Ruthlessrider

I have an EOS 5DIV and recently purchased an R5 with the EOS lens adapter. My intention, when I first bought the R5, was to use it until I was was comfortable with it and then sell the 5DIV and EF lenses purchasing RF lenses of similar range as replacements. Since purchasing the R5 I have purchased an RF800mm lens that I occasionally use and enjoy. As I contemplated following through with my plan it suddenly struck me that it may not make sense to follow through with the plan, especially since I have enjoy the flexibility of having two cameras of this quality available at the ready. As a result I thought I would throw it out to the wider experience base of UGG for opinions.

With two fairly high quality cameras that I can currently shoot every lens with except the RF lens (forget that the transition would cost a significant bundle for the moment) does it really make sense to change out the EF lenses for RF? Is there significant photo quality to be gained in going from using EF lenses on an R5 to all RF lenses? Even if I sold the 5DIV would it make sense to go from EF to RF?

APSHEPPARD

The old adage "Beauty is in the eye of the beholder" is certainly true to me here. I went through the same arguments with myself. With the RF lenses you do pick up additional stabilization with R5 body and a little bit of weight and volume not having the adapter. I also have the R3 and the same applies there. I am using the EF65 with the adapter. It is their up to 5x macro lens which is not available in RF format. Anyway, I am happy I made the full transition. I wanted to "play" with the R3, but if I had it to do over again, I would purchase one of the less expensive R bodies as a backup to make the complete transition. In short there is not really a wrong answer- just money and whether the additional features are of that much value.

ulfeld Loc: New York City

This is a question that all who have a significant investment in L glass must face when switching to Mirrorless ... when and if I make the move I'm sticking with my EF lenses ... I simply cannot afford to replace them all ... especially at the price Canon is asking for the equivalent glass ...

dennis2146 Loc: Eastern Idaho

IF the EF lenses work well for you on the R5 I see no reason to replace them.

Dennis

Basil Loc: New Mexico

I had the 5D Mark IV also when I began shopping for the R5 and faced a similar situation. Initially I thought I would keep the 5DIV, buy the R5 and keep both, using only EF glass. In the end I decided to sell the 5D IV and put the money towards RF glass. However, as @ulfeld points out, with the prices Canon is asking for RF glass, it didn't make sense to try and replace everything with RF glass (at least not right away), so I bought an adaptor (used from a friend for $50) and continue to use some of the EF lenses I decided to keep.

When I bought the R5, I got the RF24-105 "kit". That is a great lens and buying it with the camera was a cost effective way to at least have some RF glass starting out (I sold my EF 24-105 with the 5D IV). Later, I sold my EF 70-200 and bought the RF 70-200 (f4) and at the same time the RF85 f/2. So far these are the only RF lenses I have. I still have several EF lenses that are working just great with the adapter and I will probably keep these for a while. I may eventually replace some of them, but they are working so good that I'm not in any big hurry.

wcmoorejr Loc: Birmingham Alabama

I have the 7DII and bought an R7 with the RD18-150 lens and EF-RF adaptor. I did not sell my 7DII or my L lenses. Instead I am keeping my 7DII body as a backup

clickety

Everyone says RF glass is very good but as you know EF glass is very good also. What’s good enough for your expectations? By necessity I do a lot of long range shooting, from my perspective the advantage of having an 800mm mounted on my R5 and being able to pick up another with a 100-400mm (with or without the X1.4) is a reason to keep both cameras at no additional expense. Yet in any other scenario you can still use the R5 with your current lenses.

47greyfox Loc: on the edge of the Colorado front range

I owned a 5d4 and 16-36 f/4L, 24-70 f/2.8L, 70-200 f/4L, 100-400 ii, and a Sigma 150-600 C. I bought a Canon refurb R5 with ef to RF adapter. A few months later I sold the 5d4. It never occurred to me to spend the money to upgrade my lenses. Later, I bought a used RF 24-105 f/4L and it is “fine,” but not enough to temp a whole RF upgrade. Your wants and/or needs may be different. 😎

User ID

As a user of a verrrrrrry mixed bag of lens mounts, I maintain for myself maximum interchangeability.

My EF lenses adapt to EVERYTHING ... EOS R, Sony E, Nikon Z, and m4/3, so I do not see eliminating them. The best match ups among all of this adapting is the EF lenses on EOS R. If you can afford to keep all your EOS EF mount gear I expect youll be very happy with how it all works so seamlessly.

Acoarst youll get advice about RF lenses being superior and such and being a bit smaller. I spoze thaz all true but its up to you whether it really matters.

-----------------------------------------

My intention was to NEVER buy an RF lens ... but I did fall for that tiny little 16/2.8 (FF). At only $200, every EOS R user should have one, regardless of their other plans !

Ruthlessrider

Thanks to all who have responded. Most are similar to my retrospective thinking. I think I will spend my time and efforts to slowly upgrading from f/4 to f/2.8 or below.

ulfeld Loc: New York City

I think one must consider "Cost to Benefit Ratio" ... How much "Better" are RF lenses in relation to the cost ... 5% ... 10% ? ... Do I want to put myself in debt all over again for an upgrade I can barely see ... I think not ...

Architect1776 Loc: In my mind

I have not transitioned to RF lenses as I find my EF lenses so far do most excellent and are fully compatible with my R7.
EF L glass that is he latest version will be amazing still.
I would stick with the lenses to keep both cameras going, I still use my 7D as well as the 10D and 650 and keeping those EF lenses allows for using the EF and R bodies and all the lenses regardless of age fully compatible.
If you retire the EF camera and sell it then you can phase in R lenses as budget allows while still using 100% compatible EF lenses.

DWU2 Loc: Phoenix Arizona area

I think with the 5d IV and the R5, you've got the best of all possible worlds. Hang onto those EF lenses.

MtManMD Loc: Beaverton, Oregon

I started out similar to you. Unfortunately, my Tamron G2 150-600mm lens would not focus correctly with the R5 body and adapter. As a wildlife enthusiast, the big lens was a necessity, therefore that started my migration to RF glass. I eventually sold each of my DSLR bodies and got the R7 as a second very capable body and APC-C sensor for the additional reach. I systematically sold most of my EF lenses at a decent price on the used market. Got enough value back to purchase a good portion of the RF lenses. Now I have 4 RF lenses ranging from 15mm to 800mm covering most needs with fewer lenses, plus an RF 1.4x extender. I kept my EF 100mm macro lens and a 24mm f/1.8 lens for night photography. Probably 70% or more of my images are shot using the R5 and the RF 100-500mm lens. A body/lens combination doesn't get any better than that. It covers distant wildlife to close-ups of flowers without changing lens.

I also found that having to switch the EF/RF adapter from lens to lens was too much of a bother, especially when you have a mix of RF and EF lenses.

PHRubin Loc: Nashville TN USA

Ditto for me except an 80D instead of the 7DII. I got the adapter with control ring.