I just dropped a ton of cash on the R5 Mark II and now I'm panic searching for the right walk-around lens before my trip to the Dolomites in ten days. I've been looking at the RF 24-70mm f2.8 cause everyone says it's the gold standard but then I see people arguing that the 24-105mm f4 is actually better for travel cause of the extra reach. I'm worried the f4 won't be sharp enough for the 45mp sensor or I'll miss that extra stop of light when it gets dark but honestly the 24-70 is so heavy and expensive. My budget is capped at $2600 now after buying the body. What lens should I actually get that makes the most of this sensor without breaking my back?
Honestly, for a trip to the Dolomites, just grab the Canon RF 24-105mm f4L IS USM and dont look back. I know everyone hypes up f2.8 glass, but in my experience hiking through mountains, that extra reach to 105mm is way more valuable than an extra stop of light you wont even use during the day. Ive shot with both on high-res sensors and the 24-105 is plenty sharp for the R5 II. People worry about the 45mp sensor outperforming the lens but its really not an issue at f4 or f8 where youll be spending most of your time anyway. Plus, the Canon RF 24-70mm f2.8L IS USM is heavy as hell. Lugging that up a trail isn't fun, and the IBIS in your new body will more than make up for the slower aperture in low light. Save the weight and the cash... you'll thank me when you're halfway up a peak.
Look, I have been shooting with Canon gear for over a decade and I have tried many of these combos. You dont need the 2.8 for landscape trips like the Dolomites. The R5 II has insane IBIS and the high ISO performance is so clean that you can easily make up for that f4 aperture. Here is what I would do based on the technical side of things: