when changing focus is much quieter than older USM focus motors (though still not as quiet as STM or Nano-USM). I did detect a little focus noise when shooting video and recording audio in-camera, but it wasn’t pronounced. The focus precision was good, and there wasn’t any pulsing or hunting.

This hybrid behavior is important too for the nature of mirrorless focus systems. I personally suspect that part of Canon’s motivation in releasing new versions of its key lenses is to better place them for use in a future full frame mirrorless camera. I’m hoping that the timing of these releases is an indicator than Canon will leverage the EF mount in some way with their full frame mirrorless.

In the meantime, I can report that the f/4L II works well with the EF adapter on the Canon EOS M5 camera (including for video Servo AF). I let a colleague use the lens on her M5 while shooting a children’s camp together. She reported that every now and then focus during video would get stuck, but touching a new focus point on the screen would get things moving again.

I also used the lens via the Sigma MC-11 on the Sony a7R3 and found that, for the most part, I was quiet happy with the performance. In most settings focus was quick and accurate…even when tracking some boys running through an obstacle course. Every now and then the focus would get stuck and wouldn’t focus (as per usual), and this seemed more likely to happen when trying to focus at distances under 8 feet. I had to revert to manual focus a few times when trying to focus on a child’s face from 4-6 feet away. Most of the time, however, focus was excellent, and I actually really enjoyed the flexibility afforded by hitting the C1 button on my a7R3 (which I have programmed to APS-C mode) and having the advantage of the different framing options afforded by Sony’s 1.5x crop factor. The 18MP of APS-C mode is sufficient for the event work I was doing at the time, and, since I was delivering JPEGs in the form a slide show every evening of the summer camp I was shooting, this saved me doing any cropping in post. The focus on the a7R3/MC-11 combination was typically quick and quiet, and was always accurate. Here’s some images captured with the combination:

I love the fact that Tamron and Sigma provide the ability to fine-tune focus through their Tap-In/USB Dock accessories, and, particularly with Tamron, I’ve been able to really refine focus and get very accurate results (my 45mm f/1.8 VC, 85mm f/1.8 VC, and 70-200mm f/2.8 G2 lenses all give me pretty much the best focus results I’ve ever gotten from a third party lens…and also pretty much as good of focus results as any lens). Still, I have to say that it is refreshing to pull the Canon lens out of the box and just start shooting with it. I have felt that my focus accuracy was good enough that I haven’t felt the need to calibrate the lens further (though if I were to own the lens I would certainly do so). My point is that focus accuracy out of the box has been very good with the f/4L II.

There can be some pulsing in AF Servo mode in some situations. Ironically it is actually worse with a single AF point chosen, and I’ve gotten the best performance using a small group of points supporting a center point on my Canon 5D Mark IV. This seems to occur most often when trying to focus on a close subject with a busier background. I didn’t encounter it often, but did encounter it on several occasions during my review period. For the most part, however, I had no problems keeping up with action using the lens:

The lens played nicely with the Canon Extender 1.4x III well, too, with very little change in autofocus behavior with the extender attached on my Canon 5D Mark IV body.

In short, other than a few minor hiccups, autofocus performance was excellent from the Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L IS II USM. I vastly preferred the autofocus performance to that of the Tamron 70-210 VC (in Phase Detect – the lenses were roughly similar in Contrast AF), and if I were personally choosing between the lenses, I think I would save up the extra money and purchase the Canon lens.

There is one more consideration because of price, however. The Tamron 70-200mm f/2.8 G2 lens is actually the same MSRP as the f/4L II (and includes the tripod collar in the box!). It’s autofocus is much more competitive with the f/4L II, as is its feature set. But what about optical performance? Stay tuned to find out!

