Canon RF 24-70mm F2.8L IS USM Review

November 4, 2019 | Mark Goldstein | Rating star Rating star Rating star Rating star


Out of the trinity of “essential” lenses, the 24-70mm f/2.8 is likely to be the most popular and in demand. Pretty much every professional includes a 24-70mm lens in their bag.

That said, it could also be argued that Canon doesn’t yet have the camera bodies to match up to exactly how good this lens is. We’ve been using the RF 24-70mm F2.8L IS USM with the Canon EOS RP, which is an entry-level model, but even the higher end Canon EOS R perhaps doesn’t quite appeal to professionals.

We can expect that Canon will release a high-end, pro level mirrorless model at some point in the not too distant future, so perhaps the company has gone with the tactic of releasing an attractive range of lenses in anticipation of appealing to those kind of users.

On that note, the Canon RF 24-70mm F2.8L IS USM is is a big and heavy lens which doesn’t balance particularly well with the existing range of Canon EOS R bodies. To that end, if you are thinking of investing in this lens - or any of the professional trinity - it’s also worth picking up an optional battery grip to help balance things out.

Another problem with this lens is the high asking price. At over £2,300, it really is one for dedicated advanced enthusiasts or professional users.

The good news is that the Canon RF 24-70mm F2.8L IS USM lens is an excellent performer - so if you do have the cash to spend on it you shouldn’t be disappointed. It’s capable of producing some very sharp images along with very pleasing bokeh. It’ll be interesting to see if Canon releases a very high resolution model to really take advantage of what the lens is capable of.

A lens like this is pretty much a must-have for many different kinds of users, and while it isn’t exactly cheap it’s the kind of workhorse that you’ll use for many different kinds of jobs and it’ll probably end up paying for itself over time.

4 stars

Ratings (out of 5)
Design 4
Features 4
Ease-of-use 4
Image quality 4.5
Value for money 3.5