Making it possible to use EF lenses on a RF body is a boon for Canon customers. I'm almost 100% RF (still missing a 300mm f/2.8 and a 35L II equivalent) and have no regrets. But it is expensive and not for everyone. Meanwhile the R6 and R5 bring huge improvements for Canon shooters due to the combination of IBIS, eye AF and better sensors. Good time to be a Canon shooter.
I wish they did make all of my lenses in the RF mount, and I could justify the extra cost. I appreciate the innovation of the smaller 70-200 and the ability to control other functions on the lens with the control ring - but I struggle to justify replacing lenses that I am already very happy with.
Very informative thank you. I have a similar dilemma, I am way behind you quality wise as I only have 7D mkI which now has an error message and fault and so would like to upgrade. I was thinking 7D mkII or 90D but watching this makes me consider mirrorless. Like you I have several EF L Lenses that I love but just not sure if I can live with the adapter and then feel like I’m doing a half job not having the RF lenses. I’m definitely non pro, like landscapes, wildlife, sport and macro, no video as such. Would love your thoughts, great channel 👍
Hello, I think that switching over to mirror less is a good move, whether you are already invested in Canon or any other brand. But you dot have to, because of peer pressure, and it wont make your photography any better. I owned the 7d mk1 for years and created some amazing work with it. Mirrorless cameras have advantages, such as seeing the images and the exposure live, rather than taking the photo and the reviewing it (as you do on a DSLR). If you are sticking with Canon then the good news is that they are coming out with more affordable lenses now. When the first started everything was very fast expensive lenses. I still own many EF lenses, because it would be very expensive to buy their RF mirrorless equivalents, but I am currently considering the RF 24-105 which would be a great all round lens. This review should be out in the next few weeks on the Cameralabs Channel (Gordon Laing’s) and that again is an affordable lens option for the RF system. Since this video, Canon have also released the 50mm f1.8, also a great lens. I wouldn’t invest in a 7d mk2 or a 90d now, and annoying they are not reducing in price, it isn’t like you are going to get yourself a bargain - DSLR’s really seem to be holding onto their price for some reason. Canon have stopped productions EF lenses, so that it is now. They already had plenty to choose from anyway :-)
What about more regular lenses (like the "fake" USMs i have in 2 lenses like the 75-300mm IS "USM" and the 50mm 1.4 prime lens with also a dirty cheap autofocus system? I heard its not as much of a hit and miss like with DSLRs when it comes to the 1.4 lens (no hate please, its still a great lens despite released in 1990 haha) And what about even worse AF systems like the ones in my cheap Sigma Macro lens or any lens without USM/STM at all? I get it that Canon cares about the L lenses since professionals would be very very dissapointed if the mirrorless professional systems would perform worse than actual DSLRs in the pro-area. But i somehow feel Canon wants the regular customer to go for RF lenses over time which is in long term definately a good step, but i feel somehow left in the dark now with a bunch of EF lenses which i have to play roulette which one will work now and which wont (a friends 85mm Sigma didnt work on a EOS R. No AF, but at least aperture worked, 1 out of 4 EF lenses!)
I can only really comment on the performance of the lenses that I have used on the adaptor, which is mainly L-series lenses, a combination of USM lenses and a few EF-S lenses. I only have one Sigma lens, the 18-35 Art and since it is meant for a cropped sensor camera it doesn’t make much sense to use it on the EOS R full frame system. Overall though the lenses I have work as well or better on a mirrorless camera that the DSLRs.
@@benharveyphotography Seems to have vanished but not to worry, i guess it was only criticism on the time spent about the aesthetics, but rewatching it i understand if you have OCD, as i replied i have it also slightly so get it 😁😁
Hi Craig, I made this video years ago and there have been lots of responses about the aesthetics and I still stand by what I said many years later. But it is not just a shallow comment about the colour, it is also about the balance of the camera. If you have a Canon mirrorless camera (which is generally small - I still have the EOS R and now a Canon R8 which is even smaller), putting an adaptor and even a medium size EF lens (say a 24-105 f4) make it a very unbalanced set up that you may want to consider if it is a pleasurable experience shooting with. Although Canon charge way too much in my opinion for their new lenses, they are making them smaller and lighter to match the reduced size and weight of the camera bodies. All of the camera brands are. So just consider the balance of the balance of the camera and lens when you are adapting. Adapting EF lenses is an intermediate step between building up a native mirrorless lens collection, the RF lenses will get you eventually!
@@benharveyphotography Hi Ben, i understand what you are saying i have a little OCD myself but there was no mention of the balance in the video a good majority of it was just about it not looking good, the rest of the video was very good and informative about how lens preform better etc. Just a bit to much about the looks for me ......Sorry 😒😒😒
@craigyboy542 no problem. It was a long time ago as I said but I can take criticism where it is due. I haven’t deleted your comment, you should be able to see it on here unless YT has filtered it for some reason.
Thanks for the mention! Yes, it's great for adapted lenses to enjoy a new lease of life with better autofocus across a broader area, better face and eye detection and the possibility of IBIS on some models. As you know, I've been gradually testing all the new RF lenses and where possible comparing them against the old EF versions and yes, the new ones are expensive and in some cases large too. But in almost every case, the RF version does something different or better, like a broader zoom range, IS when it wasn't available on the EF model, smaller barrel, lighter barrel etc etc. I've also found in side-by-side tests that while the adapted EF lenses focus quickly, they're not normally as quick or as consistent as the native RF ones - you'll see that especially in my 70-200 and 100-500 reviews. In all cases so far, the RF model has been better overall in my opinion BUT they are pricier AND they also face the fact the latest EF versions were often already very good to start with.
Thanks Gordon. I am glad to see that Canon are productively increasing the performance of EF lenses, whilst subliminally tempting us all over to the RF lens line up. The RF lenses are great, the ones that I have used. I think I have done well to resist them for a year!
@@benharveyphotography well the problem is while they are better for a new buyer, if you already own the EF versions, they're also still very good. Also remember that adapting gives you the chance to use adapters with extra functionality, like filter holders or speedboosters.
Thank you for this video. Definitely helped to relieve any anxiety I may have had about needing to transition all my gear to mirrorless. Great review and well presented!
For me, I dont really care if the EF lenses are not looking good on a Canon Mirrorless Camera as long as Im getting nice output. I'm currently using a 77d + Sigma 18-35 and Tamron 70-200 f2.8 G2. My initial plan is to upgrade to 90d but now I'm leaning toward R7.
The Sigma 18-35 F1.8 is a cropped sensor lens, it will work on an R6 but it will either show you massive vignette when at 18mm or automatically crop in 1.6x if it is smart enough to know that it is a cropped sensor lens. In essence you would get a 24-35mm lens equivalent as you cant use the wide end of the lens @@grg.000
If the lenses perform perfectly with the adaptor, I see no problem using the adaptor. I have a EF 85 1.2 and a RF 85 1.2 DS on my R6. Love both of them :-D
@@sydneynomura281 The RF version is technically superior in every way. The EF version provides a dreamy look (because it is softer at 1.2) and a more interesting lens flare :-)
I am going to buy an RF lens one day… just let me get this one last EF L lens before I change…. Three years after this clip, I still buy used EF L’s for my R7 and R6ii
Hi Ian. I do. I spend all of my hard earnt money on my camera and lenses and I want to feel good about them. The ‘change’ in aesthetics is how any company gets us to buy their stuff. Apple keep changing the shape of their phones to make our phone look old and make us want to buy it. Their latest phones have gone back to the bevelled edge of older iPhones. I have commented elsewhere in the feed that the adaptor is a temporary fix, it increases the size of the equipment in your hand and there is room for it to fail. I also went out to shoot deer locally once, I took my eos R, my canon 100-400 and forgot the adapter!
Very nice, I'm wanting to upgrade to the R6 but was worried if the EF adapter would work well with my lenses. I'm not worried about how it looks 😅 as long as it works
Nice video BUT I am sure from you are from UK did you know butterfly knives are in fact illegal to own in UK so in wouldn't be flashing one around on a video.. Just a heads up.
BTW - Canon has fine line of videography cameras and some are compatible with EF lenses. So why bother with DSLR that is video camera shoved in the body of a DSLR. Canon has a fine line of camcorders and cinematography cameras cost less than a new R1. You already have your L lenses and you can buy a video camara for much less than an R1
Of course the old lenses will be better on the new cameras. These old lenses were used on slow dslr cameras and with the much inproved AF on these new mirrorless cameras, they will perform better. However, how the older lenses (ef) will perform on the new cameras against the RF lenses. As an example, take the best 24-70 2.8 ef and compare it with the 24-70 2.8 RF lenses on lets say EOS R5? That would be the question
My canon 135 F/2 L mounted on a 5D ii was almost unusable for kids portraits when they were moving. Now, mounted on a R5, I have 100% images with focus on eyes even when my kids are running everywhere. Just a dream to use.
I still have my Canon 135 f2, its such a lovely lens, and I used to use it on a 5d3, but this is lacking continuous autofocus and eye/face detection - so as you say it is a massive bonus when adapted to a Canon mirrorless, especially an R6 or R5 as their focusing system is fantastic.
***Correction, it also takes vintage FD lenses, thus 4 types of lenses*** I use them with no issues on my R5 and I hear you about the aesthetics, although the color doesn't bother me, just the extra length. However, the control ring is a game changer as I now customized it for Kelvins. Insane customizability. If you are thinking about getting a mirrorless, buy EF L's or FD's! You will get every focal length possible and can use the 1.6 crop mode for extra reach when in a pinch. My 50 1.2 came alive wide open on the R5, I have never seen such responsive AF even when using my 50 1.4 wide open as well, notorious for hunting but not anymore. R bodies are a no brainer if you want to evolve in photography.
Hi Fred, the FD lenses fit on the R bodies without an adaptor? I had no idea. I only have one FD lens that I use with a reverse ring for macro...but that’s interesting. I also use the crop mode when shooting video. If you export in 1080 then you can film in 4K which makes my new 35mm full frame, a 60mm with Canons 1.7x crop when shooting in 4K, and then of course you can punch in to double that in video editing software.