Canon 70-200 f/4L II Image Quality

A lot of the talk centering around these two new 70-200 lenses has been about their image quality improvements (or lack thereof). I’ve heard some apologists using the counterarguments that these lenses were near “perfect” optically already, though one could question if that were the case why there was any need to release new versions of the lenses. I personally think that Canon had other reasons for updating these lenses (some of which I’ve already detailed) than optical performance, though I do think there is more optical improvement in f/4 lens than the f/2.8 (which reportedly is mostly changes in coatings). The f/4 lens does have an updated optical formula, and, while it shares the same number of elements and groups (20 elements in 15 groups – which is pretty close to being the same as Nikon, Tamron, and Sony’s own 70-200mm f/4 lenses), it has a new front element size, which shows that the optical formula (at least when it comes to that front element) has been tweaked.

Still, expect the image quality improvements to be incremental, and there is truth to the statement that Canon was starting with an exceptional lens already – a lens that some considered to be Canon’s best lens covering this focal length. Let’s take a look at the image quality in detail.

Resolution

I’ve used two optical benchmarks for comparison purposes here. They are two third party lenses – Tamron’s 70-210mm f/4 VC (the most recent lens release covering this focal length) and their SP 70-200mm f/2.8 VC G2 lens (a fantastic lens that shares the price point with the f/4L II). I would recommend that you watch this video segment to see the detailed analysis of how all of these lenses compare:

At 70mm I observed that both the Canon and the Tamron 70-210mm exhibited minor amounts of barrel distortion and vignette. Somewhat surprising to me was the fact that the Tamron showed slightly better light transmission despite the growth in the front element of the f/4L II. It’s not significant, but I estimate the Tamron had about a one-third stop advantage in light transmission through 135mm, where the lenses seemed to equalize. Here’s a look at the full image at 70mm:

The Canon exhibited slightly better contrast levels (though not by much) along with a slightly better edge/corner performance. When stopped down to f/5.6 the results remained roughly similar, though the differences are even harder to spot.

At 100mm there is little to distinguish the two lenses. The Canon has a hair more contrast and its sharpness extends further into the extreme corners by a percentage point or two. Stopped down even to f/5.6 there isn’t enough difference between the lenses to be measurable in real usage.

At 135mm the Canon suffers from a little more vignette than the Tamron. The sharpness and contrast is more similar than different in the center and across most of the frame. The extreme corners favor the Canon. When stopped down there is little distinguish the two lenses.

To this point, you might be tempted to ask why someone would choose the Canon and its higher price tag over the Tamron, but at least part of the reason becomes clearer at the telephoto end, where the Canon opens up a decided advantage.

At 200mm (210mm for the Tamron) the Canon is clearly sharper across the frame wide open, with higher resolution and contrast. When stopped down the gap, if anything, widens. The Tamron doesn’t really improve a lot stopped down, while the Canon moves to nothing short of exceptional levels.

This is arguably the most important point in the focal range, and the f/4L II nails it. This latter point is important, too, as it is the focal length that will be most utilized if you want to extend the reach of the lens by adding an extender. I used Canon’s 1.4x Extender III to good effect, reaching 280mm of reach (at f/5.6). I thought I detected a mild amount of image softening, but resolution still looked very good as you can see from these samples.

I would call the Canon 70-200mm f/4L IS II a more useful lens than the Tamron in this regard.

As mentioned previously, the competition is much stiffer if you put the lens up against Tamron’s f/2.8 G2 lens. The G2 is generally as good at f/2.8 as the Canon is at f/4, which means that it slightly betters the f/4L II when stopped down to equal apertures (and with less vignette to boot). The chief advantage the Canon has is that the G2 lens suffers from “focus breathing”, meaning that it doesn’t reach its full focal length at close distances (it only becomes a true 200mm at 30+ feet). There are definitely other reasons why someone might prefer a f/4 lens (size and weight), but if price is the main concern, the G2 is a worthy choice.

Rendering

It has become my habit to break image quality down into two categories. The first is resolution, which includes sharpness, contrast, and longitudinal chromatic aberrations (which impact contrast). The second category is rendering, which covers things like bokeh, color rendition, lateral chromatic aberrations, flare resistance, and the general “feel” of the images produced by a particular lens.

