If you could only have one Canon RF L Lens: Happy 4th of July weekend to all. I own the Canon R5 and simply love it. The Canon RF L lens line up is amazing but also pricey. I was...

Opusx300

Happy 4th of July weekend to all.

I own the Canon R5 and simply love it. The Canon RF L lens line up is amazing but also pricey. I was wondering what folks might choose if they could only have one RF L lens.

Thanks to those that share their thoughts. Cheers!

LFingar Loc: Claverack, NY

I have a RF 15-35 f/2.8 L, a RF 50 f/1.2 L, a RF 85 f/1.2 L as well as a EF 100-400 L II, but my most used lens is my RF 24-105 f/4 L. Unless I am going to shoot something specific that is the lens that is almost always no my R5. If I could only have one lens it would be the 24-105.

MountainDave

I bought my R5 9 months ago but I've been slow to replace my EF lenses. Six weeks ago, I did replace my 100-400L II with the RF 100-500. I wanted the extra 100mm and 12 oz. less weight. I have found the AF performs significantly better plus color and contrast are better too. Pretty impressive considering how good the 100-400 is itself.

Hypothetically, if I didn't already own any EF lenses, my first purchase would have been the 24-70L 2.8 IS. The EF version is my workhorse but the cost/benefit to replace doesn't work for me now. Maybe someone can convince me otherwise?

For now, I'm content to wait and see what else is coming. A few of my favorite primes have yet to be replaced. I'm hoping they'll come up with something cool that would not be a replacement.

Architect1776 Loc: In my mind

Opusx300 wrote:

Happy 4th of July weekend to all.

I own the Canon R5 and simply love it. The Canon RF L lens line up is amazing but also pricey. I was wondering what folks might choose if they could only have one RF L lens.

Thanks to those that share their thoughts. Cheers!

24-105L if that were the parameter I had to live with.
It has a good range from wide to tele, I wish Canon would copy Nikon and do the 24-120 range for the bit more reach though.
This range has replaced the ubiquitous 50 mm of days gone by that took likely billions of photos on cameras such as the AE-1.

TriX Loc: Raleigh, NC

Another vote for the 24-105 f4L

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

I see the RF 24-105 f/4L is currently available as a refurb on Canon’s website for $1169. That’s a decent price… I would think. I’m currently using my EF 24-70 f/2.8 ii as my R5 workhorse, but can attest that a little extra range would be sweet.

ecobin Loc: Paoli, PA

That's a strange question without knowing what your preferred type of photography is. There isn't one lens that's good for all types so you need to decide what you will shoot most and then ask the question.
Others are indicating the lens that suits their needs, not yours.

TriX Loc: Raleigh, NC

ecobin wrote:

That's a strange question without knowing what your preferred type of photography is. There isn't one lens that's good for all types so you need to decide what you will shoot most and then ask the question.
Others are indicating the lens that suits their needs, not yours.

Agreed, but the 24-105 is very versatile lens with IS which makes it even usable in low light. Not the preferred lens for wildlife or sports (or macro), but the 70-200 f2.8L (my second place suggestion), is awfully heavy/large for a walk around lens, and the long telephotos (such as the 100-400L) have similar limitations. Remember, he can only have one lens initially. It’s by no means my favorite lens, but the one I would pick if going out the door, not knowing what I was going to shoot.

Architect1776 Loc: In my mind

TriX wrote:

Agreed, but the 24-105 is very versatile lens with IS which makes it even usable in low light. Not the preferred lens for wildlife or sports (or macro), but the 70-200 f2.8L (my second place suggestion), is awfully heavy/large for a walk around lens, and the long telephotos (such as the 100-400L) have similar limitations. Remember, he can only have one lens initially. It’s by no means my favorite lens, but the one I would pick if going out the door, not knowing what I was going to shoot.

Opusx300

TriX wrote:

Agreed, but the 24-105 is very versatile lens with IS which makes it even usable in low light. Not the preferred lens for wildlife or sports (or macro), but the 70-200 f2.8L (my second place suggestion), is awfully heavy/large for a walk around lens, and the long telephotos (such as the 100-400L) have similar limitations. Remember, he can only have one lens initially. It’s by no means my favorite lens, but the one I would pick if going out the door, not knowing what I was going to shoot.

What is your favorite lens and why?

TriX Loc: Raleigh, NC

Opusx300 wrote:

What is your favorite lens and why?

I really like my 135 f2L. Light, tack sharp and fast

Architect1776 Loc: In my mind

TriX wrote:

I really like my 135 f2L. Light, tack sharp and fast

User ID

Opusx300 wrote:

Happy 4th of July weekend to all.

I own the Canon R5 and simply love it. The Canon RF L lens line up is amazing but also pricey. I was wondering what folks might choose if they could only have one RF L lens.

Thanks to those that share their thoughts. Cheers!

35 or 40mm unless a small 24-70/4.0 (regardless of camera model).

Ive already put my money where my mouth is with Sony and Nikon and I would do the same with a Canon R5.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

FWIW, I have a set of four "very well sequenced" EF primes from 24 to 150, but I also have a 35 which does not fit that sequence. The 35 plays solo, with the set of four just left on the shelf.

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

For me, the must-have RF L lenses somewhat depend on what I have already. If I had no lenses, I'd look at the 15-35 f/4L or the 70-200 f/2.8L.

Tomfl101 Loc: Mount Airy, MD

I have my eye on the 28-70 f/2.0 for wedding and portrait work. I would miss my 70-200 but all in all I could shoot an entire wedding without changing lenses or using two bodies.