@@benharveyphotography Hello Ben, they fit with an FD-EOS R adaptor which works great. I bought the Vello brand from B&H and the Fotasy one from amazon as a backup, both great metallic build. You also need to go the menu on the Custom Function section page 4 and turn "ON" where is says "Release shutter w/o lens". Yes, I'm a firm believer in downsampling to 1080, you get a lot of clean edit options. Even though mine has full frame 4k, I do use the crop mode in video as well as photos, with stunning results. Crops also add a nice non distracting visual element when focusing on a subject. At the moment, my favorite modes to record are 4k HQ and 4k 120.
Considering the cost of the RF lenses and how much the EF lenses have dropped in price I would definitely buy the adapter and use the EF lenses, especially the L, until the prices drop. If they don't then the EF lenses will be in more demand than the RF and the cost of the EF lenses will go back up. I recently bought three L lenses, EF 50mm f/1.2 L, EF 24-70mm f/2.8 L II and the EF 70-200mm f/2.8 L II for so much less on the used market than what they cost new and definitely lower than the RF lenses. The key is to find out when the and of service life is for the lens you're interested in then buy. If the service life is less than one year then pass and spend a little more on the Mk II or III so that you have access to Canon PS. I had an idea that the RF L lenses would to too expensive for my budget but with the adapter my wife has an RP and I have the R along with the 1Ds MkII and 5D MkII DSLR so we're booked solid. Additionally, the newer cameras won't function with 3rd party batteries. You will have to buy Canon batteries or your camera will be dead in the water. Personally I'd live to have all genuine Canon batteries but that's not possible because the ones I need are always out of stock or on backorder. So I buy 3rd party and I haven't looked back. Did you know that one of Canon's latest flash won't use AA batteries? Flashes have used AA batteries for decades and now that's another Canon battery you'll need or your flash won't work so buy a refurbished or preowned flash that can use AA batteries because they are very easy to find and way less expensive that genuine Canon batteries at $80 to over $100 each.
Just to put it out there, I am not advocating that anyone switch to mirrorless. Only if it makes sense for what you shoot I still use my Canon 5d mk3 with my EF glass because I prefer the way that those larger heavier lenses balance on a larger camera body. Another minor but relevant point is that I don’t switch off my DSLR. It just goes into standby and the batteries last a really long time. That way it is always ready to shoot. I switch off my mirrorless Canons to save the battery life all the time, even when I am just holding it. If however you shoot video, like I do, then mirrorless is an obvious choice due to reliable continuous autofocus to film yourself to make these videos.
@@benharveyphotography for sure, just went out and recoded some evening street photography in my latest two videos and uploaded, really blown away by the quality 🤯😀 works amazing with my 24-70 2.8
My budget is very low, I currently have a t5 (I bought like 8 years ago) and managed to buy around 5 lenses and would like to upgrade (is it really an upgrade I'm not sure) to an r100. Any recommendations? How terrible is the r100?
Hi, thanks for the comment. I haven't used a T5 (although I have used other cropped sensor Canon DSLRs). I think you should plan ahead and know what you intend on buying in the future. Your existing 5 lenses, are the EF lenses (designed for full frame) or EF-S lenses, and are they premium lenses (L-series) or cheap lenses that you shouldn't be too precious about. Like i said in this video many years ago, you will end up buying native RF lenses, and they have released many more affordable options since I released this video. Perhaps ask yourself why you are switching to mirrorless also, which features is your existing camera missing to jump to mirrorless? I have personally moved over to full frame only and sold my EF-S lenses. I own the original EOS R still and last year got the R8 which is a very small and lightweight full frame camera. I haven't used the R100 or any of the cropped sensor Canons however.
Well if you couldn’t work it out for yourself years ago then more fool you!! It’s obvious that technology moves on maybe not lens wise so much as cameras but things change. Big deal so you invested in glass like we all have, either use it or donate it to me!!! At least canon have thought of the user and allowed ef to rf lenses to work, they could have gone the other way and made them rf only, then what would happen to all the ef lenses????
I think you just saved me heaps of stress and potential $ with this. I just ordered an open box and branded in my old dslr for the r6 mark II. My instructor told me to get the f2.8 but the Rmodel is waaay too $. Then I see that I can get the eF version used and get the adapter as you say and trade in my old lenses to bring down the cost more along with the free voucher I got and now I can see that I can have the f2.8 that really is what I should have.. there are two types of adapter is the one with the control ring and the regular. is the control ring one necessary? or can one get by with the regular?
Hi Janine, Thanks for leaving the comments and apologies for the delayed response, I have been on holiday. The adaptor with the control ring is not necessary if you are coming from a DSLR as you will not miss the feature that it is offering you. it essentially you can assign things such as ISO to the ring and control it with your left hand that is supporting the lens. If you buy RF lenses in future this control ring is on all of the RF lenses anyway. So I would recommend getting the normal adaptor. The R6 Mk 2 is a fantastic camera, you will be very happy with it. I have the R8, which shares the same sensor and focusing system as the R6 mk2, but sacrifices a few features that the R6 2 has.
Good video - bit tired of the pressure to move to RF. I’ve got the R6 with the adapter and my images are fantastic. Only problem is every now and then the focus blurs, sometimes at a critical moment. It’s worse when I have the heavy lens on the camera. Any ideas?
Hello. Yes, I can relate - especially since I have spent years ‘building’ a collection of EF lenses for shooting many genres. I have t experiences any issues with my adaptor (I have the basic Canon one, not the ND or the control ring one). When you say blurs it is simply missing focus entirely or it’s not locking focus on what it says is in focus? I would run a few test if static objects with the camera on a tripod and see what is happening.
Watching this in 2024. I just bought an r100 and an adapter so I can use all of my EF lenses on it. I have noticed that I'm getting really good performance out of these old lenses. I've only bought one RF lens so far.
It will depend on what DSLR you are coming from, but the newer mirrorless cameras have much better focusing capabilities and faster frame rates etc. If you want to compare EF and RF lenses though you need to compare like for like. Therefore your EF lenses adapted might out perform a new but clear RF lens. I have a Canon R8 and now I can use EF lenses to do in camera focus bracketing for macro, so there are benefits to having a newer body, with or without native lenses.
To provide a fair comparison between the performance of EF lenes native and adapted lenses I would need a Canon 5D mk4 to compare it to the EOS R, however I don’t own a 5D mk4. Comparing the EOS R with adapted lenses to anything else is not a fair test. I work with what I have to make these informative videos.
Canon r6 with EF telephoto lens sorry not working very well. Eye tracking system with 70 200mm f4 is usm lens it doesn't happen, 300mm f4 is usm barely getting the focus.
Hello, without seeing all of the options and menus, I am not going to be able to help you troubleshoot. But I have not heard of focusing not working with native canon lenses on the adaptor. It sounds like the adaptor is faulty or there is an issue with the settings.
I am looking at the new R5MKII but cant imagine my 70-200 F2.8 with a 2x extender on the adaptor with the R5 body!! Dilema?? Having said that I wouldnt want to replace it with the RF version either at nearly £3k
Without knowing which DSLR body you are going from and what you shoot, it is difficult to comment on whether you are going to achieve the results and performance on a brand new mirrorless camera with adapted lenses. Ok the basis that you are extending I am going to assume you are shooting wildlife or something that needs more reach. Honestly if you are going mirrorless then get a native Canon lens like the 100-500 and buy the R5 mark 1 if you need to save some money. The upgrades on the r5 and minimal compared to the mark 1. If you need a long lens that doesn’t have a fast aperture they make a 600 and 800 f11.
One extra comment. Having a relatively compact mirrorless camera with an adaptor, then an extender, then an EF lens is going to result in a very long, front heavy, unbalanced and odd looking setup that I personally wouldn’t enjoy using (I recently used a mirrorless camera with an adapter and extension tubes with the 100-400 L lens and although optically it was great it was not a pleasurable experience. So before you pounce on buying the R5ii have a think about what you intend on shooting with it and what the best tools for the job might be.
Many years ago I also had lots of nice FD lenses, then Canon changed to the EF, now they have done it again. I 've shot with Canon since the late 70's, Now I have my first mirrorless and EF lenses. Canon are bad for changing systems.
This was actually very helpful. Im returning to photography after taking a break and am looking to buy a Canon EOS R5. I have a 5D Mark III that I want to keep as my back up but now dont have to worry about replacing glass.
No Problem. I recently got a loner from Canon of the R6 with a few of their lenses and one of the benefit of RF lenses over adapting is the burst rate of stills. A canon R5 might be 20 photos per second, but that is dependent upon the lens you mount to it. Some older lenses can’t achieve that because of their design. So if you are shooting action sports that is something to consider.
Cool. Image quality is the same. The adaptor is simple an extension tube - so you get the same optical result with the lenses you own as you did on a DSLR. Since I made this video I rarely adapt EF glass anymore though, slowly transitioning across to RF lenses.
I’m on the same boat as you. I own several of the EF L series lenses. I was thinking 🤔... now what... should I sell them all to replace them with RF ones... What pain in a butt 😂 Well I’m glad I didn’t as they still classy, beautiful glass. They might become vintage one day who knows like a Rolleiflex. Yes, ascetically the camera might look like a Frankenstein with all the different pieces but the photos speak for themselves not the tools. Great video. All the best 🙂
100% agree. I point out the aesthetics of using EF lenses on a newer camera because it will really big some people. I would also expect EF lenses to start dropping in price - but right now I don’t see any of them being a bargain?!? I still have all of my EF glass and it works great on the EOS R. Too painful on the wallet to do a complete switch to RF lens line up.
Yes, you’re right - too expensive to replace them all and you can’t keep up with technology sometimes as there will be always something better on the horizon. I remembered buying brand new EF L 70-200mm 2.8 IS USM mk1 a while ago. After 2 months of owning it Canon released improved mk2 version. I got so hyped about new image charts that I sold my Mk1 version and lost money really (because was already considered second hand), yet I had to save up for the new one as it was ridiculously expensive. Was that really worth it... perhaps for the image quality but not for my wallet 😂. I might buy 1 or 2 RF L lens in the near future but for now I’m happy with what I got.
I have the RF 35mm f1.8 and the 50mm 1.8 RF. They are relatively ‘cheap’ and feel well balanced on the EOS R. I don’t feel the need right now to replace all of my other L series lenses for a minor improvement upon image quality.
