Ugh, this is driving me nuts. I finally pulled the trigger on the R5 Mark II because the autofocus tracking is just insane, but now I feel like I'm bottlenecking the sensor with my old EF glass. I've been shooting weddings in Chicago for over a decade and usually swear by the standard 24-70mm f/2.8 range, but trying to adapt my old L glass is honestly getting annoying with the control ring adjustments and the weight honestly. My budget for this upgrade is around 2500 bucks, maybe a little more if the optics are actually game-changing, but I need something I can keep glued to the body for an entire 12-hour event without my wrist dying. So I was thinking about the newer RF 24-70mm, but then I see people raving about the 24-105mm f/2.8 and I'm just spiraling now. The logic was that I needed that f/2.8 for the dark reception halls, but the 105 reach is so nice for ceremony shots. Has anyone actually swapped their workhorse 24-70 for the newer RF equivalents and felt like it was worth the hit to the bank account, or am I just being suckered by the marketing? Seriously, what is the best all-around lens for this thing?
Regarding what #1 said about adapting EF glass, honestly, the weight savings you are looking for dont really exist with the Canon RF 24-105mm f/2.8 L IS USM Z. It is a beast to carry for 12 hours. I tried swapping, but it felt front-heavy and ruined my wrist by the end of the night. If you want a better experience on the R5 II, just rent the Canon RF 24-70mm f/2.8 L IS USM first.
To add to the point above: the Canon RF 24-70mm f/2.8L IS USM is way more manageable for long days. It is super sharp and the stabilization is just amazing!
> Has anyone actually swapped their workhorse 24-70 for the newer RF equivalents and felt like it was worth the hit to the bank account Honestly, I made the jump when I moved to the R series and it was worth it purely for the balance. Adapters add just enough length to make the total rig feel front-heavy, which is brutal for 12-hour wedding days. If you are shooting on the R5 Mark II, the Canon RF 24-70mm f/2.8L IS USM is going to feel like a completely different world compared to your old EF version. The image stabilization alone is a game changer when you're shooting low light, and the sharpness is way better for that high-resolution sensor. Regarding the Canon RF 24-105mm f/2.8L IS USM Z, yeah its tempting, but its quite a bit heavier and bulkier than the 24-70. If your main concern is wrist fatigue over long events, you might regret the extra heft once you reach that 10-hour mark. It is a fantastic lens, but for a wedding workhorse that stays on the body all day, the 24-70 is the smarter play for weight management. Stick with the 24-70, sell off the old EF glass to recoup some cash, and you wont feel like you're compromising on that autofocus speed.
Just saw this thread and honestly, the state of these lens prices is driving me crazy. It is such a scam how these companies push the newest glass for prices that could pay my rent, while the quality control lately feels like a total toss-up. You're trying to do honest work and these manufacturers just keep hiking the prices while making everything heavier and more annoying to use. It is ridiculous that we are expected to shell out thousands just to get basic performance that matches the sensor tech we already bought. Before I even start ranting more about the lack of innovation in weight distribution, what kind of lighting setups are you using for those reception halls? Are you sticking to purely ambient light or do you have a strobe setup that might let you get away with a variable aperture lens? I have some thoughts on the optics but the way you balance your gear really matters before you drop that much cash.