The f/4L II is a strong performer in the rendering department. The images produced by the lens are generally excellent. The low chromatic aberrations produce a lot of punch to images, and I feel like the lens really shines in its color rendition. Here’s a few standout images that demonstrate what I’m talking about.

The bokeh from the lens in most situations is very nice. There is a bit of geometric distortion of bokeh highlights along the edges of the frame (cat-eye or lemon shapes), which is very common. In general the combination of sharpness on the focal plane and softness in the defocused areas is really excellent.

The lens is somewhat susceptible to flare, with a significant amount of veiling (loss of contrast) with the sun right in the frame. Ghosting isn’t particularly bad, however, with only a few small blobs of color extending into the frame.

I’m a big fan of the quality of images you can get with this lens, and it really delivers in the image quality department.

Here’s a few more sample images, and you can see more in the Image Gallery here.

Conclusion

Some have questioned whether this lens is a worthy upgrade, if enough has changed. If you are looking for a revolutionary improvement over the previous generation lens (perhaps considering updating), that might be a hard choice, but there is no doubt that this is a significantly improved lens on a number of levels. The build is improved, the autofocus is improved, and the image quality is improved. There is no single thing that jumps out at you, but the sum total of the improvements add up to what I believe is the best f/4 lens that covers this focal length. The price tag is at the high end of the spectrum, but so is the performance of the lens. There are solid alternatives to this lens, but if you want the best 70-200mm f/4 lens, the Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L IS II is the one to get.

Pros:

Improvements on an already great build
Good ergonomics and handling
Improved image stabilizer
Additional IS mode
Smoother, quieter autofocus and IS systems
Better functionality in DPAF and Video Servo AF
Very strong 200mm performance
Works well with 1.4x extender and quite well with adapters
Excellent contrast, color, and very low CA

Cons:

Prone to some veiling when bright lights are in the frame
Incremental improvements only
Price tag is at the top of the segment

BenQ SW271 4K Photo Editing Monitor – B&H Photo | Amazon | Amazon.ca | Amazon UK
Adobe Photoshop Creative Cloud 1-Year Subscription
Alien Skin Exposure X2 (Use Code “dustinabbott” to get 10% anything and everything)

Purchasing your gear through B&H and these links helps fund this website and keeps the articles coming. You can also make a donation here if you would like. Visit my Amazon page for some of my gear of choice! Thank you for your support.

Great News! I can now offer a 5% discount on all purchases at Amplis Foto, Canada’s Leading Photographic Supplier. Please enter discount code: AMPLIS52018DA in your cart. It is good for everything in your cart, and is stackable with other coupons, too! It will take 5% off your entire order! Proceeds go towards keeping this site going and providing you with new reviews!

Check me out on:

Keywords: Canon 70-200 f4 ii, 70-200, f/4L, IS II, USM Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L IS II, Canon 70-200 Review, Canon 70-200 f4 is ii, Canon, f4 is, f4 IS ii, Canon 70-200 f4 is ii review, Dustin Abbott, Photography, Sample Images, Video Test, Real World, Tamron 70-210 VC, Tamron 70-210, Comparison, Test, AF

DISCLAIMER: This article and description contains affiliate links, which means that if you click on one of the product links, I’ll receive a small commission. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.

Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L IS II Image Gallery

Dustin Abbott

July 14th, 2018

Canon is in the process of releasing new versions of both the f/2.8 and f/4 versions of their extremely popular 70-200mm zooms. Both of these lenses are extremely useful, and for those that don’t need the greater light gathering potential of the f/2.8 lens, the new Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L IS USM II lens will offer an enticing combination of a pro-grade build, great optics and performance, and a weight that is only about 60% of the “big brother”. This is particularly nice if you need to travel light and/or want a telephoto lens for landscape use. As I still have the Tamron 70-210mm f/4 VC on hand, I’ll do some comparing and contrasting to the newest competitor. My early impressions of the new Canon 70-200L II are very positive, but stay tuned for more detailed coverage. In the meantime, you can check out images of the lens along with images from it.