Great video...... good to hear about the auto focus performance of EF lenses on R6/5. As for the colour difference (black v grey (or white / cream)..... it won’t bother me in the slightest. Thanks for the video.
Thanks Bernie, obviously I haven’t tried all of the lenses adapted on the R6 & R5, but I did use the 100mm 2.8L EF, and the 35 f1.8 RF and the 24-105 F4 RF and they were all amazing due to the new focusing system on the R5 & R6. I know the colour difference is a first world problem, that I can deal with, but some of the lenses just don’t sit right on a much smaller body do they?
Great content Ben. Thanks! Canon read you right--the RF Lens product development & marketing strategy worked very well in having you seamlessly transition to RF lenses. The market was clearly left with options but for Pro use with sensitivity to ergonomics/design, it truly makes sense to get RF lens eventually for RF camera series.
What on earth does looks have to do with anything. The ef lenses still function very well on rf bodies with the ef r mount. Who cares what it looks like. Pointless statement.
Performance isn’t everything Pete. If the lens weights twice as much as your camera, then it will be off balance and uncomfortable to hold. Aesthetics and ergonomics are all encompassing with camera and lens design. Take the 50mm 1.2 EF lens, very uncomfortable to hold on the mirror less canon as the adaptor is thinner, then the lens gets thicker again and settles out. And it looks wrong. This video is about educating anyone that is transitioning from DSLR to mirrorless and how the lenses look is a consideration. That’s how marketing works, canon deliberately designed new RF lenses so that it makes the EF versions look old. That’s how they get you to upgrade. But it’s OK if this is not a consideration of yours, but it will be for others.
Been toying with the idea to jump to mirrorless from my 5D iv but not decided best option yet. Weight of gear is something that is a factor too so probably need to look into all the options including moving away from Canon but been a Canon user for years so not an easy decision
Hey Jim, send me a PM if you have any questions. I have an EOS R, and a Sony A7iii (its a bit unusual for someone to be using two camera brands! I also get to try out a lot of new cameras via my friend Gordon at Cameralabs. No better way than to try before you buy! The 5dMk4 is amazing based upon my EOS having the same inners, although I jumped from a 5d3 to the EOS R. There probably is no real reason to upgrade except for the knowledge that Canon are unfortunately no longer developing EF lenses. Which I feel a bit sad about, because I have invested in a lot of EF lenses. But there is genuinely nothing wrong with a high end DSLR and L-series lenses from a few years ago. I still use a Canon 135 f2 and that is 24 years old now. An amazing lens!!!
The adaptor looks fine, it is only a few lenses that really don’t look/work well adapted, the 50mm f1.2 was my example. Ironically the Canon lenses look better on a Sigma adaptor on a Sony mirrorless as they are all black, they look like they belong together.
There is a lot of talk w/canon for third party lenses. You can buy great canon EF lenses and adapt them at discounted prices. If you want Canon to invest in R&D for future products you need to support their glass also.
At present, Canon are not allowing any third party autofocus lenses, some companies that were making them have stopped production for fear of being legally pursued. I think this is a bad move, as options are good. I have been in the Canon system for a long time, and I had the choice to buy Canon and third party - but I still chose to buy Canon L-series lenses. But by taking that option away in the RF mount, Canon are well behind the competition and companies like Sony are a much more cost effective system to buy into, with options from Sony, Tamron, Sigma, Samyang……if I was starting afresh in a new mirrorless system I am afraid I would not choose Canon based upon lens options right now.
I think you have had a rare experience as I have had nothing but 5* experience from them, both buying and selling. Their level of communication is one of their best selling points. Just email them, I always get a reply within 24 hours.
My lenses are native RF with one exception: the EF 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS III USM. Thanks to eBay I got that lens with tax and shipping for about $1400, which is half the price of the RF before taxes and shipping. On a 20MP camera body the small difference in sharpness didn't feel worth double the price. Maybe one day I'll go RF for the portability, but for now I console myself knowing the EF one has internal zooming to keep it nice and sealed.
I have mainly moved across to native mirrorless lenses now, with the exception of a few EF lenses for architecture and landscape where autofocus is irrelevant. The optical quality remains the same, and something like the 20-700 f2.8 is mounted to the tripod via the lens anyway, so the adaptor become kind or irrelevant to the size of the overall setup. Canons RF lenses remain way too expensive, maybe one day they will open up their mount to sigma and Tamron etc.
Hi Bill, in theory yes as all of the fixing types are in the correct order, but I have never done it to say whether it will perform well. The adaptors are going to make the setup quite long and front heavy also. Depends what you are looking to achieve, but I have used and reviewed the RF 24-105 (both versions) and compared it to the EF version on an adaptor and I would choose the RF version every time. The cheapest 24-105 with variable aperture is actually my choice out of those three, very light and has optical stabilisation.
I have a question that i can't seem to find the answer for. I just bought a Canon RP and the canon adapter, but my Sigma 18-200mm lens doesnt work with this camera, because it fits the adapter pretty well but the images have a black ring on the sides of the images taken with this lens, and the camera doesnt seem to be able to fix it because it says that there are no ''data'' for the lens. Does anybody know if i can make it work? or should i just sell it and buy only canon lenses? im very confused at this point.
Hi Jud, I can hopefully clear this up. I used to have a Sigma 18-35 f1.8 lens which was designed for cropped sensor cameras. If you put it on a Canon EOS R adaptor the camera didn’t recognise it as a cropped sensor lens and therefore let you see the whole image circle, which is the darkened edges of the image. This is essentially the inside of the lens that you are seeing because it was meant to go on a smaller sensor camera. It probably says ‘EF-S’ on the lens instead of EF, which is full frame. You have two choices if you are using a cropped sensor lens on a full frame camera, either zoom in until you go beyond the darkened corners, or you go into teh menus and engage the 1.6 crop that Canon will automatically apply if you were to use a Canon EF-S lens. I hope this helps!
I know that. My OCD keeps me keen! But adapting is only the temporary solution until Canon have caught up with their RF lenses. No one would ever choose to adapt lenses if you could just exchange all of your EF lenses for RF equivalent lenses.
Sooo ... I love the look of the 50mm on the adapter :D maybe IRL I won't like it as much, but on screen it looks kinda interesting. The color mismatch is a bigger bummer.
I have never tested it. The theory makes sense, as extension tubes lose you light because the lens is further away from the sensor, but the adaptor is keeping distance the same as the space that the mirror occupies. I would therefore say its not true but it would need to be tested.
Hi Shoeb, I have not used an adaptor with any cropped sensor Canon mirrorless cameras (they were not released when I made this video), so I can’t really comment on this. I am sure there are others that have tested this though.
Is it worth buying EF lenses today despite of coming of age of mirrorless generation? I still have a perfectly working 5D3 and invested to L prime lenses. Thanks for your advice!
Hi Mark, this is the question. I would say that it depends on what you shoot and how long you can/will resist the temptation to upgrade? I switched to mirrorless because at the time there were no full frame DSLR’s with a flip out screen that I could make my RUclips videos with and shoot stills (with the exception of 6d mk2 which is meh). So I bought an eos r. I was perfectly happy with my 5d3, although I have to say that for shooting portraits mirrorless is much easier with face and eye detection. If you shoot landscapes then there is less reason to switch because you have live view things are a lot more calm and calculated. It’s probably a personal choice if you switch or not.
@@benharveyphotography thanks for your reply. Im more of a food photographer. I wanted to get the eos R6 but I dont have the budget 🤣 Now, I’m balancing the idea of needs and wants. I checked a lot of videos just like yours that EF lenses can be easily mounted to an eos R with an adopter at an ease. Plus that EF lenses can also be used to other non canon cameras like Sony and Red. But what do you think Ben? If its you, will you still buy the lens? Do you think it’s still worthy? Thanks
Hi Mark, the L series lenses are fantastic lenses. As long as you don’t buy them like you are making an investment - expecting to get your money back then fine. But they on the basis that you are going to keep them and they are a ‘bargain’ compared to the RF versions. I am keeping all my EF lenses.
@@benharveyphotography thanks Ben! Appreciate your replies! On your own experience using EF lenses with EOS R, is it almost the same like your using a native RF lenses? I know it’s not 100% the same but if the difference is just little and I can still get the quality of images and videos I need, I think I will keep using EF lenses. Aside that I don’t have the money. Haha
Hi Mark, I only have one RF lens - so I can’t really make a fair comparison. But I use my EF lenses on the R for portraits and landscapes, architecture and I have no complaints. If you are pixel peeping then the RF versions seem to be slightly sharper and you have the control ring to control ISO for example. You get more than just the same lens with a different mount.
Hi, there are a few different versions. Here is the standard version without the control ring or the ND filters. www.canon.co.uk/lenses/eos-r-adapters/mount-adapter-ef-eos-r/
I am sure that it would have been possible, but using your existing EF lenses still requires a void between the sensor and the glass elements in the back of the lens to obtain focus. New RF lenses could then be redesigned to focus on the new sensor plane but they would still ‘sting’ us with the increased prices of the RF lenses despite the mount itself.
You're right, the RF 35 looks great on the R. I myself am guilty of thinking the same.... it just looks off, having an EF lens on the R5. Not to mention that the total length of the combination is significantly larger. I tried my EF 70-200 on both the 5DIV and the R5.... and the R5 combination warped the eyepiece in my backpack/bag. Just wouldn't fit properly anymore. However, I do think some RF lenses are probably worth the money, but it's unconventional. For example, look at the RF 28-70 f/2. Seeing the optical quality (low distortion, sharp even wide open and in the corners) and the amount of light it let's in...it might be a replacement for several primes. I'd replace my 28mm f/1.8, 35mm f/1.4, 50mm f/1.4 and maybe 85mm f/1.4 with it, while replacing the 24-70mm f/2.8 as well in the process. It's all about your style of shooting however. I mostly shoot portraits, people, events ... and even in a controlled set I like the flexibility of a zoom. While in your landscape work it's probably no issue to change lenses at all unless the rain is pouring down. :)
I did an interesting experiment about a year and a half ago. I put my 24 year old Canon 135 f2 against Sony’s latest G master 135 f1.8. The Sony was so sharp it hurt! Wide open. But when I shared the images online (note that I got the images as close as possible because canon and Sony cameras + dynamic range are different) people couldn’t tell which one was new and which was from the mid 90’s! So most of the sharpness benefit comes when we appreciate the images on a good screen or a high quality print. If you never do that then we are not getting the most out of the equipment.
