Your cart is currently empty!
The Holy Trinity
CANON RF 15-35, 28-70, AND 70-200
For Those Who Want It ALL
The term “Holy Trinity” is a biblical concept, but ask any photographer and they will instantly identify a wide, medium, and telephoto assortment of lenses. This lens combination enables you to photograph just about anything aside from perhaps sports or wildlife. Although you could do this with a large behemoth like a 28-300 mm, you often sacrifice speed, aperture, size, and potentially image quality for the benefit of carrying one lens.
Whereas the holy trinity can apply to either primes or zooms, zoom lenses give you the most options. As Canon has evolved into mirrorless, they have been doing some groundbreaking work moving from older EF glass to the newer RF lenses.
Introduced in 2018, Canon RF lenses have notable improvements over older EF models. A bigger mount and shorter flange distance allow for larger apertures and more flexibility in design. One underutilized but helpful feature is the control ring, which is easily missed because of how well it blends in. Though unnecessary, it adds a really convenient degree of functionality. For example, I set mine to ISO when shooting manual. Between the control ring and the other dials, I can rapidly adjust shutter speed, aperture, ISO, and white balance quickly during portrait sessions without ever entering a menu or using a touchscreen.
01.
RF 15-35 f/2.8
I started out doing cityscape and landscape photography and felt that I wanted to get wider and wider with increasing experience. I’ve made some incredible images with my Canon EF 16-35 f/4.0 and questioned whether the RF 15-35 f/2.8 would be worthwhile. Though the f/4.0 version takes some amazing photos, I upgraded to the f/2.8 because I want to get into astrophotography and aperture really matters in that case. Because of the increasingly lower noise at higher ISOs with today’s cameras, I personally think the EF f/4.0 version is a fine substitute instead of the RF f/2.8. That said, they seem to weigh about the same amount in the hand (the RF version is slightly more).
Regardless, the build quality on both is phenomenal but it just seems to be a little more solid with the RF version. Overall, I think the image quality is amazing with minimal edge distortion. Frankly, this is a great lens that I anticipate being one of my most used, though I tend to shoot wide overall. Additionally, I’m thankful for having the extra 1 mm at 15 mm for future shoots in really tight areas like European churches.
Pros:
– Excellent image quality
– 5 stop image stabilization
Cons:
– Expensive $2,299 vs $1,099 for the EF f/4.0
– Slight but essentially imperceptible difference in weight from f/4.0 version
02.
RF 28-70 f/2.0
Oh boy!
Oh boy! This lens is the one that I’m most uncertain about. I love it but am constantly looking for reasons not to use it, mostly because of its gigantic size and weight.
I can do an entire wedding with this lens and feel like I’m not limited in any way. That said, it’s super heavy. Like crazy heavy. I’m a 250 lb guy, so that’s not a dealbreaker right now, but I wonder about how long I’d want to continue using such a beast of a lens? I do really appreciate the f/2.0 aperture but personally, I’d probably go with the f/2.8 if I was doing it again. I don’t know if I’d be able to tell the difference in bokeh between the two and I think the f/2.8 would be more manageable long term. It’s more than a pound lighter (3.15 lbs vs 1.98 lbs according to the Canon website). Another aspect I don’t like about the 28-70 is that you need 95 mm filters, which are crazy expensive and something you can’t use for any of your other lenses without step-down rings. Lastly, I’d really like to have 24 mm on the wide end instead of 28 mm. It seems like a small difference, but it can be huge when trying to get into a tight space.
While I’ve made some incredible award-winning images with this lens, it’s the one I’d skip if I was doing it again.
Pros:
– f/2.0 aperture is unique
– Incredible image quality
Cons:
– Huge, like really huge
– Heavy
– 95 mm filters are a pain to buy
– Wish I had 24 mm on the wide end
– Will you notice the image quality/bokeh between f/2.0 and f/2.8?
03.
RF 70-200 f/2.8
I love this lens.
Pure love. In every way. That might sum it up.
Seriously, I’m astonished that they were able to get such incredible image quality into such a small and light lens. I remember the gigantic 70-200s of yesteryear that would take up most of your camera bag. This is totally different and easily to carry for an entire photoshoot. Fast and light, you won’t regret this lens. Honestly, just buy it. I really don’t have much else to say.
Pros:
– Way smaller and lighter than most other 70-200 lenses
Cons:
– None
Follow me.
Instagram is where I tell stories of daily life and love. Step into my world.
For all the latest, click below!
Adventure is everywhere
Every click is a story–see through the lens of my life!
