Which Canon EF lenses will you keep after RF mount becomes the norm?
Apr 26, 2022 16:06:07 #
I am wondering which EF lenses will be worth keeping before the RF mount becomes the norm. I hope to get the Canon experts feedback.
Apr 26, 2022 16:11:41 #
Apr 26, 2022 16:22:35 #
It depends on what you get in the RF mount, as well as what you keep for ongoing use with your DSLR/SLRs (if any). If you get the RF 28-70 f/2, there's a strong reason for not keeping anything that overlaps within this zoom. The review of the RF 24-70 f/2.8L has convinced me there's not a reason to replace the EF 24-70 f/2.L II.
I think the RF 70-200 f/2.8L is very innovative. I'd replace the larger EF version with this RF re-design.
If you have lots of EF primes, these get 'better' from the IBIS support of the EOS R capable bodies.
The RF zooms at 14-35 f/4L IS or 15-35 f/2.8L IS offer differences that might make them worth replacing the less-wide EF versions. With the improved lens correction profiles, almost all EF lenses are 'worth keeping', especially if the RF is out of your price range or not a very real difference.
I think the RF 70-200 f/2.8L is very innovative. I'd replace the larger EF version with this RF re-design.
If you have lots of EF primes, these get 'better' from the IBIS support of the EOS R capable bodies.
The RF zooms at 14-35 f/4L IS or 15-35 f/2.8L IS offer differences that might make them worth replacing the less-wide EF versions. With the improved lens correction profiles, almost all EF lenses are 'worth keeping', especially if the RF is out of your price range or not a very real difference.
Apr 26, 2022 16:31:14 #
Gabyto wrote:
I am wondering which EF lenses will be worth keeping before the RF mount becomes the norm. I hope to get the Canon experts feedback.
My 100-400mm MII, 100mm L Macro, 24-105mm and ALL the other EF/EFs lenses because I still have a D30, 10D and 7D as well as a couple of film EOS cameras.
So it would be silly to get rid of the EF lenses as they ALL work on All EOS EF and RF mount cameras 100% with NO loss of any features.
Apr 26, 2022 18:30:10 #
Gabyto wrote:
I am wondering which EF lenses will be worth keeping before the RF mount becomes the norm. I hope to get the Canon experts feedback.
I have 3 EF lenses - 17-40 F4 L; 40 mm F2.8; and 50 mm F1.4. And the following RF lenses - 35 mm F1.8; 24-105 F 4-7.1; 70-200 F4 L. All used on a Canon RP. The used value of the 40 mm and 50 mm is so low that I decided to keep them for occasional use. Over time, I am thinking of adding two RF lenses - 100 mm Macro; and if I can resolve my hip problem, the 600 mm F11. Mobility (my right hip and both knees and age (I’ll be 92 in August) are factors I need to consider. So for you it all depends on the glass you currently have and what you can get if you sell it and what disposable income you have for RF lenses. Whatever your decision good luck and stay healthy.
Bud
Apr 27, 2022 01:15:20 #
If I ever go mirrorless I'm keeping my 500 f4, 400 F4 DO, 300 2.8, 8-15, 11-24, 50 1.2. 16-35 2.8, 17-40 2.8. Its about time to replace my 24-70 2.8, 70-200 2.8 and 100 macro so I will replace them with the mirrorless versions.
Apr 27, 2022 04:35:04 #
I currently have a 5D Mark IV, but have been seriously considering getting an R5 I also have a 7D Mark II. I have a pretty good stable of EF lenses currently, but what I would keep would probably depend on which RF lenses I eventually get. Probably the first RF lens I would get is the RF 24-105, so I'd get rid of my EF version pf that same lens. After that I don't know - I'll have to play it by ear and see which RF lenses I decide to get going forward. I would not be in a big hurry to get rid of my EF ,lenses, but would trade them out over time as circumstances warrant.
Apr 27, 2022 05:54:13 #
Architect1776 wrote:
My 100-400mm MII, 100mm L Macro, 24-105mm and ALL the other EF/EFs lenses because I still have a D30, 10D and 7D as well as a couple of film EOS cameras.