That would essentially have a section in front of the camera (the same size as the adaptor) to create the gap to enable the lenses to focus on the sensor. They will never do that as they are promoting you to buy into RF lenses. Plus it makes the camera unnecessarily larger and only ever backwards compatible with EF lenses. Sorry!
That is quite a broad statement. The cheaper RF lenses (50mm f1.8 and 16mm f2.8 that I own for example) are nowhere near as sharp as an L-series EF lens. There is still a quality differentiation in RF mount as EF lenses. But generally the same lenses, say 100mm L-series has improved in sharpness in the RF version compared to the EF version. The adaptor doesn’t discriminate between which canon camera you put it in, so the RP, R, R7, R10 etc will all have comparable sharpness when using the adaptor when you are talking about lens sharpness. Take into consideration also that many lens manufacturers rely upon lens corrections in camera/software, whereas older EF lenses depended a lot more on getting it right with the glass in the first place.
@@benharveyphotography Yes, I was referring to the test(here on YT) that shows same body(R6) and same lens(EF28-70 f2.8 and RF28-70 f2.8) that shows RF significant sharpness over EF lens.
Canon and Sony have a different mount size - so it’s not possible. I use Canon lenses on a Sony, via the sigma MC11 adaptor however you cannot do it the other way around.
Hi Dan, absolutely. The continuous autofocus on all of the canon mirrorless cameras work really well, including with adapted EF lenses. I used to have an 80D and for comparison the adapted EF lenses on my eos R is just as capable if not better.
Hi Vincent, I have only tried it with a Sigma lens and that worked. Providing that it’s an EF or EF-S mount it will work but I don’t know about performance.
how about softness. saw a video claiming pics with the R lenses are way sharper , need to confirm if optical quality decreases when using the EF lenses .
Hello. It obviously depends what lenses you are trying to compare. The R lenses are redesigned, it isn’t just the same glass with a new mount, I would expect them to be sharper and better than their EF equivalent. But if you put an EF lens in a Canon mirror less camera it won’t be any different to putting it on a DSLR in terms of optical performance. It is just air between the sensor and the back of the lens element.
generally, RF L lenses is an upgrade from EF, technology, optical glasses, etc etc. so they expected perform better than the Ef L lenses. i own 70-200 F2.8 RF and EF mount. the RF is very very good in term of image quality 10/10. sadly the price 1/10 lol...
Interesting video and good to know these EF lenses work even better on the RF cameras. I just purchased a Canon R3 and the RF 70-200 f/2.8. I have two 1DX Mk3 bodies, 16-35 f2.8, 24-70 f2.8, EF 70-200 f2.8, 300 f2.8, 50 f1.2 and 85 f1.2. I'm likely going to sell both 1DX Mk3s, EF 70-200 2.8 and 300 f2.8 which I can say is never used as too long for what I shoot. The 70-200 is my go to and the weight saving in new camera and lens is worth it. However, having the ability to re-use the other lenses which are only used occasionally makes the switch less of a financial burden - RF glass ain't cheap. The long awaited R1 just didn't seem worth the extra (or on hindsight the wait) to me.
Thank you very much for this vdeo !! I got a question though, is the focal lenght the same with the adapter ? Or will my 24 mm become a 32 mm or something ?
Hi Emilie, it depends whether the lens is an EF lens (full frame) or EF-s lens (cropped sensor). If you put a full frame lens on a full frame camera via the adaptor it will stay the same, therefore 24mm will stay 24mm. However if you put the 24mm EF-S lens on a Canon mirrorless the camera will automatically crop in and it will become a 36mm (24 x1.5 crop factor). I hope this makes sense. The adaptor is simply creating a space between the sensor and the back of the lens where the mirror used to be.
Thank you Walid - but I don’t have any affiliate links set up. I appreciate the consideration though. I hope you gained something useful from the video :-)
3 года назад+1
Liked you video and also the way you interact/give advice to everyone in the comments. New follower!
Hi Eddie, it is posted in the comments elsewhere but here you. You will find it cheaper on Amazon than direct from Canon. www.canon.co.uk/lenses/eos-r-adapters/mount-adapter-ef-eos-r/
Hello. The Canon R50 wasn’t invented at the time I made this video, and Canon hadn’t actually made any cropped sensor mirrorless cameras then either, but the principles are the same as using lenses on a cropped sensor DSLR. Any full frame lenses on a cropped sensor camera will have the focal length times by 1.6 for canon and the performance will be equal to of better when adapting onto a mirrorless Canon. BUT if you are buying a small mirrorless camera, just get the RF lenses to go with it as the adaptor is another £100+ and adds weight and size to a small camera. Luckily Canon have actually produced quite a few affordable lenses since making this video.
Hi Chica, I am use the Canon EF-RF adaptor. It’s the first one that they created before adding a version that had a built in control ring and another version that takes filters.
It’s an interesting question because this does happen with an extension tube - however the distance between the back of the lens and the sensor is still the same, so I am very confident it is exactly the same amount of light coming in.
@@benharveyphotography Thanks for the reply. I am actually more concerned with the R5 with battery life. My understanding (from other sources and reviews) is that the R5 battery will last about 250 to 300 shots. If that is true, doing a wedding I'd have to change batteries about 5 times, where as with my Canon 5D4, I can do a whole wedding on one battery...(w/very rare exception I'd need to change the battery)...Thanks as always. Phil NYC Area
Hello. I have only played with the R5 pre-release, so I cant say that I have any experience of its battery life. I own an Canon EOS R, which will ‘suffer’ from the same battery use of the screen draining energy from it, however I have setup a shortcut for switching the screen to hibernate. I genuinely wouldn’t hold back from transitioning to mirrorless on the basis of battery though, they are very efficient, but I believe that burst Rate decreases as the battery life goes down, but I think that applied to DSLR’s also. I still have a 5d3 and a mirrorless camera and I use both, so I get the attachment to the DSLR, they feel reassuring robust in the hand when compared to mirrorless cameras.
@@benharveyphotography Thanks for the info and insight Ben. Appreciated. As soon as the wedding market and photography gigs pick up again, I will likely still buy an R5 at some point. I do really like my 5D4 and even still have my 5D3 for backup, so all will be good for sure. Have a good day and thanks. Phil NYC Area
Yes, your full frame EF lenses have the same focal length when adapted. Mirrorless cameras have more in camera lens corrections and digital stabilisation that will add a crop, but they are optional and can therefore be disabled. EF-S lenses will incur an automatic crop as the camera recognises that it is not meant for a full frame camera.
Two years later... RF lenses aren't getting cheaper and Canon is blocking third-party lenses. EF lenses doing FINE.
a year later .. same story
Is the EF lens less compatible in autofocus for street photography as compared to the RF or the EF works good?
@@anonymous-wh8szall good rf IS 10% or so better Over all except build quality but 5x more expensive
@@Tzunami07 which gear are you using?
Canon really takes us for pigeons. (RF = Real Fuck)
Making it possible to use EF lenses on a RF body is a boon for Canon customers. I'm almost 100% RF (still missing a 300mm f/2.8 and a 35L II equivalent) and have no regrets. But it is expensive and not for everyone. Meanwhile the R6 and R5 bring huge improvements for Canon shooters due to the combination of IBIS, eye AF and better sensors. Good time to be a Canon shooter.
I wish they did make all of my lenses in the RF mount, and I could justify the extra cost. I appreciate the innovation of the smaller 70-200 and the ability to control other functions on the lens with the control ring - but I struggle to justify replacing lenses that I am already very happy with.
Very informative thank you. I have a similar dilemma, I am way behind you quality wise as I only have 7D mkI which now has an error message and fault and so would like to upgrade. I was thinking 7D mkII or 90D but watching this makes me consider mirrorless. Like you I have several EF L Lenses that I love but just not sure if I can live with the adapter and then feel like I’m doing a half job not having the RF lenses. I’m definitely non pro, like landscapes, wildlife, sport and macro, no video as such. Would love your thoughts, great channel 👍
Hello, I think that switching over to mirror less is a good move, whether you are already invested in Canon or any other brand. But you dot have to, because of peer pressure, and it wont make your photography any better. I owned the 7d mk1 for years and created some amazing work with it. Mirrorless cameras have advantages, such as seeing the images and the exposure live, rather than taking the photo and the reviewing it (as you do on a DSLR). If you are sticking with Canon then the good news is that they are coming out with more affordable lenses now. When the first started everything was very fast expensive lenses. I still own many EF lenses, because it would be very expensive to buy their RF mirrorless equivalents, but I am currently considering the RF 24-105 which would be a great all round lens. This review should be out in the next few weeks on the Cameralabs Channel (Gordon Laing’s) and that again is an affordable lens option for the RF system. Since this video, Canon have also released the 50mm f1.8, also a great lens. I wouldn’t invest in a 7d mk2 or a 90d now, and annoying they are not reducing in price, it isn’t like you are going to get yourself a bargain - DSLR’s really seem to be holding onto their price for some reason. Canon have stopped productions EF lenses, so that it is now. They already had plenty to choose from anyway :-)
What about more regular lenses (like the "fake" USMs i have in 2 lenses like the 75-300mm IS "USM" and the 50mm 1.4 prime lens with also a dirty cheap autofocus system? I heard its not as much of a hit and miss like with DSLRs when it comes to the 1.4 lens (no hate please, its still a great lens despite released in 1990 haha)
And what about even worse AF systems like the ones in my cheap Sigma Macro lens or any lens without USM/STM at all?
I get it that Canon cares about the L lenses since professionals would be very very dissapointed if the mirrorless professional systems would perform worse than actual DSLRs in the pro-area.
But i somehow feel Canon wants the regular customer to go for RF lenses over time which is in long term definately a good step, but i feel somehow left in the dark now with a bunch of EF lenses which i have to play roulette which one will work now and which wont (a friends 85mm Sigma didnt work on a EOS R. No AF, but at least aperture worked, 1 out of 4 EF lenses!)
