I’ve only had my R5 a short time, so jury is still out on what RF lenses are in my future. I do have the RF 24-105 that came with the camera. I also have a bunch of EF lenses, but haven’t used each enough to know whether I feel a need to upgrade.
One exception is my Sigma 150-600. I took that to Bosque Del Apache recently. I set the lens (via the doc) and camera’s AF settings per Duade Payton’s suggestions. I was extremely happy with the performance. AF worked great as did Eye tracking. Even at 600mm I was very pleased with the results.
So, on the long telephoto front, I’m probably not going to be jumping on any RF lenses right away.
Also, my 50mm f/1.4 and 135 f/2.0 both so far seem to work great, but again I haven’t used them a bunch yet.
I have had my eye on the RF 35mm with IS as it is reasonably priced and has great reviews.
The other RF lens I’m seriously considering is the RF 70-200 f/4. I don’t usually need 2.8 for what I shoot and I like the f/4 compactness and light weight for hiking.

It has been widely discussed and Canon has issued statements, they are saying cease to all third=party makers who had made a few RF lenses and/or ready to release new RF lenses. Those makers have pulled those RF lenses and Canon is saying no more will be allowed in the market.

On the opposite side of this philosophy Nikon is now even opening up its Z-mount to Tamron and other third party makers and is even badging some Tamron mirrorless lenses as Z-mount.

Sony has had an open E-mount for a long time, and there are over 200 quality Third-party lenses in E-mount from Sony, Sigma, Tamron, Samyang/Rokinon, Zeiss, Yonguo, Viltrox, Tokina, and others. The E-mount is the most widely produced and used mirrorless lens mount in the world. With additional quality E-mount lenses being introduced all the time. That is part of the reason Sony leads in Worldwide Mirrorless camera sales. Check the CIPA numbers if you doubt that. Sony and now Nikon have decided it is better to allow more people with all budgets to be able to afford to fully embrace their mirrorless systems.

IMHO, as a longtime pro that has owned and shot with the best of Nikon, Canon, Sony, Leica in my 48+ years in the business, Canon is a big, and often arrogant maker that has lost sight of building up its base. Even Leica shares the mirrorless L-mount with Panasonic and Sigma (yes Sigma makes mirrorless cameras), using L-mount lenses from Leica, Panasonic, Sigma and other third-party makers.

Full disclosure, Tamron is partly owned by Sony.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Sony_E-mount_lenses

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_third-party_Sony_E-mount_lenses

As most photographers and industry experts worldwide agree, Canon is eventually hurting themselves in the marketplace just to keep a monopoly on RF lens sales, and Nikon and Sony will reap the benefits as it is a fact that many are now moving away from the R series and moving to Nikon Z-mount and Sony E-mount bodies where they will have a greater choice of quality E-mount lenses in all price ranges. It does matter to many around the world.

The still fairly limited RF lens series choices from Canon are either cheap kit lenses, or very expensive top quality RF lenses. Canon's RF lens lineup is still slow to fill out, and is nowhere as extensive as its mirrorless competitors, just the facts. Not everyone is willing to wait on Canon to slowly fill out its top RF lens lineup, and be forced to pay high prices for top quality Canon-only RF lens, if and when they are available. People have photos to make now, not later.

The top News Services around the world have moved to Sony and Nikon fullframe mirrorless for all their staff photographers and staff videographers, worldwide. They aren't waiting for Canon to fill out their RF Lens lineup either.

https://alphauniverse.com/stories/why-the-associated-press-just-switched-to-sony/

https://petapixel.com/2021/11/17/sony-is-now-the-exclusive-camera-provider-for-gannett-and-usa-today/

https://www.dpreview.com/news/4545693607/the-uk-largest-news-agency-partners-with-sony

https://petapixel.com/2022/01/31/canadas-largest-news-organization-moves-exclusively-to-sony-cameras/#:~:text=Canada's%20Largest%20News%20Agency%20Moves%20Exclusively%20to%20Sony%20Cameras,-Jan%2031%2C%202022&text=The%20Canadian%20Press%2C%20the%20largest,provider%20for%20the%20media%20company.

https://petapixel.com/2022/06/09/how-pro-photographers-helped-make-the-z9-from-prototype-to-flagship/

Cheers and best to you.

Hey I am sure an equal number of Nikon, Sony, Fuji, Olympus cameras are on sale as folks decide to go for improved models that have been introduced by all makers.

Folks will want to get as much value for their current cameras as possible, and usually the longer a model is around the more it depreciates as improved models are released.

And as an administrator and moderator of several Worldwide Photography Groups on Facebook with many tens of thousands of members around the world using all brands of gear, yes we are seeing group members say they are now moving away from Canon R cameras in part because of Canon's ban on third-party RF lens makers which restricts their affordable choices for quality RF glass, not the cheap kit RF lenses.

Some here live in a permanent fanboy bubble, but the reality is yes this Canon move has had a ripple effect around the world for many current and would-be Canon R buyers. It wont matter or effect what Canon management decides to do, but in the end it is Canon unnecessarily applying the cripple hammer again to itself.

Sometimes companies get so big and arrogant , they lose sight of how best to expand and take care of their base .

Smart to sell now, not later.

Cheers and best to you all.

I disagree. The f/2.8 lens can't simply be called "better" and it's definitely not "way" better!

Sure, f/2.8 is a stop bigger so you have a little better ability to throw a background out of focus (though far less than an f/1.4 or f/1.2 prime lens offers).

BUT... There's no IS on the f/2.8 lens. The f/4 lenses can actually be better for low light shooting, with up to 4 stops of assistance from its IS.

Yeah, the f/2.8 is built like a tank. It's bigger and heavier than the 24-70mm f/4. Both are L-series, with similar build quality, sealing and durability.

Image quality simply isn't all that different. In fact, the 24-70mm f/4 very nearly matches the sharpness of the 24-70mm f/2.8 II. The f/4 lens' "worst" sharpness comparison is when wide open, around 50mm. You'll have a hard time seeing any difference in sharpness at other focal lengths. It often doesn't matter in images, but the f/2.8 lens has about a stop stronger vignetting than the f/4 lens. The two have similar flare performance at the wide end, but the f/4 lens is a bit more resistant at the 70mm end of the zoom range. And they have virtually identical distortion... minimal barrel at the wide end and pincushion at the tele end of the zoom.

The 24-70mm f/4 has MUCH closer focusing with its ability to shoot 0.70X magnification. That's more than triple the magnification possible with the 24-70mm f/2.8 II's 0.21X!

So, yeah... if you gotta have f/2.8, the EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM II is "better". With it you also get a smidgen "better" image quality at some focal lengths and on some cameras slightly faster AF (cameras that can take full advantage of the larger aperture).

But if you want smaller and lighter with image stabilized low light capabilities, would like to leave your macro lens at home and want to save hundreds of $, well then EF 24-70mm f/4L IS USM would be "better".