I just pre-ordered the R5 Mark II for a hiking trip to Patagonia next month, but now I'm stressing out over what walkaround lens to get. My budget is capped at $2500.
I read that the RF 24-70mm f/2.8 is the absolute best, but it seems so heavy for long hikes. Everyone else says the 24-105mm f/4 is the way to go for the reach, but I'm really worried the f/4 is gonna struggle in low light or look soft on that 45MP sensor.
Which of these should I actually commit to, or is there a better all-around option?
Honestly, I was in your shoes last year with my original R5 and went with the Canon RF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM thinking it was the safe bet. Unfortunately, it really let me down during a trek through the Dolomites. The images were just soft at the edges, and when the sun dipped behind the peaks, the f/4 aperture felt so restrictive... I missed a once-in-a-lifetime shot of a mountain goat because the autofocus hunted in the dim light. The Canon RF 24-70mm f/2.8L IS USM is way sharper, but hiking with that brick is a nightmare for your neck. Its frustrating because neither feels perfect for high-res sensors. If I had to pick for reliability on a trip like Patagonia, I'd begrudgingly take the 24-70 despite the bulk. TL;DR: The 24-105 f/4 is too soft for that 45MP sensor. Deal with the weight and get the Canon RF 24-70mm f/2.8L IS USM.
The Canon RF 24-70mm f/2.8L IS USM is technically the best choice for that sensor. It delivers much better corner sharpness. It also handles low light without cranking the ISO too high. Quick tip: grab a Peak Design Capture Clip v3 for your backpack strap. It distributes the weight perfectly. You wont even notice the extra bulk compared to the f/4 version.
Can confirm