I can only really comment on the performance of the lenses that I have used on the adaptor, which is mainly L-series lenses, a combination of USM lenses and a few EF-S lenses. I only have one Sigma lens, the 18-35 Art and since it is meant for a cropped sensor camera it doesn’t make much sense to use it on the EOS R full frame system. Overall though the lenses I have work as well or better on a mirrorless camera that the DSLRs.
If it preforms good I don't care what it looks like. I guess I was one who doesn't care about looks. It's about what's inside.
You deleted my comment...lol 🤣🤣🤣🤣
I just replied to the comment, hopefully you should still see that it is there. I haven’t deleted your comment, any fair criticism is welcome :-)
@@benharveyphotography Seems to have vanished but not to worry, i guess it was only criticism on the time spent about the aesthetics, but rewatching it i understand if you have OCD, as i replied i have it also slightly so get it 😁😁
No one care about looks it is all about quality
I was just about to say the same thing, and for most of what he was saying they perform better so who cares about the looks.
Hi Craig, I made this video years ago and there have been lots of responses about the aesthetics and I still stand by what I said many years later. But it is not just a shallow comment about the colour, it is also about the balance of the camera. If you have a Canon mirrorless camera (which is generally small - I still have the EOS R and now a Canon R8 which is even smaller), putting an adaptor and even a medium size EF lens (say a 24-105 f4) make it a very unbalanced set up that you may want to consider if it is a pleasurable experience shooting with. Although Canon charge way too much in my opinion for their new lenses, they are making them smaller and lighter to match the reduced size and weight of the camera bodies. All of the camera brands are. So just consider the balance of the balance of the camera and lens when you are adapting. Adapting EF lenses is an intermediate step between building up a native mirrorless lens collection, the RF lenses will get you eventually!
@@benharveyphotography Hi Ben, i understand what you are saying i have a little OCD myself but there was no mention of the balance in the video a good majority of it was just about it not looking good, the rest of the video was very good and informative about how lens preform better etc.
Just a bit to much about the looks for me ......Sorry 😒😒😒
@craigyboy542 no problem. It was a long time ago as I said but I can take criticism where it is due. I haven’t deleted your comment, you should be able to see it on here unless YT has filtered it for some reason.
Thanks for the mention! Yes, it's great for adapted lenses to enjoy a new lease of life with better autofocus across a broader area, better face and eye detection and the possibility of IBIS on some models. As you know, I've been gradually testing all the new RF lenses and where possible comparing them against the old EF versions and yes, the new ones are expensive and in some cases large too. But in almost every case, the RF version does something different or better, like a broader zoom range, IS when it wasn't available on the EF model, smaller barrel, lighter barrel etc etc. I've also found in side-by-side tests that while the adapted EF lenses focus quickly, they're not normally as quick or as consistent as the native RF ones - you'll see that especially in my 70-200 and 100-500 reviews. In all cases so far, the RF model has been better overall in my opinion BUT they are pricier AND they also face the fact the latest EF versions were often already very good to start with.
Thanks Gordon. I am glad to see that Canon are productively increasing the performance of EF lenses, whilst subliminally tempting us all over to the RF lens line up. The RF lenses are great, the ones that I have used. I think I have done well to resist them for a year!
@@benharveyphotography well the problem is while they are better for a new buyer, if you already own the EF versions, they're also still very good. Also remember that adapting gives you the chance to use adapters with extra functionality, like filter holders or speedboosters.
@@cameralabs (I don't do filters, but) Yay, filters on my TS-E 17.
Confirming that ef lenses work better on the R series camera has sold me, I'm on my way to the shop 😊
Lol me too
Same!!
did that info turn out to be true? I am on EF and have considered grabbing an RF next time there is a huge sale.
Thank you for this video. Definitely helped to relieve any anxiety I may have had about needing to transition all my gear to mirrorless. Great review and well presented!
For me, I dont really care if the EF lenses are not looking good on a Canon Mirrorless Camera as long as Im getting nice output.
I'm currently using a 77d + Sigma 18-35 and Tamron 70-200 f2.8 G2.
My initial plan is to upgrade to 90d but now I'm leaning toward R7.
The Sigma 18-35 is a lovely lens. Beautiful images
@@benharveyphotographyCan the Sigma lens be used on the R 6?
The Sigma 18-35 F1.8 is a cropped sensor lens, it will work on an R6 but it will either show you massive vignette when at 18mm or automatically crop in 1.6x if it is smart enough to know that it is a cropped sensor lens. In essence you would get a 24-35mm lens equivalent as you cant use the wide end of the lens
@@grg.000
Who gives a crap how it looks if it works well and meets my needs. Stopped watching after you spent too much time talking about aesthetics
If the lenses perform perfectly with the adaptor, I see no problem using the adaptor. I have a EF 85 1.2 and a RF 85 1.2 DS on my R6. Love both of them :-D
which do you like more?
@@sydneynomura281 The RF version is technically superior in every way. The EF version provides a dreamy look (because it is softer at 1.2) and a more interesting lens flare :-)
I am going to buy an RF lens one day… just let me get this one last EF L lens before I change…. Three years after this clip, I still buy used EF L’s for my R7 and R6ii
You have held out buying native glass for a loooong time. Congratulations. You have self-discipline
Who cares how it looks, as long as it performs.
Hi Ian. I do. I spend all of my hard earnt money on my camera and lenses and I want to feel good about them. The ‘change’ in aesthetics is how any company gets us to buy their stuff. Apple keep changing the shape of their phones to make our phone look old and make us want to buy it. Their latest phones have gone back to the bevelled edge of older iPhones.
I have commented elsewhere in the feed that the adaptor is a temporary fix, it increases the size of the equipment in your hand and there is room for it to fail. I also went out to shoot deer locally once, I took my eos R, my canon 100-400 and forgot the adapter!
Very nice, I'm wanting to upgrade to the R6 but was worried if the EF adapter would work well with my lenses. I'm not worried about how it looks 😅 as long as it works
Nice video BUT I am sure from you are from UK did you know butterfly knives are in fact illegal to own in UK so in wouldn't be flashing one around on a video.. Just a heads up.
I think they are, I picked it up in Holland about 20 years ago - I keep it in the house, all good 🙂
BTW - Canon has fine line of videography cameras and some are compatible with EF lenses. So why bother with DSLR that is video camera shoved in the body of a DSLR.
Canon has a fine line of camcorders and cinematography cameras cost less than a new R1. You already have your L lenses and you can buy a video camara for much less than an R1
Can the non stabilized ef lenses with canon mount adapter work with in body image stabilization
yes it does work, think about the IBIS like something "independent" or complementary with the IS
Of course the old lenses will be better on the new cameras. These old lenses were used on slow dslr cameras and with the much inproved AF on these new mirrorless cameras, they will perform better. However, how the older lenses (ef) will perform on the new cameras against the RF lenses. As an example, take the best 24-70 2.8 ef and compare it with the 24-70 2.8 RF lenses on lets say EOS R5? That would be the question
If its Performs so well, why does it matter if it doesn't "just doesn't looks right"
Thanks for this. I was skeptical about buying the R10 because I have ef lenses. All I clearly need is an adaptor_
It doesn't really matter how your lens looks on the camera .. it's not like your camera is going to a fashion show is it ?
Love the Balisong(butterfly). in the 70-80’s,only robbers had them.
My canon 135 F/2 L mounted on a 5D ii was almost unusable for kids portraits when they were moving. Now, mounted on a R5, I have 100% images with focus on eyes even when my kids are running everywhere. Just a dream to use.
I still have my Canon 135 f2, its such a lovely lens, and I used to use it on a 5d3, but this is lacking continuous autofocus and eye/face detection - so as you say it is a massive bonus when adapted to a Canon mirrorless, especially an R6 or R5 as their focusing system is fantastic.
The Argument "it doesn´t look right" is the equivalent of parking your porsche gt3 at the ice cream parlor.
OH MY GAWDDD.. IT LOOKS FINE !!!! ( lol )
Tempting to buy the R5 and second hand ef lenses. Trying to force me to buy RF glass sticks in my throat.
Who gives a shit about the aesthetics LOL, Typical iMoron, cares more about looks than functionality
***Correction, it also takes vintage FD lenses, thus 4 types of lenses*** I use them with no issues on my R5 and I hear you about the aesthetics, although the color doesn't bother me, just the extra length. However, the control ring is a game changer as I now customized it for Kelvins. Insane customizability. If you are thinking about getting a mirrorless, buy EF L's or FD's! You will get every focal length possible and can use the 1.6 crop mode for extra reach when in a pinch. My 50 1.2 came alive wide open on the R5, I have never seen such responsive AF even when using my 50 1.4 wide open as well, notorious for hunting but not anymore. R bodies are a no brainer if you want to evolve in photography.
Hi Fred, the FD lenses fit on the R bodies without an adaptor? I had no idea. I only have one FD lens that I use with a reverse ring for macro...but that’s interesting. I also use the crop mode when shooting video. If you export in 1080 then you can film in 4K which makes my new 35mm full frame, a 60mm with Canons 1.7x crop when shooting in 4K, and then of course you can punch in to double that in video editing software.
@@benharveyphotography Hello Ben, they fit with an FD-EOS R adaptor which works great. I bought the Vello brand from B&H and the Fotasy one from amazon as a backup, both great metallic build. You also need to go the menu on the Custom Function section page 4 and turn "ON" where is says "Release shutter w/o lens".
Yes, I'm a firm believer in downsampling to 1080, you get a lot of clean edit options. Even though mine has full frame 4k, I do use the crop mode in video as well as photos, with stunning results. Crops also add a nice non distracting visual element when focusing on a subject. At the moment, my favorite modes to record are 4k HQ and 4k 120.
eBay for camera gear. Been doing so for 21 years. The old days of paying by Western Union are long gone.
Considering the cost of the RF lenses and how much the EF lenses have dropped in price I would definitely buy the adapter and use the EF lenses, especially the L, until the prices drop. If they don't then the EF lenses will be in more demand than the RF and the cost of the EF lenses will go back up.