So it would be silly to get rid of the EF lenses as they ALL work on All EOS EF and RF mount cameras 100% with NO loss of any features.
So it would be silly to get rid of the EF lenses as they ALL work on All EOS EF and RF mount cameras 100% with NO loss of any features.
Apr 27, 2022 06:13:37 #
I am shooting the R5, I have the RF 24-105L but other than that don't see much reason to spend thousands of dollars converting to RF lenses. I have the 16-35 f/4L, I also have the Sigma 14-24 Art, I have several Sigma Art Primes, the 70-200 f/2.8 L II, the 100-400 II, and a 300 f/2.8 L with both of the Canon third generation extenders, to replace these lenses would cost several thousand dollars and I don't feel that it would be money well spent, these lenses perform just fine on the R5.
My EF lenses can produce shots like the ones below on my R5. When you can get the eyelashes on a humming bird from about 15 feet away why in the world would you feel the need to spend more money?
My EF lenses can produce shots like the ones below on my R5. When you can get the eyelashes on a humming bird from about 15 feet away why in the world would you feel the need to spend more money?
Apr 27, 2022 07:31:38 #
After I bought an R a few years back, and then an R5, I sold all of my EF lenses except for my EF 100-400 L II. I do still have an EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro but will be selling that at some point since I just don't do any macro. No point keeping it. The 100-400 is such a fine lens that I have not felt the need to replace it with the RF 100-500. Actually, all the EF lenses I had were L's and were fine lenses but I decided if I was moving to the R series then I would make the switch to RF lenses.
Apr 27, 2022 09:11:52 #
I recently bought a Canon R5. Prior to that purchase, I owned a 5d4 and 7d2. I sold the latter with its kit lens. The 5d4 will probably go next. The lenses being used with the R5 are all EF, a 16-35 f4L, 27-70 f2.8L ii, 70-200 f4L, 100-400 ii, a nifty 50, and Sigma 150-600 C. Also a Canon 1.4x iii and a Sigma 1.4 TC. Only lens I’d consider in the short term replacing is the 70-200 and that would take some convincing.
Apr 27, 2022 09:44:22 #
Having 12 ef lens and now shoot with the R6 the lens that i would love to add, but don't want to spend the money is the rf 100-500 with a l.4x.
The reason being that most of the images i have seen with that set up has been outstanding and the reviews by owners have be 5 star.
The reason being that most of the images i have seen with that set up has been outstanding and the reviews by owners have be 5 star.
Apr 27, 2022 10:38:49 #
I bought a R5 7 months ago. I have 13 carefully chosen EF lenses. I think 8 of them now have direct RF replacements available. So far, I bought an RF 24-105 4L. I don't have the EF version. I also found a used RF 50 1.8 for a good price, so bought that. The 24-105 is very nice light weight all around lens, but I still prefer to use my EF 24-70 2.8L II for noticeably better IQ. I am considering replacing my 100-400 L II with the RF 100-500 to get the extra reach and lighter weight. I have read and watched many comparos and it looks like the RF offers a little better AF performance and slightly better IQ. But a switch would likely cost 1500-1600. and I just don't know if it is worth it to me. I'm also considering a RF 50 1.2L. Reviewers make it sound like the second coming and I don't own the EF version. For now, I'm waiting to see what else comes out and/or sales.
Apr 27, 2022 10:45:36 #
MountainDave wrote:
I bought a R5 7 months ago. I have 13 carefully ch... (show quote)
The RF 50 f/1.2L is the second coming. As sharp at f/1.2 as any stepped-down aperture of the older EF 50 f/1.2L, sharper actually. But still, is that a feature you need, especially at the size and cost and weight of the monstrously large RF 50 version?
If Canon returns to the Eye of Sauron design with a 200mm prime at f/1.8 (or wider), would that interest you? Or, a 135mm at f/1.8 and IS-enabled?
Apr 27, 2022 10:48:32 #
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.