So I finally pulled the trigger and got the R5 Mark II after saving up for what feels like an eternity. It just showed up two days ago and honestly I am already hitting a wall. I'm coming from an older 5D and I thought I could just use my old EF glass with an adapter and call it a day but the autofocus feels slightly off and the images just dont look as crisp as I expected on this new sensor. I have this huge trip to the Italian Dolomites coming up in exactly three weeks and I'm lowkey panicking because I need one solid zoom lens that can stay on the camera 90% of the time. I really dont want to be fumbling with lens changes while I'm hiking in the wind and rain.
I have been scouring the forums and watching way too many YouTube reviews and I'm just more confused now. Everyone says the RF 24-105mm f/4L is the gold standard for a walkaround lens but then I see these picky guys saying it doesnt actually resolve enough detail for the 45 megapixel sensor and that it gets soft at the edges. So then I look at the RF 24-70mm f/2.8 but I'm worried that losing that extra reach on the long end is gonna kill me when I'm trying to compress those mountain peaks.
Then there is that crazy 24-105 f/2.8 but that thing is like three pounds and costs more than my first car. I'm already stretching my budget thin after buying the body—I can probably swing about $1800 to $2200 max if I sell some of my old gear. I'm frustrated because I feel like I'm stuck between a lens that's light but maybe not sharp enough and a lens that's sharp but doesnt have the range I need for travel. Is the f/4 version really that much of a compromise on the Mark II or are people just being gear snobs? I just want something that isnt gonna make me regret spending all this money on a high res body. What are you guys actually keeping on your R5II for everyday shooting and travel...
Honestly, I went through the exact same crisis when I upgraded. The plan was to love the Canon RF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM because that focal range is basically the dream for hiking, but unfortunately, it just didn't live up to the hype for me. Taking it on a big trip to Zion last year left me pretty bummed once I got home and started looking at the files on a big monitor. While the center is okay, those corners on a 45MP sensor are just not as good as I expected. Some pretty noticeable softness at the long end made the mountains look... mushy. Basically felt like putting cheap gas in a high-end sports car. Swapping it for the Canon RF 24-70mm f/2.8L IS USM was the move, and even though it's heavier, the difference is night and day. Yeah, losing that extra reach to 105mm is annoying for compression, but the R5II has so many megapixels that you can honestly just crop in and still have a better image than the f/4 would've given you natively. It's frustrating that there isn't a perfect light lens for this body yet, but for the Dolomites, you really want that edge-to-edge sharpness. My experience was that the f/4 is a bit of a compromise if you're actually planning to appreciate that high-res sensor. Sell the old EF gear and grab the f/2.8 zoom, it's the only way to not feel like you're wasting the R5II's potential...