I recently bought three L lenses, EF 50mm f/1.2 L, EF 24-70mm f/2.8 L II and the EF 70-200mm f/2.8 L II for so much less on the used market than what they cost new and definitely lower than the RF lenses.
The key is to find out when the and of service life is for the lens you're interested in then buy. If the service life is less than one year then pass and spend a little more on the Mk II or III so that you have access to Canon PS.
I had an idea that the RF L lenses would to too expensive for my budget but with the adapter my wife has an RP and I have the R along with the 1Ds MkII and 5D MkII DSLR so we're booked solid.
Additionally, the newer cameras won't function with 3rd party batteries. You will have to buy Canon batteries or your camera will be dead in the water.
Personally I'd live to have all genuine Canon batteries but that's not possible because the ones I need are always out of stock or on backorder. So I buy 3rd party and I haven't looked back.
Did you know that one of Canon's latest flash won't use AA batteries? Flashes have used AA batteries for decades and now that's another Canon battery you'll need or your flash won't work so buy a refurbished or preowned flash that can use AA batteries because they are very easy to find and way less expensive that genuine Canon batteries at $80 to over $100 each.
Just to put it out there, I am not advocating that anyone switch to mirrorless. Only if it makes sense for what you shoot I still use my Canon 5d mk3 with my EF glass because I prefer the way that those larger heavier lenses balance on a larger camera body. Another minor but relevant point is that I don’t switch off my DSLR. It just goes into standby and the batteries last a really long time. That way it is always ready to shoot. I switch off my mirrorless Canons to save the battery life all the time, even when I am just holding it. If however you shoot video, like I do, then mirrorless is an obvious choice due to reliable continuous autofocus to film yourself to make these videos.
Love the word ludicrously expensive
The 50mm looks better with the adapter on
Really useful, gonna pick up a R6 and combine with my EF lenses 😊 Hope to step up my RUclips game 🎥
It’s a lovely camera, I am sure that you will enjoy it!
@@benharveyphotography for sure, just went out and recoded some evening street photography in my latest two videos and uploaded, really blown away by the quality 🤯😀 works amazing with my 24-70 2.8
My budget is very low, I currently have a t5 (I bought like 8 years ago) and managed to buy around 5 lenses and would like to upgrade (is it really an upgrade I'm not sure) to an r100. Any recommendations? How terrible is the r100?
Hi, thanks for the comment. I haven't used a T5 (although I have used other cropped sensor Canon DSLRs). I think you should plan ahead and know what you intend on buying in the future. Your existing 5 lenses, are the EF lenses (designed for full frame) or EF-S lenses, and are they premium lenses (L-series) or cheap lenses that you shouldn't be too precious about. Like i said in this video many years ago, you will end up buying native RF lenses, and they have released many more affordable options since I released this video. Perhaps ask yourself why you are switching to mirrorless also, which features is your existing camera missing to jump to mirrorless? I have personally moved over to full frame only and sold my EF-S lenses. I own the original EOS R still and last year got the R8 which is a very small and lightweight full frame camera. I haven't used the R100 or any of the cropped sensor Canons however.
Well if you couldn’t work it out for yourself years ago then more fool you!! It’s obvious that technology moves on maybe not lens wise so much as cameras but things change. Big deal so you invested in glass like we all have, either use it or donate it to me!!! At least canon have thought of the user and allowed ef to rf lenses to work, they could have gone the other way and made them rf only, then what would happen to all the ef lenses????
so your basing it on the look?? LOL
I think you just saved me heaps of stress and potential $ with this. I just ordered an open box and branded in my old dslr for the r6 mark II. My instructor told me to get the f2.8 but the Rmodel is waaay too $. Then I see that I can get the eF version used and get the adapter as you say and trade in my old lenses to bring down the cost more along with the free voucher I got and now I can see that I can have the f2.8 that really is what I should have.. there are two types of adapter is the one with the control ring and the regular. is the control ring one necessary? or can one get by with the regular?
Hi Janine, Thanks for leaving the comments and apologies for the delayed response, I have been on holiday. The adaptor with the control ring is not necessary if you are coming from a DSLR as you will not miss the feature that it is offering you. it essentially you can assign things such as ISO to the ring and control it with your left hand that is supporting the lens. If you buy RF lenses in future this control ring is on all of the RF lenses anyway. So I would recommend getting the normal adaptor. The R6 Mk 2 is a fantastic camera, you will be very happy with it. I have the R8, which shares the same sensor and focusing system as the R6 mk2, but sacrifices a few features that the R6 2 has.
Good video - bit tired of the pressure to move to RF. I’ve got the R6 with the adapter and my images are fantastic. Only problem is every now and then the focus blurs, sometimes at a critical moment. It’s worse when I have the heavy lens on the camera. Any ideas?
Hello. Yes, I can relate - especially since I have spent years ‘building’ a collection of EF lenses for shooting many genres. I have t experiences any issues with my adaptor (I have the basic Canon one, not the ND or the control ring one). When you say blurs it is simply missing focus entirely or it’s not locking focus on what it says is in focus? I would run a few test if static objects with the camera on a tripod and see what is happening.
Maybe it doesn't look good but they work great on the r6 and my wife would kill me if I would buy new lenses for those prices
I have used MPB for 4 of my cameras, plus quite a few lenses and also really would recomend them. (Canon 1Dx. user )
Agreed, they are my go to for purchasing used lenses, they provide such a good service, awesome communication. I really cant fault them.
Watching this in 2024. I just bought an r100 and an adapter so I can use all of my EF lenses on it. I have noticed that I'm getting really good performance out of these old lenses. I've only bought one RF lens so far.
It will depend on what DSLR you are coming from, but the newer mirrorless cameras have much better focusing capabilities and faster frame rates etc. If you want to compare EF and RF lenses though you need to compare like for like. Therefore your EF lenses adapted might out perform a new but clear RF lens. I have a Canon R8 and now I can use EF lenses to do in camera focus bracketing for macro, so there are benefits to having a newer body, with or without native lenses.
You have a problem with the way an adapter looks on a camera, I have a problem with you using a balasong knife to open a box. 😮
Butterfly knives are illegal to possess, sell or hire in the UK! The guy is bang to rights.
Lot of talks, not practical demonstration, I don't like these type if youtubers, not subscribed.
To provide a fair comparison between the performance of EF lenes native and adapted lenses I would need a Canon 5D mk4 to compare it to the EOS R, however I don’t own a 5D mk4. Comparing the EOS R with adapted lenses to anything else is not a fair test. I work with what I have to make these informative videos.
Canon r6 with EF telephoto lens sorry not working very well. Eye tracking system with 70 200mm f4 is usm lens it doesn't happen, 300mm f4 is usm barely getting the focus.
Hello, without seeing all of the options and menus, I am not going to be able to help you troubleshoot. But I have not heard of focusing not working with native canon lenses on the adaptor. It sounds like the adaptor is faulty or there is an issue with the settings.
I am looking at the new R5MKII but cant imagine my 70-200 F2.8 with a 2x extender on the adaptor with the R5 body!! Dilema?? Having said that I wouldnt want to replace it with the RF version either at nearly £3k
Without knowing which DSLR body you are going from and what you shoot, it is difficult to comment on whether you are going to achieve the results and performance on a brand new mirrorless camera with adapted lenses. Ok the basis that you are extending I am going to assume you are shooting wildlife or something that needs more reach. Honestly if you are going mirrorless then get a native Canon lens like the 100-500 and buy the R5 mark 1 if you need to save some money. The upgrades on the r5 and minimal compared to the mark 1. If you need a long lens that doesn’t have a fast aperture they make a 600 and 800 f11.
One extra comment. Having a relatively compact mirrorless camera with an adaptor, then an extender, then an EF lens is going to result in a very long, front heavy, unbalanced and odd looking setup that I personally wouldn’t enjoy using (I recently used a mirrorless camera with an adapter and extension tubes with the 100-400 L lens and although optically it was great it was not a pleasurable experience. So before you pounce on buying the R5ii have a think about what you intend on shooting with it and what the best tools for the job might be.
Many years ago I also had lots of nice FD lenses, then Canon changed to the EF, now they have done it again. I 've shot with Canon since the late 70's, Now I have my first mirrorless and EF lenses. Canon are bad for changing systems.
I can imagine how frustrating that would have been, and twice now!
This was actually very helpful. Im returning to photography after taking a break and am looking to buy a Canon EOS R5. I have a 5D Mark III that I want to keep as my back up but now dont have to worry about replacing glass.
No Problem. I recently got a loner from Canon of the R6 with a few of their lenses and one of the benefit of RF lenses over adapting is the burst rate of stills. A canon R5 might be 20 photos per second, but that is dependent upon the lens you mount to it. Some older lenses can’t achieve that because of their design. So if you are shooting action sports that is something to consider.
I don’t think the things you are complaining about re real issues. I’d rather focus on image quality, but thanks.
Cool. Image quality is the same. The adaptor is simple an extension tube - so you get the same optical result with the lenses you own as you did on a DSLR. Since I made this video I rarely adapt EF glass anymore though, slowly transitioning across to RF lenses.
Basically, if you suffer from ocd dont adapt😂😂😂
I’m on the same boat as you. I own several of the EF L series lenses. I was thinking 🤔... now what... should I sell them all to replace them with RF ones... What pain in a butt 😂 Well I’m glad I didn’t as they still classy, beautiful glass. They might become vintage one day who knows like a Rolleiflex. Yes, ascetically the camera might look like a Frankenstein with all the different pieces but the photos speak for themselves not the tools. Great video. All the best 🙂
100% agree. I point out the aesthetics of using EF lenses on a newer camera because it will really big some people. I would also expect EF lenses to start dropping in price - but right now I don’t see any of them being a bargain?!? I still have all of my EF glass and it works great on the EOS R. Too painful on the wallet to do a complete switch to RF lens line up.
Yes, you’re right - too expensive to replace them all and you can’t keep up with technology sometimes as there will be always something better on the horizon.
I remembered buying brand new EF L 70-200mm 2.8 IS USM mk1 a while ago. After 2 months of owning it Canon released improved mk2 version. I got so hyped about new image charts that I sold my Mk1 version and lost money really (because was already considered second hand), yet I had to save up for the new one as it was ridiculously expensive. Was that really worth it... perhaps for the image quality but not for my wallet 😂.
