Home · Register · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda

New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site

New Feature: SMS Notification alert

New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist

FM Forums | Canon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

2 end

Is It Just Me, or Are Canon RF Lenses Getting Out of Hand?

aboss3
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #1 · p.1 #1 · Is It Just Me, or Are Canon RF Lenses Getting Out of Hand?

Hi All,

Maybe I just need to vent, but here goes—having recently switched from Sony FE to Canon RF (after years as a loyal Canon shooter with 10+ full-frame and crop DSLRs), I’m feeling a bit let down by the size and weight of Canon's current mirrorless lineup.

My son uses a Canon R10, which is a tiny little thing—smaller than the old Rebel series, with equally lightweight lenses. But then I upgraded to the Canon R5 Mark II, and wow, it's quite a bit chunkier than my old 5D series.

Now, let's talk lenses. This week, I’ve been receiving all my new Canon RF glass after selling off my Sony FE gear, and I have to say, I'm a little disappointed. Take the Canon RF 85mm f/1.2, for example. I owned the old EF 85mm f/1.2, and while it was big and heavy, it had a much more manageable footprint. The new RF version? It's a monster.

The RF 100mm macro is another one—it seems way bigger than the old EF and Sony FE 100mm macro lenses. And don't even get me started on the RF 28-70mm f/2.0 I just got yesterday. I mean, it’s practically in a weight class of its own! Sure, it’s a full stop faster and delivers amazing images, but at what cost? My biceps are getting a workout just carrying it around.

Am I the only one noticing that Canon’s mirrorless gear isn’t actually getting smaller? In fact, it feels like it’s growing in size, bulk, and weight compared to the old DSLR days. Anyone else feeling the strain?

Aug 29, 2024 at 03:41 PM

garyvot
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #2 · p.1 #2 · Is It Just Me, or Are Canon RF Lenses Getting Out of Hand?

aboss3 wrote:
But then I upgraded to the Canon R5 Mark II, and wow, it's quite a bit chunkier than my old 5D series.

Not sure if this is a troll post, but this is demonstrably false.

https://camerasize.com/compare/#682,929

Aug 29, 2024 at 03:45 PM

RustyRus
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #3 · p.1 #3 · Is It Just Me, or Are Canon RF Lenses Getting Out of Hand?

What are you shooting where you need the 28-70 f/2? Surely you knew it was massive before buying it.

Are you a professional wedding photographer? I can't see any reason to want to own that lens and carry except for very specific paid purposes. Im sure some non pro wedding photogs own it and love it but its massive for a reason.

I have the 85 1.2 and it is also a big lens, but I knew that when buying it. Sony doesn't make an 85 1.2 so we can't even compare it. The old 85 1.2 L EF is ridiculously slow AF- I wouldn't be able to manage the hunting of that thing in todays world but its still a fine optic.

The 70-200F2.8 is by far the most compact option on the market and a pleasure to use. So I guess it really boils down to buying lenses for what you need them for and trading off the size.

Again though, what are you shooting that you need the 28-70? Seems like an odd choice to buy that and then complain about the size of it.

Aug 29, 2024 at 03:52 PM

RustyRus
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #4 · p.1 #4 · Is It Just Me, or Are Canon RF Lenses Getting Out of Hand?

garyvot wrote:
Not sure if this is a troll post, but this is demonstrably false.

https://camerasize.com/compare/#682,929

The R5mk2 is crazy compact- I am actually loving the size of it for the power it packs!!!

Aug 29, 2024 at 03:54 PM

Sashi
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #5 · p.1 #5 · Is It Just Me, or Are Canon RF Lenses Getting Out of Hand?

I'm coming in from a 5DMk3 and find the R5M2 comparable in all dimensions and weight, once I put on the RF-EF Control ring adapter. Pretty sure it's lighter without the adapter. Easy to use. Cannot speak about the RF lenses since I don't own any

Aug 29, 2024 at 04:00 PM

jedibrain
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #6 · p.1 #6 · Is It Just Me, or Are Canon RF Lenses Getting Out of Hand?

garyvot wrote:
Not sure if this is a troll post, but this is demonstrably false.

https://camerasize.com/compare/#682,929

Case in point, I was just digging through my cabinet and pulled out my 5DIII, which I used and loved (still love) for 10years and which had become just like an extension of my hand. After 2 years of an R6, the 5DIII suddenly looks like a behemoth!

Brian

Aug 29, 2024 at 04:02 PM

jedibrain
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #7 · p.1 #7 · Is It Just Me, or Are Canon RF Lenses Getting Out of Hand?

I'd say lens wise Canon has focused on unique offerings, and not on size and weight reduction.

