So I finally did it and preordered the R5 Mark II and I am honestly so hyped I can barely sit still! This is my first big jump into the pro-level mirrorless stuff after shooting on an old 90D for way too long. I really want to make sure I get the absolute best glass for this beast of a sensor because it would be a shame to waste all those megapixels on a lens that cant keep up. I’ve been looking for that one holy grail zoom lens that can just stay on my camera for most of my trips so I dont have to carry a massive bag of primes everywhere.
I spent the last three nights falling down a YouTube rabbit hole and I’m still totally stuck between a few options. Everyone seems to love the RF 24-70mm f/2.8L for its sharpness and that wide aperture for low light, but then I see all these travel photographers raving about the 24-105mm f/4L because of the extra reach. I also saw that crazy 24-105mm f/2.8 but it looks like a literal telescope and I’m worried it’ll break my neck if I carry it all day. I’m just confused if the f/2.8 is really that necessary for landscape and street stuff or if the f/4 is good enough for a high-res body like the R5ii. Some people online say the f/4 is a bit soft on the edges when you're shooting at 45mp and that really scares me for the price.
Here is what I am looking for:
- Main use is landscape and travel photography (I have a big trip to Iceland planned for October!)
- Budget is around $2,500 ish but I can push it a bit if its really worth it for the long term
- Needs to be weather sealed because I know I'm gonna be getting sprayed by waterfalls and rain
- I hate switching lenses in the wind so a good versatile range is a must
- Something that wont make my wrists ache after a 6 mile hike
Do you guys think the 24-70 is wide enough for everything or should I go for the extra reach of the 105? Also is the sharpness difference really noticeable on this new sensor or am I just overthinking the tech specs...
Jumping in here to agree that the reach is usually more valuable. A few technical details to consider:
- The Canon RF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM is much lighter for those 6-mile hikes.
- Since you'll likely shoot landscapes at f/8 or f/11, the f/2.8 aperture isn't always a necessity.
- IBIS on the R5II helps stabilize handheld shots if you do hit lower light. The Canon RF 24-70mm f/2.8L IS USM is sharp, but 70mm often feels limited in open landscapes.
Saw this and wanted to toss in my two cents. I spent way too much time looking at the MTF charts on sites like The Digital Picture before I bought my kit... it can really mess with your head after a while.
- Canon RF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM: This is basically the reliable workhorse. For Iceland, that weather sealing is a must. People complain about the edges at 45mp, but if you are shooting landscapes at f/8 or f/11, it is honestly fine. It is the safe bet for hiking since it wont weigh you down.
- Canon RF 24-70mm f/2.8L IS USM: Technically sharper across the frame, yeah. But 70mm is gonna feel really short when you are trying to frame a distant waterfall. Plus it is heavier and more expensive. I dont think the extra stop of light is worth the weight trade-off for travel.
- Canon RF 24-105mm f/2.8L IS USM Z: Like you said, it is a literal telescope. Unless you have a sherpa, maybe skip this for a 6-mile hike. It is a beast of a lens but totally overkill for most people. Ngl, I think people overthink the sharpness thing. Most viewers wont see the difference between these two on a screen. If I were you, Id go for the f/4 and maybe grab a nice polarizer for the trip instead. Check out the image comparison tools on DPReview if you wanna see the real-world difference between them side-by-side before you drop the cash.
Just wanted to say thanks for everyone chiming in. Super helpful discussion.
Yep, this is the way
I've been thinking about your lens choice for a few hours. When you're dealing with a high-res body like the R5 II, the brand direction is actually way more important than people realize.
- Stick with Canon for this mount. Third-party options are starting to pop up, but they dont always play nice with the newer autofocus stuff in the Mark II.
- Focus on the professional-grade series rather than the consumer ones. The high-end glass is built to a much tighter standard which is basically required for those 45 megapixels.
- Native glass usually has way better weather sealing compared to other brands. For a trip to Iceland, you really dont want to risk a non-native mount failing in the rain or spray. Just go with Canon, you cant go wrong. Any of their professional zooms will hold up way better than the alternatives tho.
Solid advice 👍