I might buy 1 or 2 RF L lens in the near future but for now I’m happy with what I got.
I have the RF 35mm f1.8 and the 50mm 1.8 RF. They are relatively ‘cheap’ and feel well balanced on the EOS R. I don’t feel the need right now to replace all of my other L series lenses for a minor improvement upon image quality.
How does this 28-300l compare to something like the RF24-240 in terms of image quality and EYE AF tracking?
Hi, I haven’t used either of those lenses, sorry!
I can't relate to your intense aesthetic hangups. But I appreciate the rest of the info especially the cost benefit, focusing and IQ
Great video...... good to hear about the auto focus performance of EF lenses on R6/5. As for the colour difference (black v grey (or white / cream)..... it won’t bother me in the slightest. Thanks for the video.
Thanks Bernie, obviously I haven’t tried all of the lenses adapted on the R6 & R5, but I did use the 100mm 2.8L EF, and the 35 f1.8 RF and the 24-105 F4 RF and they were all amazing due to the new focusing system on the R5 & R6. I know the colour difference is a first world problem, that I can deal with, but some of the lenses just don’t sit right on a much smaller body do they?
Great content Ben. Thanks! Canon read you right--the RF Lens product development & marketing strategy worked very well in having you seamlessly transition to RF lenses. The market was clearly left with options but for Pro use with sensitivity to ergonomics/design, it truly makes sense to get RF lens eventually for RF camera series.
What on earth does looks have to do with anything. The ef lenses still function very well on rf bodies with the ef r mount. Who cares what it looks like. Pointless statement.
Performance isn’t everything Pete. If the lens weights twice as much as your camera, then it will be off balance and uncomfortable to hold. Aesthetics and ergonomics are all encompassing with camera and lens design. Take the 50mm 1.2 EF lens, very uncomfortable to hold on the mirror less canon as the adaptor is thinner, then the lens gets thicker again and settles out. And it looks wrong. This video is about educating anyone that is transitioning from DSLR to mirrorless and how the lenses look is a consideration. That’s how marketing works, canon deliberately designed new RF lenses so that it makes the EF versions look old. That’s how they get you to upgrade. But it’s OK if this is not a consideration of yours, but it will be for others.
adapt or not adapt, this is a question...hah
Been toying with the idea to jump to mirrorless from my 5D iv but not decided best option yet. Weight of gear is something that is a factor too so probably need to look into all the options including moving away from Canon but been a Canon user for years so not an easy decision
Hey Jim, send me a PM if you have any questions. I have an EOS R, and a Sony A7iii (its a bit unusual for someone to be using two camera brands! I also get to try out a lot of new cameras via my friend Gordon at Cameralabs. No better way than to try before you buy! The 5dMk4 is amazing based upon my EOS having the same inners, although I jumped from a 5d3 to the EOS R. There probably is no real reason to upgrade except for the knowledge that Canon are unfortunately no longer developing EF lenses. Which I feel a bit sad about, because I have invested in a lot of EF lenses. But there is genuinely nothing wrong with a high end DSLR and L-series lenses from a few years ago. I still use a Canon 135 f2 and that is 24 years old now. An amazing lens!!!
Thanks so much for this. I know it sounds silly but I too care about the aesthetic of the camera! Still happy with the adapter though
The adaptor looks fine, it is only a few lenses that really don’t look/work well adapted, the 50mm f1.2 was my example. Ironically the Canon lenses look better on a Sigma adaptor on a Sony mirrorless as they are all black, they look like they belong together.
sony a, sony ef, sony ef apsc
There is a lot of talk w/canon for third party lenses. You can buy great canon EF lenses and adapt them at discounted prices. If you want Canon to invest in R&D for future products you need to support their glass also.
At present, Canon are not allowing any third party autofocus lenses, some companies that were making them have stopped production for fear of being legally pursued. I think this is a bad move, as options are good. I have been in the Canon system for a long time, and I had the choice to buy Canon and third party - but I still chose to buy Canon L-series lenses. But by taking that option away in the RF mount, Canon are well behind the competition and companies like Sony are a much more cost effective system to buy into, with options from Sony, Tamron, Sigma, Samyang……if I was starting afresh in a new mirrorless system I am afraid I would not choose Canon based upon lens options right now.
I do not recommend MPB...when you want your money back on a return...they won't answer the phone.
I think you have had a rare experience as I have had nothing but 5* experience from them, both buying and selling. Their level of communication is one of their best selling points. Just email them, I always get a reply within 24 hours.
Thank you!! Exactly the information I was looking for!
You are welcome :-)
What the f, it’s an image thing , not a look thing ffs
My lenses are native RF with one exception: the EF 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS III USM. Thanks to eBay I got that lens with tax and shipping for about $1400, which is half the price of the RF before taxes and shipping. On a 20MP camera body the small difference in sharpness didn't feel worth double the price. Maybe one day I'll go RF for the portability, but for now I console myself knowing the EF one has internal zooming to keep it nice and sealed.
I have mainly moved across to native mirrorless lenses now, with the exception of a few EF lenses for architecture and landscape where autofocus is irrelevant. The optical quality remains the same, and something like the 20-700 f2.8 is mounted to the tripod via the lens anyway, so the adaptor become kind or irrelevant to the size of the overall setup. Canons RF lenses remain way too expensive, maybe one day they will open up their mount to sigma and Tamron etc.
can i fit a canon 2x converter between r adapter and my canon 24 x105 lens
Hi Bill, in theory yes as all of the fixing types are in the correct order, but I have never done it to say whether it will perform well. The adaptors are going to make the setup quite long and front heavy also. Depends what you are looking to achieve, but I have used and reviewed the RF 24-105 (both versions) and compared it to the EF version on an adaptor and I would choose the RF version every time. The cheapest 24-105 with variable aperture is actually my choice out of those three, very light and has optical stabilisation.
I have a question that i can't seem to find the answer for. I just bought a Canon RP and the canon adapter, but my Sigma 18-200mm lens doesnt work with this camera, because it fits the adapter pretty well but the images have a black ring on the sides of the images taken with this lens, and the camera doesnt seem to be able to fix it because it says that there are no ''data'' for the lens. Does anybody know if i can make it work? or should i just sell it and buy only canon lenses? im very confused at this point.
Hi Jud, I can hopefully clear this up. I used to have a Sigma 18-35 f1.8 lens which was designed for cropped sensor cameras. If you put it on a Canon EOS R adaptor the camera didn’t recognise it as a cropped sensor lens and therefore let you see the whole image circle, which is the darkened edges of the image. This is essentially the inside of the lens that you are seeing because it was meant to go on a smaller sensor camera. It probably says ‘EF-S’ on the lens instead of EF, which is full frame. You have two choices if you are using a cropped sensor lens on a full frame camera, either zoom in until you go beyond the darkened corners, or you go into teh menus and engage the 1.6 crop that Canon will automatically apply if you were to use a Canon EF-S lens. I hope this helps!
Most of the problems you have is with your own OCD and not with the camera and lens working itself
I know that. My OCD keeps me keen! But adapting is only the temporary solution until Canon have caught up with their RF lenses. No one would ever choose to adapt lenses if you could just exchange all of your EF lenses for RF equivalent lenses.
This video answered my questions! Thanks! New sub.
Sooo ... I love the look of the 50mm on the adapter :D maybe IRL I won't like it as much, but on screen it looks kinda interesting. The color mismatch is a bigger bummer.
My old ef 24-70 felt upgraded on an R because there were no micro-adjustments needed. The sensor focused the lens!
Really helpful video, I am about to swap to mirrorless so good to know I don't have to sell all my EF lenses!
i don't care about looks or how it looks, if it work that is more that enough for me
Rite
Someone told me you loose a 1/3 stop when converting. Is this bollocks?
I have never tested it. The theory makes sense, as extension tubes lose you light because the lens is further away from the sensor, but the adaptor is keeping distance the same as the space that the mirror occupies. I would therefore say its not true but it would need to be tested.
The ef 17-40mm L lens is the same as the canon eos R, still vignette or not
I don’t have that lens unfortunately- I have the 16-35 and the 24-105.
Please let me know that, a Canon EF 70 ~300 mm when fitted to Canon R8, via adopter, will CROP the image. Thank you.
This EF 70 ~300 lense was being used on a AP-C sensor Canon 80D
Hi Shoeb, I have not used an adaptor with any cropped sensor Canon mirrorless cameras (they were not released when I made this video), so I can’t really comment on this. I am sure there are others that have tested this though.
Sold me, buying r5, because I have a bunch of ef lenses. Don’t care about look, if I could save my old lenses. Thank you!
The R5 is an amazing camera. Enjoy it.
Is it worth buying EF lenses today despite of coming of age of mirrorless generation? I still have a perfectly working 5D3 and invested to L prime lenses. Thanks for your advice!
Hi Mark, this is the question. I would say that it depends on what you shoot and how long you can/will resist the temptation to upgrade? I switched to mirrorless because at the time there were no full frame DSLR’s with a flip out screen that I could make my RUclips videos with and shoot stills (with the exception of 6d mk2 which is meh). So I bought an eos r. I was perfectly happy with my 5d3, although I have to say that for shooting portraits mirrorless is much easier with face and eye detection. If you shoot landscapes then there is less reason to switch because you have live view things are a lot more calm and calculated. It’s probably a personal choice if you switch or not.
@@benharveyphotography thanks for your reply. Im more of a food photographer. I wanted to get the eos R6 but I dont have the budget 🤣 Now, I’m balancing the idea of needs and wants. I checked a lot of videos just like yours that EF lenses can be easily mounted to an eos R with an adopter at an ease. Plus that EF lenses can also be used to other non canon cameras like Sony and Red. But what do you think Ben? If its you, will you still buy the lens? Do you think it’s still worthy? Thanks
Hi Mark, the L series lenses are fantastic lenses. As long as you don’t buy them like you are making an investment - expecting to get your money back then fine. But they on the basis that you are going to keep them and they are a ‘bargain’ compared to the RF versions. I am keeping all my EF lenses.
