Im honestly so annoyed right now because I dropped all this money on the new R5 Mark II and now I am totally paralyzed trying to find one lens that actually makes sense for it. My logic was that the 24-105mm f/4 L would be the perfect do everything kit but honestly the f/4 is killing me in low light and the bokeh is just... meh. I tried using it for a family shoot last weekend in a forest here in Washington and I had to crank my ISO so high I felt like I was losing all that sensor quality I paid for. So then I looked at the 24-70mm f/2.8 but the reach feels so limited for travel and I dont want to be swapping lenses every five minutes while I am hiking around Olympic National Park next month. I have about $2800 left in my gear budget and I really need to figure this out before my trip. Is the 28-70 f/2 actually worth the weight penalty or is it just gonna break my neck after an hour? Or should I just give up and get that massive 24-105 f/2.8 even though it looks like a telescope? I just want one lens that stays on the camera 90% of the time and doesnt make me regret my life choices when the sun goes down. What are you guys actually using on this body that doesnt feel like a total compromise?
Like someone mentioned, those massive zooms are basically gym equipment. Ive tried many different setups over the years and honestly, the weight of the big glass usually ruins the experience for me. Since you have the R5 Mark II, you should really reconsider the Canon RF 24-70mm f/2.8L IS USM but from a technical perspective. I know you said the reach feels limited for hiking, but you have 45 megapixels to play with. In my experience, using the in-camera 1.6x crop mode on that body gives you a 112mm reach at f/2.8 while still keeping a very clean 17MP file. Thats plenty of resolution for a sharp print or any digital delivery. It keeps your kit manageable for a long day in Olympic National Park without the neck pain of the f/2 brick. If you're shooting in those dark Washington woods, f/2.8 is the bare minimum... dont settle for the f/4 or you'll just be fighting noise all trip.
Late to the party here but I've been through this loop with the R5 series. @Reply #1 - good point on the aperture issue. Honestly, I lugged the Canon RF 28-70mm f/2L USM around for a while and it is a brick. My neck was screaming after a half day in the field. Its a stunning lens, basically a bag of primes, but for hiking in Olympic? Forget it. Youll leave it in the car by day three. If you really want that one-lens setup that handles the dark forest floors, you might want to reconsider the Canon RF 24-70mm f/2.8L IS USM. Its usually the sweet spot for weight versus light gathering. The R5 Mark II has insane IBIS too, so you can often drop the shutter speed more than you think to keep that ISO down. Another option is keeping a light prime like the Canon RF 35mm f/1.8 Macro IS STM in your pocket for when the sun really dips. Just my experience after years of trying to find the perfect unicorn lens...
Honestly I have been through a few setups with this body and it has been pretty disappointing so far. The dream of a one-lens solution is tough because everything I tried felt like a massive compromise. Some serious issues with the balance on my Canon EOS R5 Mark II cropped up and the autofocus consistency just was not as good as I expected for the price.
- Weight distribution made the setup feel totally front-heavy
- Weather sealing felt questionable during a light drizzle last month
- General build quality feels a bit more consumer than the old pro gear Tbh you should just search for Canon R5 II zoom lens comparison on YouTube or check the dedicated gear threads on Reddit. There is a really good video that breaks down the weight and sharpness of all these options side-by-side. It is much better to see the actual footage than just reading our opinions here.
I've spent a lot of time with both those big lenses on my R5 and they're both monsters in their own way. Since the f/4 is causing you trouble, moving to a faster aperture is definitely the right move for those dark PNW forests.
- Canon RF 24-105mm f/2.8L IS USM Z: This is probably your best bet for a single-lens setup. It gives you the range you want but with f/2.8 speed throughout. It is heavier than the f/4 version, but the stabilization is rock solid for low light shooting when you're handheld.
- Canon RF 28-70mm f/2L USM: This lens is basically a bag of primes. The f/2 is gorgeous, but missing out on 24mm and the 70-105mm range can feel really restrictive for travel and landscapes. Its also very front-heavy for long hikes. Honestly, if you want one lens that stays on the body, the 24-105mm f/2.8 is the most versatile despite the size. It covers basically every base without you having to swap gear constantly.
