My EF 70-200mm IS USM f4 has been my favorite Canon lens since 2010. I was hesitant to let it go in favor of the RF version. I finally did because of an upcoming trip and the fact that the RF version is so much easier to pack in a small bag. I couldn't be happier. The RF is at least as good... possibly very slightly better optically than the EF version. The size/weight is amazing. It's close to the same length and weight of the RF 24-105mm f4. Very convenient to carry around.

I've been using this lens for awhile and I really love it. It is sharp and fast. Its light weight makes it perfect for handholding with my R5. I researched the comparison between the f4 and the f2.8 and could find little difference in image quality. I use my 24-105 f4 all the time and have rarely been penalized from lack of lens speed. The R5 handles low light conditions at high ISO really well so no real problem there. I find the same is true for this lens as well and when I considered price and weight difference it was a no brainer for me. I didn't need to add more weight to my camera pack as it's pretty heavy as it is. What I like most is that the zoom range is a perfect companion to my 100-500. On a safari I can put one lens on each of my R5 bodies and capture almost any subject distance. So, I'm pleased with my choice of the f4 and the price and weight savings.

After a workshop in Tuscany with Mads Peter Iversen, I learned I needed to lighten the load. I love my Canon EF 2.8 trinity lenses, but they will stay at home. Shooting landscapes, it's time to take advantage of the Canon mirrorless camera system and the lightweight, quality L lenses available.


I specifically purchased the RF 15-35 f2.8 for the trip and I love the lens, but looking back, taking my RF 24-105 f4, paired with this lens would have allowed me to get all the shots.


After watching Dustin Abbott's reviews of both the RF 24-105 f4 and RF 70-200 f4, and seeing firsthand for myself, I think the image quality is exceptional for both lenses, so I am not compromising when capturing those foggy Tuscany landscape images.


This lens will travel with me on all future trips.

My 2nd RF lens after I purchased the an RF 50 1.2 to go with my new R5. Just amazed how light it is with the R5. No weight comparison against my EF 70-200 2.8 plus converter. Starting to think that I can travel again using full frame due to the lighter mirrorless body and this f/4 lens. Great colors and without pixel peeper sharpness is in same league as my 135L and the 70-200 2.8 MK II. Just thrilled.

This is a nice addition to my Canon R family. The lens is light weight, weighing about the same as my 24-104 lens, easy to shoot hand held. It has an image stabilization switch, an AF/MF switch and lens lock switch to prevent lens creep. Images are nice and sharp.

I read multiple reviews and articles describing this zoom lens. I tend to go through analysis paralysis when planning a major purchase, and I wanted to be thoroughly sure what to expect. I opted for the f/4 vs the f/2.8 as it seemed to meet my needs at a less expensive price. I have the 24 - 105 f/4 L paired with the Canon R6 and am spoiled by how sharp it is. Both lenses perform beautifully. I'd considered a longer zoom (maybe later) but for now the reach is adequate and the images seem super crisp edge to edge. In many cases, I can crop down to less than 20% of the frame to get a clean photo result despite it only going to 200mm. There was so much praise for this lens in the reviews I read, like many, my expectations have been exceeded. Great glass!

I've been happily using the EF 70-200 f4 L IS for 11 years, so I decided to treat myself to it's RF replacement. Great idea! This is a fine lens, perfect for my needs. The price point is a lot nicer than the F2.8 version, so if you don't actually NEED that extra f-stop, save the $1000 and the extra pound of weight and get this lens.

I've seen reviews that mention a minute, almost undetectable difference in sharpness, but in real world usage, there is nothing to it. Even at f4, its widest aperture, its dead on sharp. Stop down one or 2 stops and it just gets better.

It's almost one pound lighter and nearly 2 inches shorter than the f2.8. For me that means that I'm more likely to actually have it with me, even at times when I'm trying to save space and weight.

I simply haven't found anything negative to say about this lens.

The latest EF version is a great lens but the shorter size, lighter weight and shorter MFD of the RF version compelled me to replace it. The RF version also tracks better mounted on a R5. I can carry this lens comfortably on long hikes and climbs mounted on a RP. I recently carried it to the summit of a 14er and got great shots along the way. If the factors I mentioned aren't important to you, then you might want to stick with the EF version. O/w well worth it. Photos taken with a RP.

This is much smaller than my EF 70-200. Almost the size of my RF 24-70,
so perfect for any activity where you want to save as much weight and size as possible.
The images are sharp and free from CA, so that's a winner for me!

I purchased this lens for my R5. I takes great images and the focus is extremely fast. This lens along with my 24-105 makes a great combination.