@@benharveyphotography thanks Ben! Appreciate your replies! On your own experience using EF lenses with EOS R, is it almost the same like your using a native RF lenses? I know it’s not 100% the same but if the difference is just little and I can still get the quality of images and videos I need, I think I will keep using EF lenses. Aside that I don’t have the money. Haha
Hi Mark, I only have one RF lens - so I can’t really make a fair comparison. But I use my EF lenses on the R for portraits and landscapes, architecture and I have no complaints. If you are pixel peeping then the RF versions seem to be slightly sharper and you have the control ring to control ISO for example. You get more than just the same lens with a different mount.
Why you didn’t put the link for the adapter?😡
Hi, there are a few different versions. Here is the standard version without the control ring or the ND filters. www.canon.co.uk/lenses/eos-r-adapters/mount-adapter-ef-eos-r/
No reason canon couldn’t have kept the mount the same, while still improving the connection.
I am sure that it would have been possible, but using your existing EF lenses still requires a void between the sensor and the glass elements in the back of the lens to obtain focus. New RF lenses could then be redesigned to focus on the new sensor plane but they would still ‘sting’ us with the increased prices of the RF lenses despite the mount itself.
You're right, the RF 35 looks great on the R. I myself am guilty of thinking the same.... it just looks off, having an EF lens on the R5. Not to mention that the total length of the combination is significantly larger. I tried my EF 70-200 on both the 5DIV and the R5.... and the R5 combination warped the eyepiece in my backpack/bag. Just wouldn't fit properly anymore.
However, I do think some RF lenses are probably worth the money, but it's unconventional. For example, look at the RF 28-70 f/2. Seeing the optical quality (low distortion, sharp even wide open and in the corners) and the amount of light it let's in...it might be a replacement for several primes. I'd replace my 28mm f/1.8, 35mm f/1.4, 50mm f/1.4 and maybe 85mm f/1.4 with it, while replacing the 24-70mm f/2.8 as well in the process.
It's all about your style of shooting however. I mostly shoot portraits, people, events ... and even in a controlled set I like the flexibility of a zoom. While in your landscape work it's probably no issue to change lenses at all unless the rain is pouring down. :)
I did an interesting experiment about a year and a half ago. I put my 24 year old Canon 135 f2 against Sony’s latest G master 135 f1.8. The Sony was so sharp it hurt! Wide open. But when I shared the images online (note that I got the images as close as possible because canon and Sony cameras + dynamic range are different) people couldn’t tell which one was new and which was from the mid 90’s! So most of the sharpness benefit comes when we appreciate the images on a good screen or a high quality print. If you never do that then we are not getting the most out of the equipment.
I hope Canon can make a mirror less camera with EF mount, so that all the EF lens can still mounted without any adaptor.
That would essentially have a section in front of the camera (the same size as the adaptor) to create the gap to enable the lenses to focus on the sensor. They will never do that as they are promoting you to buy into RF lenses. Plus it makes the camera unnecessarily larger and only ever backwards compatible with EF lenses. Sorry!
No chance!
Well, the test shows that EF lenses on EF-EOS R adapter using with R5/R6 cameras are softer than native RF lenses.
That is quite a broad statement. The cheaper RF lenses (50mm f1.8 and 16mm f2.8 that I own for example) are nowhere near as sharp as an L-series EF lens. There is still a quality differentiation in RF mount as EF lenses. But generally the same lenses, say 100mm L-series has improved in sharpness in the RF version compared to the EF version. The adaptor doesn’t discriminate between which canon camera you put it in, so the RP, R, R7, R10 etc will all have comparable sharpness when using the adaptor when you are talking about lens sharpness.
Take into consideration also that many lens manufacturers rely upon lens corrections in camera/software, whereas older EF lenses depended a lot more on getting it right with the glass in the first place.
@@benharveyphotography Yes, I was referring to the test(here on YT) that shows same body(R6) and same lens(EF28-70 f2.8 and RF28-70 f2.8) that shows RF significant sharpness over EF lens.
Hi newbie here, may i know the exact name of "red circle" hanging in your camera? just like a button
Hey. It’s a peak design dongle, which works with their hand straps and quick release neck straps, bags etc.
@@benharveyphotography thanks for the info
Can I use a Canon R with a Zeiss Batis 85mm lens?
Canon and Sony have a different mount size - so it’s not possible. I use Canon lenses on a Sony, via the sigma MC11 adaptor however you cannot do it the other way around.
Hello, apologies if you covered this but do EF autofocus in video?
Hi Dan, absolutely. The continuous autofocus on all of the canon mirrorless cameras work really well, including with adapted EF lenses. I used to have an 80D and for comparison the adapted EF lenses on my eos R is just as capable if not better.
Does the adapter works with 3rd party lenses like tamron?
Hi Vincent, I have only tried it with a Sigma lens and that worked. Providing that it’s an EF or EF-S mount it will work but I don’t know about performance.
how about softness. saw a video claiming pics with the R lenses are way sharper , need to confirm if optical quality decreases when using the EF lenses .
Hello. It obviously depends what lenses you are trying to compare. The R lenses are redesigned, it isn’t just the same glass with a new mount, I would expect them to be sharper and better than their EF equivalent. But if you put an EF lens in a Canon mirror less camera it won’t be any different to putting it on a DSLR in terms of optical performance. It is just air between the sensor and the back of the lens element.
generally, RF L lenses is an upgrade from EF, technology, optical glasses, etc etc. so they expected perform better than the Ef L lenses.
i own 70-200 F2.8 RF and EF mount. the RF is very very good in term of image quality 10/10. sadly the price 1/10 lol...
Interesting video and good to know these EF lenses work even better on the RF cameras.
I just purchased a Canon R3 and the RF 70-200 f/2.8. I have two 1DX Mk3 bodies, 16-35 f2.8, 24-70 f2.8, EF 70-200 f2.8, 300 f2.8, 50 f1.2 and 85 f1.2.
I'm likely going to sell both 1DX Mk3s, EF 70-200 2.8 and 300 f2.8 which I can say is never used as too long for what I shoot. The 70-200 is my go to and the weight saving in new camera and lens is worth it. However, having the ability to re-use the other lenses which are only used occasionally makes the switch less of a financial burden - RF glass ain't cheap. The long awaited R1 just didn't seem worth the extra (or on hindsight the wait) to me.
Thank you very much for this vdeo !! I got a question though, is the focal lenght the same with the adapter ? Or will my 24 mm become a 32 mm or something ?
Hi Emilie, it depends whether the lens is an EF lens (full frame) or EF-s lens (cropped sensor). If you put a full frame lens on a full frame camera via the adaptor it will stay the same, therefore 24mm will stay 24mm. However if you put the 24mm EF-S lens on a Canon mirrorless the camera will automatically crop in and it will become a 36mm (24 x1.5 crop factor). I hope this makes sense. The adaptor is simply creating a space between the sensor and the back of the lens where the mirror used to be.
@@benharveyphotography Ok, thank you so much for your answer !! This makes perfect sense :)
I want to support you - do you have an amazon link?
Thank you Walid - but I don’t have any affiliate links set up. I appreciate the consideration though. I hope you gained something useful from the video :-)
Liked you video and also the way you interact/give advice to everyone in the comments. New follower!
Thanks Fred. Much appreciated.
Hi Ben....that was very helpful. By the way....you have a very honest expression style. :-)
Thank you :-)
I like this guy
Can someone post a link to the adapter
Hi Eddie, it is posted in the comments elsewhere but here you. You will find it cheaper on Amazon than direct from Canon.
www.canon.co.uk/lenses/eos-r-adapters/mount-adapter-ef-eos-r/
What about ef lenses on canon R50?
Hello. The Canon R50 wasn’t invented at the time I made this video, and Canon hadn’t actually made any cropped sensor mirrorless cameras then either, but the principles are the same as using lenses on a cropped sensor DSLR. Any full frame lenses on a cropped sensor camera will have the focal length times by 1.6 for canon and the performance will be equal to of better when adapting onto a mirrorless Canon. BUT if you are buying a small mirrorless camera, just get the RF lenses to go with it as the adaptor is another £100+ and adds weight and size to a small camera. Luckily Canon have actually produced quite a few affordable lenses since making this video.
So what adapter is he using…?
Hi Chica, I am use the Canon EF-RF adaptor. It’s the first one that they created before adding a version that had a built in control ring and another version that takes filters.
Is there any loss of light using the EF to RF adapter? If yes, how many stops please? Thanks as always...
Philip
NYC Area
It’s an interesting question because this does happen with an extension tube - however the distance between the back of the lens and the sensor is still the same, so I am very confident it is exactly the same amount of light coming in.
@@benharveyphotography Thanks for the reply.
I am actually more concerned with the R5 with battery life. My understanding (from other sources and reviews) is that the R5 battery will last about 250 to 300 shots.
If that is true, doing a wedding I'd have to change batteries about 5 times, where as with my Canon 5D4, I can do a whole wedding on one battery...(w/very rare exception I'd need to change the battery)...Thanks as always.
Phil
NYC Area
Hello. I have only played with the R5 pre-release, so I cant say that I have any experience of its battery life. I own an Canon EOS R, which will ‘suffer’ from the same battery use of the screen draining energy from it, however I have setup a shortcut for switching the screen to hibernate. I genuinely wouldn’t hold back from transitioning to mirrorless on the basis of battery though, they are very efficient, but I believe that burst Rate decreases as the battery life goes down, but I think that applied to DSLR’s also. I still have a 5d3 and a mirrorless camera and I use both, so I get the attachment to the DSLR, they feel reassuring robust in the hand when compared to mirrorless cameras.
@@benharveyphotography Thanks for the info and insight Ben. Appreciated.
As soon as the wedding market and photography gigs pick up again, I will likely still buy an R5 at some point. I do really like my 5D4 and even still have my 5D3 for backup, so all will be good for sure. Have a good day and thanks.
Phil
NYC Area
So, do only the efs lenses crop?
Yes, your full frame EF lenses have the same focal length when adapted. Mirrorless cameras have more in camera lens corrections and digital stabilisation that will add a crop, but they are optional and can therefore be disabled. EF-S lenses will incur an automatic crop as the camera recognises that it is not meant for a full frame camera.