The 28-70 is an f/2 lens - with the level of optical quality it has neither comparable prime would be much smaller, and its 4 in one! (28,35,50,70). No one buys this lens for its compactness. Like no one buys a full size pickup for its fuel economy.

100mm macro has a 1.4x magnification, 40% more than its predecessors. That requires it to be larger.

You want small, look at the 16 and 24mm primes, especially the 16mm. And the 25-105 STM lens is quite handy with good optical quality at both ends. Ls have never been lightweight travel lenses.

Brian

Aug 29, 2024 at 04:08 PM

EGrav
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #8 · p.1 #8 · Is It Just Me, or Are Canon RF Lenses Getting Out of Hand?

Troll

Aug 29, 2024 at 04:20 PM

aboss3
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #9 · p.1 #9 · Is It Just Me, or Are Canon RF Lenses Getting Out of Hand?

Hey everyone,

First off, I just want to say I didn’t mean to come across as trolling—definitely not my intention! I’ve just genuinely noticed how the RF lenses have gotten significantly bigger compared to the old EF lineup, and it caught me off guard. Trust me, I'm not looking to stir up a fight here, just venting a bit.

To clear things up, I’m not a professional photographer—this has been a passion of mine for over 20 years. I’ve switched camera systems a few times, but spent the last six years with Sony FE and GM lenses before making the jump to Canon RF. I was actually deciding between the R5 II and Leica but ended up going with Canon because I love taking photos of my kids, birding, etc.—all of which need good autofocus.

Yes, I knew what I was getting into with lenses like the 28-70 f/2 (it’s a beast, for sure), but after using smaller gear for so long, the size difference just stood out to me. That said, I still appreciate the amazing image quality these lenses deliver.

So, no hard feelings here—I’m just a hobbyist who’s a little surprised by the size and weight of the new gear, but still enjoying the process. Thanks for the feedback, and happy shooting!

Aug 29, 2024 at 04:40 PM

moondigger
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #10 · p.1 #10 · Is It Just Me, or Are Canon RF Lenses Getting Out of Hand?

Setting aside the fact that the 5D series bodies are much larger than the R5 series bodies...

The key here is that you're literally buying all the largest lenses available for the RF mount. If you value smaller/lighter, then consider the following substitutions:

RF 85 f/2.0 instead of the 85 f/1.2L. If you must have a wider aperture, consider the EF 85 f/1.4L IS (which is lighter and a little narrower, but longer when coupled with the required EF-RF adapter). Or get the EF 85 f/1.2L II, which doesn't perform as well as any of the previously mentioned options but is more compact.

RF 24-70 f/2.8L instead of the 28-70 f/2.0L.

You get the idea.

Aug 29, 2024 at 05:57 PM

Imagemaster
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #11 · p.1 #11 · Is It Just Me, or Are Canon RF Lenses Getting Out of Hand?

aboss3 wrote:
I’ve just genuinely noticed how the RF lenses have gotten significantly bigger compared to the old EF lineup,

I guess you are not talking about RF 100-400 compared to EF 100-400:

https://cameradecision.com/lenses/compare/Canon-RF-100-400mm-F5.6-8-IS-USM-vs-Canon-EF-100-400mm-f4.5-5.6L-IS-USM

Aug 29, 2024 at 07:38 PM

Gochugogi
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #12 · p.1 #12 · Is It Just Me, or Are Canon RF Lenses Getting Out of Hand?

It's just you. Most of my RF lenses are smaller than their EF equivalents. My RF 70-200 4L is a mighty midget. The RF 35 1.8 Macro IS STM is smaller than my prior EF 35 2.0 IS USM and so on. As we age, cameras appear to get bigger and heavier as me diminish physically...

Aug 29, 2024 at 10:08 PM

burningheart
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #13 · p.1 #13 · Is It Just Me, or Are Canon RF Lenses Getting Out of Hand?

aboss3 wrote:
Hey everyone,

First off, I just want to say I didn’t mean to come across as trolling—definitely not my intention! I’ve just genuinely noticed how the RF lenses have gotten significantly bigger compared to the old EF lineup, and it caught me off guard. Trust me, I'm not looking to stir up a fight here, just venting a bit.

To clear things up, I’m not a professional photographer—this has been a passion of mine for over 20 years. I’ve switched camera systems a few times, but spent the last six years with Sony FE and GM lenses before making the jump to...Show more →

Welcome back to shooting with Canon cameras.

A lot of folks find the 28-70 a beast. I haven't. I often carry it when hiking. Mind you the first time I saw the 28-70 was at a Canon presentation and the presenter started to apologize for the heft at the exact same moment I picked it up off the table and I responded I didn't find it any that heavy. He then thanked me for saying that. The 28-70 for me feels just like the 11-24.

