Now that I have bought into the mirrorless world and purchased a Canon R5, I have begun the process of deciding which EF lenses to keep and which to sell and replace with RF versions.

The EF lenses I've replaced so far are:
EF 24-105 (Replaced with RF 24-105)
EF 70-200 f4 Non-IS (replaced with RF 70-200 f4 IS)

EF Lenses I'm (so far) keeping:
Sigma 150-600 Contemporary (already tried it out on Birds and it works great)
Canon 300mm f4 L prime
Canon 135 f2
Canon 50mm f1/4

One RF lens that wasn't a replacement, but a new focal length for my kit was the Canon RF 85mm f2. I have always wanted a good 85mm. I would have loved to buy the RF 85 f/1.2 for its creamy bokeh and low light capabilities, but dang, $2600 (on sale) - yikes! The 85 f/2 I recently bought (refurbished) for $489 from Canon is really a terrific lens! Sharp as a tack and great color rendition. Plus, it's much smaller and lighter that the f1.2 "beast" and will cover my needs most of the time.

But this got me thinking - looking at the used market, it is possible to get the EF 85 L II f/1.2 in good used condition for under $1000. Let's just say $1000 for sake of discussion. If I kept the RF 85 f2 for hiking and travel and 90% of my shooting, I could buy a used EF 85 for those occasions when I really felt I needed those extra stops, whether for better bokeh or better low light performance. So for about 1/2 the cost of a new RF 85, I could have the best of both worlds - one lens that's light and small and easy to tote around for everyday use, and another lens for special occasions when that 1.2 is needed. And all this while saving a ton of cash.

Does that scheme make sense?

Now that I have bought into the mirrorless world and purchased a Canon R5, I have begun the process of deciding which EF lenses to keep and which to sell and replace with RF versions.

The EF lenses I've replaced so far are:
EF 24-105 (Replaced with RF 24-105)
EF 70-200 f4 Non-IS (replaced with RF 70-200 f4 IS)

EF Lenses I'm (so far) keeping:
Sigma 150-600 Contemporary (already tried it out on Birds and it works great)
Canon 300mm f4 L prime
Canon 135 f2
Canon 50mm f1/4

One RF lens that wasn't a replacement, but a new focal length for my kit was the Canon RF 85mm f2. I have always wanted a good 85mm. I would have loved to buy the RF 85 f/1.2 for its creamy bokeh and low light capabilities, but dang, $2600 (on sale) - yikes! The 85 f/2 I recently bought (refurbished) for $489 from Canon is really a terrific lens! Sharp as a tack and great color rendition. Plus, it's much smaller and lighter that the f1.2 "beast" and will cover my needs most of the time.

But this got me thinking - looking at the used market, it is possible to get the EF 85 L II f/1.2 in good used condition for under $1000. Let's just say $1000 for sake of discussion. If I kept the RF 85 f2 for hiking and travel and 90% of my shooting, I could buy a used EF 85 for those occasions when I really felt I needed those extra stops, whether for better bokeh or better low light performance. So for about 1/2 the cost of a new RF 85, I could have the best of both worlds - one lens that's light and small and easy to tote around for everyday use, and another lens for special occasions when that 1.2 is needed. And all this while saving a ton of cash.

Does that scheme make sense?

Now that I have bought into the mirrorless world and purchased a Canon R5, I have begun the process of deciding which EF lenses to keep and which to sell and replace with RF versions.

The EF lenses I've replaced so far are:
EF 24-105 (Replaced with RF 24-105)
EF 70-200 f4 Non-IS (replaced with RF 70-200 f4 IS)

EF Lenses I'm (so far) keeping:
Sigma 150-600 Contemporary (already tried it out on Birds and it works great)
Canon 300mm f4 L prime
Canon 135 f2
Canon 50mm f1/4

One RF lens that wasn't a replacement, but a new focal length for my kit was the Canon RF 85mm f2. I have always wanted a good 85mm. I would have loved to buy the RF 85 f/1.2 for its creamy bokeh and low light capabilities, but dang, $2600 (on sale) - yikes! The 85 f/2 I recently bought (refurbished) for $489 from Canon is really a terrific lens! Sharp as a tack and great color rendition. Plus, it's much smaller and lighter that the f1.2 "beast" and will cover my needs most of the time.

But this got me thinking - looking at the used market, it is possible to get the EF 85 L II f/1.2 in good used condition for under $1000. Let's just say $1000 for sake of discussion. If I kept the RF 85 f2 for hiking and travel and 90% of my shooting, I could buy a used EF 85 for those occasions when I really felt I needed those extra stops, whether for better bokeh or better low light performance. So for about 1/2 the cost of a new RF 85, I could have the best of both worlds - one lens that's light and small and easy to tote around for everyday use, and another lens for special occasions when that 1.2 is needed. And all this while saving a ton of cash.

Does that scheme make sense?

Like you, I am old (72) and still go on long, strenuous hikes and climbs. I own a EF 35 2.0 IS and 1.4L II for exactly the same reason you're considering the 85 1.2L. I bought the 1.4 used as well. I don't use either lens a whole lot and sometimes think I should have just bought one. But I expect both will be in my estate so I'm OK with that. I've had a 85 1.8 for many years and don't use it a whole lot so I don't have any specific advice on that focal length. I know the 85 1.2 has been knocked for slow and sometimes not accurate AF but I'll bet it performs a lot better on a R5 vs 5D4. Used ones seem like good bang for the buck.

Bottom line: I would wait a bit and assess just how much an 85 1.2 can do something your 85 2.0 or 135 2L cannot. Make sure it is the best use of 1000. The main reason I don't use my 85 much is I'd rather use the 135 which creates magical images. BTW, the 135 has become quite a legend with legions of passionate users, including me. I don't see the same level of passion for the 85. I have preordered the RF 135 1.8. I guess millions of others have as well because I'm still waiting!

"I use the adapter with helical cuz rangefinder lenses need help for close focus."

The pre M Leica lenses provided for this with an adaptor that went between the screw mount lens and the body that allowed the lens to focus close in and it worked flawlessly, even had an auxiliary frame window that adjusted for parallax, for the view finders of all view finder cameras. I have both the 35mm and 50mm lens adaptors. For longer lenses both the Visoflex adaptors were used for lenses from 85mm to 200mm for any type of close or normal distances (the Visoflex was the pre SLR system).

E. Leitz pretty much provided solutions for any possibilities in photography with their cameras. And naturally, most of these items are hard to come by, or off the scale for most users pocketbook, but they sure do attract the collectors.

Not that I need to justify my gear purchases to anyone, but since you asked - Over the course of a couple of decades I inherited some lenses when my uncle died. Kept some but sold some of those to buy different lenses; Some I bought used on Craig's List and some I have bought new since moving to the R5.

The ones I have bought new I either waited until they were on sale or, in the case of the 85 f2, I purchases as a refurbished unit from the Canon store. I sold some other lenses before buying those two. I also sold a DSLR and that money went towards my RF lenses also. If money was no object I would not have waited for sales, bought refurbished, nor sold other lenses.

Fact is, I am fully retired after 24 years in the military, plus another 20 as a contractor in the missile defense field, plus another 5 years as a program director for a mental health non-profit. In other words, I am at a place in my life where I will buy what I want, if it interests me, but I usually try to get the best deals I can. Does more gear make me feel better? Well, I enjoy the hobby of photography and very much enjoy trying out new gear with different capabilities. So, yes, I guess you could say it makes me feel better - because I'm having fun.