junglejim1949 Loc: Sacramento,CA

Sounds encouraging, thanks

junglejim1949 Loc: Sacramento,CA

imagemeister Loc: mid east Florida

I do not own any RF stuff - but I will mention that ALL of the Imatest acuity/sharpness numbers I have seen for the RF lenses beat the EF counterparts - some by rather significant amounts......
It would seem and I believe to be true that Canon is making sure that the RF line is sharper than the EF line.

MountainDave

I switched from a 5D4 to R5 two years ago. I had a dozen or so EF lenses at the time. All the EF lenses work better on the R5 to varying degrees. The main benefit is improved AF. I gradually replaced the ones I use most over two years.

The EF 24-70 2.8L II was my workhorse for years. If you are familiar with this lens, you know it is one of the best, if not the best, EF zoom made. Reviews of the RF version were uniform in saying there is little IQ improvement though you get IS. It weighs about an ounce less than the EF version plus adapter but is better balanced. Recently, B&H had a promotion with a 600. discount on this lens so I bought it. Subjectively, I like the way the images are rendered a little better. They seem to have a more 3D look for lack of a better description. The shorter MFD and better magnification make it more versatile too. Either of these lenses would be a big improvement over your f/4 version.

I owned the EF 70-200 4L II IS and it was a really good zoom. I reluctantly replaced it mainly for the lighter weight and shorter length. It also has shorter MFD and better magnification which is important for my purposes. Over the course of a year, I've grown very fond of this lens. I own some of the sharpest primes and this lens compares favorably with them even at 200mm where a lot of others get soft. I carry equipment on long hikes and climbs and this one's light weight and small size make it a joy. I use it a lot more than I did the EF version. I have seen a number of comparison reviews with the 2.8 version and none of them find the 2.8 to perform any better. Weight is important to me, so I have the f/4. If I used it for events, especially indoor, I would have the 2.8.

Finally, I did replace my EF 50 1.8 with RF version. I can't say it performs better but I do think it is built better.

Someone else mentioned the 16 2.8. This would be a 26mm equivalent on your R7 and seems like a no brainer. It's been on sale for 199. a couple of times. I just stick it in my pocket when I use the 24-70. I was able to sell my 16-35 4L.

Enjoy your search!

Architect1776 Loc: In my mind

I thought you had tons of experience with RF stuff from pervious posts.

junglejim1949 Loc: Sacramento,CA

Thank you for your reply

MJPerini

In the move from DSLR to mirrorless, all brands got a theoretical boost from larger flange diameter and shorter flange focal distance. It makes Really Good lenses easier to design and manufacture. Nikon Probably got the biggest boost because of the constraints of the original F-mount. Everyone is now making more lenses that are really good.
The shorter flange focal distance eliminates the need for retro focus wide angle lenses , which are needed when the focal length is shorter than the flange focal distance. That does not automatically make mirrorless lenses better, If a DSLR lens was really great, it is still going to be great with a non optical adapter. The longer the lens, the less the adapter makes any difference. With short zooms the extra adapter makes them bigger and a bit heavier.
Canon EOS cameras have had a wide flange diameter since inception, so that has been an advantage for a while, they got an added boost from the short FFD, which made things like the 28-70 f /2.0 possible.
But if your EF lens was good, it will still be good. The 70-200 f/4 is just as sharp as the f/2.8 Canon's EF 16-35 f/2.8 vIII and 24-70 f/2,8 vII are both superb lenses. I haven't used the 24-70 f/4 so do not know.
But my advice would be buy the body and use your lenses, and only switch if you can see performance deficiencies.
Re f/2.8 vs f/4. For some work, f/2.8 is genuinely nice to have, but it is only one stop. Look at your work, you will know if you need the extra stop. But again buy the body first and try it, an extra stop in iso may be a non event.
Another strategy would be to keep those lenses and add a fast 50 or 85 for portraits then you will have f/1.4, 1.8, or f/2 depending on which you choose.
I hope this helps a bit

williejoha

I use the EF 24-70 f 2:8 on my R5 without any problem.
WJH

junglejim1949 Loc: Sacramento,CA

Thanks for your input MJPerini

philo Loc: philo, ca

It all about the money. I have purchase a couple of rf lens 24-50 and 16 prime. I was having problems with my ef f24-70 and the adp. the lens would not work with my r6. Sent the lens and adp to Canon to service. Waiting for the return.

Mauilover Loc: Northern VA - DC area

I've had all the Canon 5D series DSLR with about 10-12 lenses - mostly L. When the R5 came out, I decided to switch to mirrorless and have not been disappointed. It is the best camera I've ever owned. I use primarily RF glass and have the 15-35 L, 24-70 L, 70-200 L, 100-500 L, and the 24-105 L. While I haven't tried any primes yet, these 5 lenses, on my R5 are, in just about every way, better IQ than their corresponding EF counterpart. I wish they were a little less expensive but they are very, very good - in my opinion. I wouldn't put much weight in anyone who gives you feedback who is not an owner. At this quality level RF L-series, there really isn't anything better in terms of IQ on the market. I've used Nikon in the past, and while they are very good, they're not better (certainly wrt glass) - similar with Sony. If you have the money to switch, go ahead and do it, since RF is the future and with some of the older EF lenses, the compatibility with the RF mounts is not as good as and RF lens, which is to be expected. Whether it's worth the cost to upgrade, that is a personal choice. Hope that helps.

Architect1776 Loc: In my mind

Actually Canon kept the same diameter as the EF and I believe the R/FL/FD is the same.

junglejim1949 Loc: Sacramento,CA

Smart to send it back for repairs.

junglejim1949 Loc: Sacramento,CA

I agree with you ask someone that owns one. That is why I posted on HH.
Thanks for the feedback.

junglejim1949 Loc: Sacramento,CA

All replies and info helps.
Thank you Mauilover