In the past month, I’ve reviewed two of the three lenses that comprise Canon’s famous trilogy – the RF 24-70 f2.8, and the RF 15-35 f2.8.  I’ll close out this series with a look at the Canon RF 70-200 f2.8 – the heavy hitter of the trilogy.

MY HISTORY WITH THE CANON 70-200.

I’ve owned more versions of Canon’s 70-200 than any other lens.  It started with the EF 70-200mm f/4. At the time, I was primarily photographing my Rottweilers — and we were actively showing them. Indoor events quickly exposed the limits of f/4. I needed more light to capture sharp images of the dogs while moving in the ring.  So I upgraded to the EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II — a lens I kept for years.  But after moving to mirrorless and purchasing the EOS R6, I eventually replaced it with the RF 70-200mm f/2.8.

WHY UPGRADE?

Honestly? I didn’t use my EF 70-200 very often.  It was optically brilliant — but it was large and heavy. And because of that, it frequently stayed home.  Canon addressed that directly with the RF redesign:

The RF 70-200 isn’t much larger or heavier than most other L series RF glass from Canon.

Canon shaved nearly a full pound and two inches off the lens. That doesn’t sound dramatic on paper. In real-world use, it absolutely is.  In the three years I’ve owned it, this lens has gone from “rarely used” to one of my most frequently packed lenses. When collapsed, it fits easily in my bag. It travels well and doesn’t irritate my aging back. I brought it to Washington D.C. two years ago and came home with some incredible images:

ACTION/SPORTS

Historically, the 70-200mm f/2.8 is the go-to sports lens. The RF version is no exception.

There is one widely discussed criticism from sports shooters: you can’t go from 70mm to 200mm in one fast, fluid twist like you could with the EF version.  To make this lens compact, Canon redesigned the internal mechanics. This translates to a longer zoom rotation and a telescoping barrel with more internal cams.  The result?   You often need two partial twists to go from 70mm to 200mm.  Is that a deal-breaker?  For me, it isn’t. After extended use, it becomes second nature. I’ve shot high school sports, auto racing, and fast-moving backyard chaos with my Rottweilers without feeling limited or missing shots.  But if you’re a dedicated professional sports shooter who relies on rapid framing adjustments all game long, Canon now offers the RF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM Z.

The Z version returns to a fixed internal zoom design. It’s larger and heavier, but offers more traditional handling and extender compatibility. It’s a different tool for a different priority.  Each version of the Canon 70-200 has its tradeoffs.

If you already own the EF 70-200 and are debating whether the upgrade is worth it — the answer depends less on image quality and more on whether portability changes how often you bring it with you.  And keep in mind that, if weight is at all a consideration, you have to add the weight of the EF to RF adaptor into the equation

Here’s some examples of some high school sports photos I’ve taken with this lens:

I’ve also used it quite a bit for auto racing:

And yes, I still enjoy getting photos in my back yard of my Rottweilers playing:

AUTOFOCUS PERFORMANCE?

Autofocus is primarily a function of the camera, not the lens.  I’ve used this lens with every version of the R6 and R5 and the autofocus performance is exceptional, primarily because of the bodies I was using.  Where the lens performance comes into play is how fast the lens focuses.  Canon designs its big white lenses to focus extremely fast — among the fastest in professional sports photography.  I’ve never been let down by autofocus speed from a Canon 70-200.

WHAT ABOUT IMAGE STABILIZATION?

I’m probably the wrong guy to ask about IS performance.  In my experience, IS isn’t that big of a deal.  If I’m in low-light, I bring a tripod.  I don’t try and risk getting a blurry shot when MAYBE I could hand hold it.  Sharp images hand held in low light are best served by increasing ISO and increasing aperture to get the shutter speed necessary to freeze the action.  Sure, modern IS helps a lot in this regard – but I don’t use it as a crutch.  Your mileage may vary.

That said, in real-world handheld shooting at moderate shutter speeds, the stabilization performs exactly as advertised.  Canon is top-tier in the implementation of both in-body and in-lens image stabilization.  If you have a use case (and I personally think there’s a stronger use case for video than photography) then you won’t be disappointed by the IS performance of this lens, particularly when paired with a higher-end Canon body.

No Substitute for Reach

When evaluating Canon’s trinity, the 70-200mm stands apart. With the 24-70mm or 15-35mm, you can debate primes vs. zooms. You can crop. You can work around focal length gaps. But there simply is no substitute for reach.  And you cannot crop your way to compression. You cannot simulate perspective.

The real question is simple:  Do you have a use case for a 70-200?  If yes, then refine your priorities.  If sports performance and traditional mechanics are paramount, the Z version may be your best fit.  If size, travel, and versatility matter more — portraits, automotive, landscapes, events — the original RF 70-200mm f/2.8 is an exceptional lens.  Either way, you will not be disappointed with the image quality.

Here’s my video review: