EF vs RF (Page 4): I have an R6 and bought it with the 24-105 f/4 RF L lens. IT BLOWS THE EF 34-105 I HAD, AWAY!!! I always unsharped masked my photos but the new RF lens is so sharp I...

xposure

I have an R6 and bought it with the 24-105 f/4 RF L lens. IT BLOWS THE EF 34-105 I HAD, AWAY!!! I always unsharped masked my photos but the new RF lens is so sharp I cannot do that anymore. all my other lenses have the EF to RF adapter but since I use the 24-105 60-80% of the time I'm glad I switched.

junglejim1949 Loc: Sacramento,CA

xposure wrote:

I have an R6 and bought it with the 24-105 f/4 RF L lens. IT BLOWS THE EF 34-105 I HAD, AWAY!!! I always unsharped masked my photos but the new RF lens is so sharp I cannot do that anymore. all my other lenses have the EF to RF adapter but since I use the 24-105 60-80% of the time I'm glad I switched.

Thanks xposure!!

MrBob Loc: lookout Mtn. NE Alabama

Is the AVERAGE, non professional, like a lot of us here on the hog who have a substantial investment in EF glass REALLY going to notice THAT much of a difference without extensive peeping, which they don't prob. do anyway, between their legacy EF lenses and an expensive RF lens ? We are talking Avg. user, NOT a working pro or perfectionist... I myself am still using a 15 year old L lens which fits all my needs... Yes, RF a little lighter and prob. a tad sharper, but it seems to me that unless you have SPECIFIC requirements, WHY BUY ?

junglejim1949 Loc: Sacramento,CA

MrBob wrote:

Is the AVERAGE, non professional, like a lot of us... (show quote)

Just inquiring and asking folks who own one, what they think

larryepage Loc: North Texas area

MrBob wrote:

Is the AVERAGE, non professional, like a lot of us... (show quote)

This is quite a valid question. You have described me pretty accurately. I am fortunate to have put together quite a nice kit of capable camera gear. The maker of my gear recently introduced a mirrorless model with everything I would want in a new camera. I'd like to have one, but it makes no sense to spend the money...at least not now. If something breaks or wears out, maybe later. But the truth is that I can do what I need and want to do already.

Architect1776 Loc: In my mind

MrBob wrote:

Is the AVERAGE, non professional, like a lot of us... (show quote)

You are so correct.
Except for pixel peepers, who are not photographers, one will never see a real world difference between EF and RF lenses quality wise for a majority of them.
I keep my EF lenses because I still have EOS film cameras as well as a D30, 10D and a 7D that require EF lenses. My EF lenses all work perfectly on EF and RF bodies and with the control ring adapter same additional features.
If one wants RF lenses that is one's prerogative and I hope they enjoy them. Canon has some superb RF lenses that no one comes close to.
PS, Nikon also has some absolutely amazing Z lenses that Canon needs to look at.

MrBob Loc: lookout Mtn. NE Alabama

junglejim1949 wrote:

Just inquiring and asking folks who own one, what they think

I am sure they are GREAT lenses Jim and folks that buy them will prob. confirm that... I was just commenting on the NEED to stay on the cutting edge. I would LOVE to have the newest mirrorless and top shelf lenses, but I was barely able to get into my new KIA after trading in my 17 year old truck. You do what you can do...

ThreeCee Loc: Washington, DC

I have RF and 5DIV with both lenses. The EF adapted lenses work well on the R5. I think the RF glass is better and the price shows Canon has upgraded the optics to take advantage of the large MP sensors. The RF28-70 f2 is now my go to lens for events.

junglejim1949 Loc: Sacramento,CA

ThreeCee wrote:

I have RF and 5DIV with both lenses. The EF adapted lenses work well on the R5. I think the RF glass is better and the price shows Canon has upgraded the optics to take advantage of the large MP sensors. The RF28-70 f2 is now my go to lens for events.

Thank you for your info ThreeCee, much appreciated.

Ruthlessrider

junglejim1949 wrote:

Thank you Ruthlessrider . Are the RF lenses sharper or have a significant advantage?

I’m 76 and wear glasses to correct minor near sightedness to 20-20, and I see little to no difference between my EFs and RF. Betters might disagree.

junglejim1949 Loc: Sacramento,CA

Ruthlessrider wrote:

I’m 76 and wear glasses to correct minor near sightedness to 20-20, and I see little to no difference between my EFs and RF. Betters might disagree.

I am 74 and appreciate your feedback