I finally pulled the trigger on the R5 Mark II and Im honestly so pumped to get out and shoot with it! Im mostly going to be using it for a mix of street photography and some light portrait work while I travel through Europe this summer. I have about 1500 to 2000 bucks left in the budget for a lens.
I have been scouring the web for weeks now. Everyone keeps pointing to the RF 24-105mm f/4L because of the versatility, but then I read a few threads where people say it lacks that special pop you get with a prime. Then there is the RF 35mm f/1.4, which looks like a dream for street stuff, but I am terrified that not having a zoom will drive me crazy when I just want to capture some architecture while walking around. Its so hard to decide because I dont want to be swapping lenses in the middle of a busy square every five minutes.
Does anyone have experience using a specific lens as their permanent body cap on this camera? I really need something that can handle low light well but still be wide enough for city shots. Is the 24-105 actually sharp enough to justify the price over just grabbing a really solid prime, or am I overthinking the whole lens sharpness thing?
Forget the zoom. The Canon RF 24-70mm f/2.8L IS USM is the only lens that balances sharpness and low-light performance perfectly for travel. Just be careful with weight.
> I am terrified that not having a zoom will drive me crazy when I just want to capture some architecture while walking around. Honestly, I get that fear. Having used the Canon RF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM as a permanent body cap for years, I can tell you the versatility for travel is unmatched. Youre in Europe, you want to be enjoying the sights, not fumbling with glass in a crowded piazza. While primes offer that extra pop, the sharpness on this L-series is definitely high enough for professional output on the R5 series sensor. You arent going to be disappointed by the detail. If you really crave that low-light performance but need to stay within budget, look into the Canon RF 28-70mm f/2L USM if you can stretch the budget or snag a used copy, though that gets heavy quick. For something more manageable, the Canon RF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM is my go-to. It handles architecture perfectly at the 24mm end and gives you enough reach for portraits at 105mm. The f/4 aperture is fine for street photography as long as you arent shooting in pitch black. It just works well, its reliable, and it allows you to focus on the shot instead of the gear. You wont regret the convenience.
Adding my two cents, you have a solid dilemma. The 24-70 provides that pro-grade aperture, while the 24-105 is basically the king of travel convenience. Honestly, if you want that prime-like character without constantly swapping, look at the Canon RF 28-70mm f/2L USM. It is pricey and heavy, but it is basically three primes in one. If that is too much, just grab the Canon RF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM and dont overthink the sharpness. You will be glad you did.
Jumping in here because I obsessed over these exact specs when I got my R5. If you are worried about that prime look, you might want to consider the Canon RF 24-105mm f/2.8L IS USM Z. It is a beastly piece of glass, but it effectively closes the gap between the f/4 versatility and the f/1.4 depth of field you get from a prime. Just be careful with the weight though, as it will definitely be front-heavy on your body. I personally started with the Canon RF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM and it is incredibly reliable for travel, but I found myself constantly fighting the high ISO noise in dim European cathedrals. If you prioritize reliability, the f/4 is fine, but if you want that creamy bokeh for portraits, you really need to look at the faster glass. Make sure to double check your camera bag weight limits before you pack too much. I would suggest renting the heavier f/2.8 zooms for a weekend first to see if you can handle the bulk all day.