Aug 29, 2024 at 10:52 PM

Choderboy
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #14 · p.1 #14 · Is It Just Me, or Are Canon RF Lenses Getting Out of Hand?

So are you going to get 24-105 2.8 next?

EF 300 f4 to EF 300 2.8. Just a top faster. Twice the weight.
EF 400 f5.6 to EF 400 2.8. 2 stops faster, 4 times the weight.
EF 200 2.8 to EF 200 1.8. 1 and 1/3rd stop faster, 4 times the weight.

EF 24-105 f4L IS 795g. RF 24-105 f4L IS 700g.
EF 600 f4L IS 5.36kg. RF 600 f4 3.09kg.

So, no, things are not getting out of hand.
Some lenses a little heavier.
Some lenses a little lighter.
Some lenses a lot lighter.
Some lenses quite heavy, but a stop faster than available EF versions, and almost everyone knows that means much heavier.

It would only be logical to suspect you may be trolling.

Aug 30, 2024 at 02:10 AM

johnvanr
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #15 · p.1 #15 · Is It Just Me, or Are Canon RF Lenses Getting Out of Hand?

It’s you.

Aug 30, 2024 at 02:15 AM

boldcolors
Offline
•
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #16 · p.1 #16 · Is It Just Me, or Are Canon RF Lenses Getting Out of Hand?

The L-glass you got yourself are made with no compromises and mainly aimed towards working pros, not for casual walk-arounds to rich hobbyists (even though Canon loves that money).

Furthermore, increased size is not just a Canon thing. When Sigma released their 50/1.4 Art people were laughing at its bulky size and weight but soon became quiet when the performance @1.4 was revealed. Same thing with the 50L and 85L. Yes, the older versions were smaller and lighter but there is a massive difference in performance wide open.

The 28-70 is a beast yes, but if offers something unique. Personally I would never get it though but I know many wedding photographers who use that lens 85% of the wedding.

Aug 30, 2024 at 05:53 AM

eddieb
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #17 · p.1 #17 · Is It Just Me, or Are Canon RF Lenses Getting Out of Hand?

Why the obsession with weight and size? If it is such a burden to carry a current Canon camera and lens, might I suggest an Apple IPhone. Small and fits in your pocket. Yeah, I’m being snarky.

Aug 30, 2024 at 08:59 AM

Jeff Nolten
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #18 · p.1 #18 · Is It Just Me, or Are Canon RF Lenses Getting Out of Hand?

My R5 travel kit weighs 3/4 lb less than my 5D4 travel kit and I've added the 35 f1.8 and the tele goes to 500! If I use the RF 100-400 the R kit would be over 2 lbs less! The RF 24-105 L weighs .6 oz more than the original EF 24-105 L and 3.4 oz less than the EF 24-105 L II. The R5 weighs less than any 5D body. I'm happy!

My current travel kit is R5, RF 16, 24-105 L, 35 f1.8, 100-500, G1X3 - 8 lbs.

Yes, weight matters when I'm lugging it through airports.

And! Apple iPhone 15 pro images don't compare well to even my over 6 year old G1X3 for colors, DR, and resolution, both at their 24 MP comparable FLs.

Aug 30, 2024 at 10:24 AM

aboss3
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #19 · p.1 #19 · Is It Just Me, or Are Canon RF Lenses Getting Out of Hand?

I guess it all boils down to the fact that I’ve picked up some of the heaviest lenses in the RF lineup, hence my little venting session. But I’ve got to admit, they do deliver incredible image quality, far beyond what I got from my old Canon glass.

I was planning to take the 28-70 for travel photography, paired with the 15-35 for wider shots and the 100-500 for some longer reach. Yes, they’re all heavy, but after playing around with them for the past 2-3 days, I’m really loving the IQ and the images they produce with the R5 II.

I totally get that I can’t have the best of both worlds—compact, lightweight m43 lenses and amazing IQ with fast apertures. So, I’ll stop venting now. And just to clarify, this definitely wasn’t trolling! 😊

Aug 30, 2024 at 10:39 AM

Jeff Nolten
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #20 · p.1 #20 · Is It Just Me, or Are Canon RF Lenses Getting Out of Hand?

My wife's APS-C R7 kit (RF 10-18, 18-150, 100-400) weighs 3.7 lbs and takes some very nice images. Swap the Sigma RF-S 18-50 f2.8 for the 18-150 if you like faster glass - equal weights.

Aug 30, 2024 at 10:48 AM

1 2 end
FM Forums \| Canon Forum \| Join Upload & Sell 1 2 end

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.