Images of the Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L IS II

Images Taken with the Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L IS II

With a Canon 1.4x III Extender

BenQ SW271 4K Photo Editing Monitor – B&H Photo | Amazon | Amazon.ca | Amazon UK
Adobe Photoshop Creative Cloud 1-Year Subscription
Alien Skin Exposure X2 (Use Code “dustinabbott” to get 10% anything and everything)

Purchasing your gear through B&H and these links helps fund this website and keeps the articles coming. You can also make a donation here if you would like. Visit my Amazon page for some of my gear of choice! Thank you for your support.

Great News! I can now offer a 5% discount on all purchases at Amplis Foto, Canada’s Leading Photographic Supplier. Please enter discount code: AMPLIS52018DA in your cart. It is good for everything in your cart, and is stackable with other coupons, too! It will take 5% off your entire order! Proceeds go towards keeping this site going and providing you with new reviews!

Check me out on:

Keywords: Canon 70-200 f4 ii, 70-200, f/4L, IS II, USM Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L IS II, Canon 70-200 Review, Canon 70-200 f4 is ii, Canon, f4 is, f4 IS ii, Canon 70-200 f4 is ii review, Dustin Abbott, Photography, Sample Images, Video Test, Real World, Tamron 70-210 VC, Tamron 70-210, Comparison, Test, AF

DISCLAIMER: This article and description contains affiliate links, which means that if you click on one of the product links, I’ll receive a small commission. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.

Canon RF 100-500mm F4.5-7.1L IS USM Review

Dustin Abbott

March 22nd, 2022

Canon RF 100-500L Build and Handling

Canon RF 100-500mm F4.5-7.1L IS Autofocus

Canon RF 100-500L Image Quality

Conclusion

Pros:

Cons:

Purchase the Canon RF 100-500L @ B&H Photo | Amazon | Camera Canada | Amazon Canada | Amazon UK | Ebay

Purchase a Canon EOS R5 @ B&H Photo | Amazon | Camera Canada | Amazon Canada | Amazon UK | Amazon Germany | Ebay

Purchase a Canon EOS R6 @ B&H Photo | Amazon | Camera Canada | Amazon Canada | Amazon UK | Amazon Germany | Ebay

Buy DA Merchandise https://bit.ly/TWIMerch

Purchase a Sony a7C @ B&H Photo | Amazon | Camera Canada | Amazon Canada | Amazon UK | Amazon Germany | Ebay

Peak Design Leash Strap: Peak Design Store | B&H Photo | Amazon | Amazon Canada | Amazon UK

Related Articles at DustinAbbott.net

Canon RF 100-500mm F4.5-7.1L IS Image Gallery

Dustin Abbott

March 22nd, 2022

Photos of the Canon RF 100-500mm F4.5-7.1L Build and Handling

Photos taken with the Canon RF 100-500mm

Purchase the Canon RF 100-500L @ B&H Photo | Amazon | Camera Canada | Amazon Canada | Amazon UK | Ebay

Purchase a Canon EOS R5 @ B&H Photo | Amazon | Camera Canada | Amazon Canada | Amazon UK | Amazon Germany | Ebay

Purchase a Canon EOS R6 @ B&H Photo | Amazon | Camera Canada | Amazon Canada | Amazon UK | Amazon Germany | Ebay

Buy DA Merchandise https://bit.ly/TWIMerch

Purchase a Sony a7C @ B&H Photo | Amazon | Camera Canada | Amazon Canada | Amazon UK | Amazon Germany | Ebay

Peak Design Leash Strap: Peak Design Store | B&H Photo | Amazon | Amazon Canada | Amazon UK

Related Articles at DustinAbbott.net

Canon RF 70-200mm F4L IS USM Review

Dustin Abbott

March 8th, 2021

Canon RF 70-200 F4L Build and Features

Autofocus Performance

Canon RF 70-200 F4L Image Quality

Conclusion

Pros:

Cons:

Purchase a Canon RF 70-200mm F4L IS @ B&H Photo | Amazon | Camera Canada | Amazon Canada | Amazon UK | Amazon Germany | Ebay

Purchase a Canon RF 70-200mm F2.8L IS @ B&H Photo | Amazon | Camera Canada | Amazon Canada | Amazon UK | Amazon Germany | Ebay

Purchase a Canon EOS R5 @ B&H Photo | Amazon | Camera Canada | Amazon Canada | Amazon UK | Amazon Germany | Ebay

Purchase a Canon EOS R6 @ B&H Photo | Amazon | Camera Canada | Amazon Canada | Amazon UK | Amazon Germany | Ebay

Buy DA Merchandise https://bit.ly/TWIMerch

Use Code “DUSTINHDR” to get $10 off ($15 CDN) any Skylum product: Luminar, Aurora, or AirMagic

Related Articles at DustinAbbott.net

Canon RF 70-200mm F4L IS USM Image Gallery

Dustin Abbott

March 8th, 2021

Images of the Canon RF 70-200mm F4L IS

Images Taken with the Canon RF 70-200mm F4L IS

Purchase a Canon RF 70-200mm F4L IS @ B&H Photo | Amazon | Camera Canada | Amazon Canada | Amazon UK | Amazon Germany | Ebay

Purchase a Canon RF 70-200mm F2.8L IS @ B&H Photo | Amazon | Camera Canada | Amazon Canada | Amazon UK | Amazon Germany | Ebay

Purchase a Canon EOS R5 @ B&H Photo | Amazon | Camera Canada | Amazon Canada | Amazon UK | Amazon Germany | Ebay

Purchase a Canon EOS R6 @ B&H Photo | Amazon | Camera Canada | Amazon Canada | Amazon UK | Amazon Germany | Ebay

Buy DA Merchandise https://bit.ly/TWIMerch

Use Code “DUSTINHDR” to get $10 off ($15 CDN) any Skylum product: Luminar, Aurora, or AirMagic

Related Articles at DustinAbbott.net

Canon RF 70-200mm F2.8L IS Review

Dustin Abbott

November 2nd, 2020

Canon RF 70-200L Build and Features

Autofocus Performance

Canon RF 70-200L Image Quality

Conclusion

Pros:

Cons:

Purchase a Canon RF 70-200mm F2.8L IS @ B&H Photo | Amazon | Camera Canada | Amazon Canada | Amazon UK | Amazon Germany | Ebay

Purchase a Canon EOS R5 @ B&H Photo | Amazon | Camera Canada | Amazon Canada | Amazon UK | Amazon Germany | Ebay

Purchase a Canon EOS R6 @ B&H Photo | Amazon | Camera Canada | Amazon Canada | Amazon UK | Amazon Germany | Ebay

Purchase a Canon RF 15-35mm F2.8L IS @ B&H Photo | Amazon | Camera Canada | Amazon Canada | Amazon UK | Amazon Germany | Ebay

Use Code “DUSTINHDR” to get $10 off ($15 CDN) any Skylum product: Luminar, Aurora, or AirMagic

Related Articles at DustinAbbott.net

Canon RF 70-200mm F2.8L IS Image Gallery

Dustin Abbott

October 31st, 2020

Photos of the Canon RF 70-200mm F2.8L IS

Photos taken with the Canon RF 70-200mm F2.8L IS

Purchase a Canon RF 70-200mm F2.8L IS @ B&H Photo | Amazon | Camera Canada | Amazon Canada | Amazon UK | Amazon Germany | Ebay

Purchase a Canon EOS R5 @ B&H Photo | Amazon | Camera Canada | Amazon Canada | Amazon UK | Amazon Germany | Ebay

Purchase a Canon EOS R6 @ B&H Photo | Amazon | Camera Canada | Amazon Canada | Amazon UK | Amazon Germany | Ebay

Purchase a Canon RF 15-35mm F2.8L IS @ B&H Photo | Amazon | Camera Canada | Amazon Canada | Amazon UK | Amazon Germany | Ebay