I finally pulled the trigger on the R5 Mark II pre-order and now I am staring at my empty lens shelf like a total idiot lol. I am heading to Iceland in November for a two week trek so I really need to nail down the wide angle situation before then. My logic was originally to go with the RF 15-35mm f/2.8L because everyone says its the gold standard and I might do some northern lights shots while I am there so the extra stop helps.
But then I started looking at the RF 14-35mm f/4L and honestly that extra 1mm on the wide end is kinda tempting for those massive glaciers and the weight savings would be huge for hiking all day. Budget isnt super tight but I would like to stay under $2500 if possible. I am also considering just getting the 14-35 and maybe a fast prime like the RF 24mm 1.8 for the night stuff but then I am swapping lenses in the wind and rain which sounds like a nightmare for the sensor.
Is the sharpness on the 14-35 actually good enough for that 45mp sensor or am I gonna regret not getting the f/2.8 glass when I see the files on a big monitor later? I am torn because the f/4 is so much more practical for travel but the R5II feels like it deserves the absolute best glass available. What would you prioritize for a dedicated landscape setup...
Like someone mentioned, weight is vital. Are you taking a sturdy tripod? In my experience, the Canon RF 14-35mm f/4L IS USM is safer for:
- Weather sealing
- 77mm filters
- Corner sharpness
^ This. Also, you gotta consider the grit factor. In my experience trekking through places like the Snaefellsnes peninsula, the wind is powerful enough to blow salt and silt into every nook of your gear. I'm a total safety nut when it comes to my bodies, so the idea of swapping to a prime for night shots in that environment makes me cringe. I've tried many setups over the years and honestly, I'd just bite the bullet and get the Canon RF 15-35mm f/2.8L IS USM. It's a heavy beast but it's built like a bunker. Having the 2.8 ready for the northern lights without exposing the sensor is a massive relief when the weather turns sideways. If you do go for the Canon RF 14-35mm f/4L IS USM, please grab a B+W 77mm Master Clear Filter MRC Nano to finish the weather sealing. Nothing ruins a trip faster than moisture getting behind the front element... trust me on that one. Stay safe out there, Iceland doesnt play around.
I have used both and the Canon RF 14-35mm f/4L IS USM is definitely the smarter choice for a trek. In my experience, weight savings matter way more than a stop of light when hiking. Sharpness at f/8 is outstanding on high-res sensors. Quick tip: carry the Canon RF 16mm f/2.8 STM for northern lights. Its tiny and wont break your back like the heavy f/2.8 zoom.
Finally someone says it. Ive been thinking this for a while but wasnt sure.
Like someone mentioned, the wide angle situation for the R5 II is actually pretty frustrating. Im in the exact same boat as you, staring at my gear and feeling let down by the current RF options for high-res landscape work.
- Canon RF 15-35mm f/2.8L IS USM: Its a total brick. I had issues with the weight on treks and the sharpness wasnt as good as expected for 45mp. Honestly felt my old EF glass was better in the corners than this one.
- Canon RF 14-35mm f/4L IS USM: The distortion at 14mm is disappointing. Tbh you lose so much detail once the camera corrects the image that it almost defeats the purpose of having the extra 1mm on such a high-res sensor.
- Canon RF 10-20mm f/4L IS STM: Insanely wide but the lack of front filter threads is a massive dealbreaker for most of my landscape work. I still havent decided what to do either. Its annoying having such a powerful body but feeling like every lens option is just a series of compromises... I might just end up adapting old glass again which feels like a waste.
