philo Loc: philo, ca

If you own this lens I would love to hear your views. thinking about adding it to my kit.

Blurryeyed Loc: NC Mountains.

Hope you are considering the 14-35 as well.

philo Loc: philo, ca

No I'm not....the price different is too great.........$600 vx $1500

josquin1 Loc: Massachusetts

You might want to consider the EF 16-35mm f4L used. You can get excellent prices at MPB etc. I have it with the adaptor for my R6 and it is a marvelous lens which the RF 15-30 cannot compete for sharpness etc.

Blurryeyed Loc: NC Mountains.

My mistake, I have not kept up on all the new issues of the RF lenses, I just assumed that you were looking at the 15-35 f/2.8 which is more expensive.

AntonioReyna Loc: Los Angeles, California

True. The EF lenses work great on the mirrorless bodies with the cheap Canon adapter.

User ID

They work great not only on R-series, taking your word as reliable, but also on Nikon, Sony, and m4/3, by my personal current experience.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Canon EF lenses are the most adaptable automated lenses available, almost as adaptable as simple manual lenses. Ive got no modern EOS bodies, but I use a large pool of Canon EF lenses. I can use any given EF lens across four different systems in three formats.

(Download)


(Download)

gouldopfl

I have only upgraded one lens to RF and the rest are my EF lenses on the adapter. Many of my lenses work better on RF camera than they did on my EF camera. Now that Canon has decided to become a monopoly brand, when I decide to change camera's I will be changing systems. Canon is no longer for amateurs.

amfoto1 Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA

I do not have the RF 15-30mm...

However, I agree with one of the above recommendations. You might want to consider the EF 16-35mm f/4L IS USM and an EF to RF adapter.

There are pluses and minuses to this.

At comparable apertures, to me the EF 16-35mm looks a bit sharper with somewhat less chromatic aberration than the RF 15-30mm. https://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=1624&Camera=1508&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=2&LensComp=949&CameraComp=979&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=2 (Note: The slightly higher resolution 5DS-R used to make the test shots with the 16-35mm is probably more demanding of that lens, than the 45MP R5 used for test shots with the 15-30mm.)

The 16-35mm is an L-series lens, which is likely better built. And it has USM focus drive, which may be better than the 15-30's STM.

Further, the EF 16-35mm offers f/4 aperture throughout it's range, where the 15-30mm has a bit slower f/4.5-6.3 variable aperture.

As with most (all?) Canon L-series, the lens hood is included with the EF 16-35mm. It's sold separately with the 15-30mm.

The 15-30mm is smaller and lighter weight. It weighs under 1 lb. (13 oz.), while the 16-35mm is about 1.5 lb. (22 oz.) plus the EF to RF adapter.

The 15-30mm is smaller diameter, using a 67mm filter, while the 16-35mm uses 77mm.

The 16-35mm itself is about one inch longer than the 15-30mm, and adding the adapter to the EF lens makes it nearly another inch longer.

And, yeah, the EF 16-35mm f/4L will cost a bit more.

The RF 15-30mm is selling for $550 plus $59 (or 44£ or 50€) for the difficult to find, separately sold EW-73E hood (3rd party hoods may be avail. for less).

You can buy used copies of the EF 16-35mm in great condition for around $700 (with caps & hood): https://www.mpb.com/en-us/product/canon-ef-16-35mm-f-4-l-is-usm?page=4 and if you don't already have one, you'll need an EF to RF adapter to use this lens on an R-series camera. There are a number of those available now: https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/search?q=EF%20to%20RF%20adapter&filters=fct_accelerator-booster-turbo-hidden_6898%3Ano%2Cfct_camera-body-mount_1595%3Acanon-eos-rf%2Cfct_category%3Alens_adapters_3420 Note: If you want, this is an opportunity to add a control ring (which neither lens has, though the RF lens can be switched so it's focus ring acts as a control ring). Or you could add an adapter that accepts filters.

Full review of EF 16-35mm: https://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-16-35mm-f-4-L-IS-USM-Lens.aspx

Full review of RF 15-30mm: https://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-RF-15-30mm-F4-5-6-3-IS-STM-Lens.aspx

In the end, if you want as small and light as possible, the RF 15-30mm might be ideal. But if you want better build, a little bit larger lens aperture and slightly better image quality, the EF 16-35mm may be a better choice.

Blurryeyed Loc: NC Mountains.

I have a 16-35 f/4 L IS and it is awesome on the R5.

josquin1 Loc: Massachusetts

Also the EF 16-35 f4 has weather sealing and the 15-30 does not.

User ID

So far, which does seem far enough, the answer is, "No. We have no user reports here cuz we have no actual users."

Perhaps a dedicated Canon User forum would have some users. This thread will go about 10 pages without a single real user involved.

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

You know who has a copy of the RF 15-30mm F4.5-6.3 IS STM ?? That's right, Bryan Carnathan at the Digital Picture.

https://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-RF-15-30mm-F4-5-6-3-IS-STM-Lens.aspx

Blurryeyed Loc: NC Mountains.

Reviewers often say that they own the lens they are reviewing, it would not surprise me if he were to also say he owns a RF 15-35 f/2.8

Personally were I making this decision I think that I would consider what was posted earlier and see if I could not purchase a 16-35 f/4L for not much more money. That is possibly the best Ultra-wide in the EF lineup. Funny thing about Ultra-wides, they are either heavily used or not used much at all. People often think they need that really wide angle lens but unless they are really into landscape their new lens mostly sits on a shelf until they eventually sell it. I am pretty sure that the OP can probably find a good deal on the 16-35 as many of the R line shooters feel the need to migrate to the RF lenses. Personally I am not one of them, I am quite content with my EF glass.

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

You can read his process. I believe both Carnathan and definitely Rockwell buy their equipment retail for evaluation.

That said, my EF 16-35 f/4L IS is in my top 4 lenses of all that I own. It's a wonderful lens and I can't see how having this lens would be justified by replacing with an RF mount lens.