Don't Buy Canon RF Lenses - I screwed up!
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 8 июл 2024
- Most people should NEVER buy Canon RF mount Lenses. There are better lenses out there for a fraction of the cost.
Buy the Canon 50mm 1.8 RF $99 with Code CANONSAVEBIG here - bhpho.to/43saeh1
Tamron 70-200 G2 2.8 EF - amzn.to/44169R4
Tamron 24-70 G2 2.8 EF - amzn.to/3qS28jl
Sigma 50 1.4 ART EF - amzn.to/3Pf62Nq
Viltrox Speedbooster - amzn.to/3p1fcCJ
Canon 15-35 RF 2.8 amzn.to/3H4Ztcj
Canon 70-200 RF 2.8 amzn.to/3iyhB4d
Canon 24-70 RF 2.8 amzn.to/3XNwAa
Canon 70-200 RF F4 amzn.to/3Y8aeRc
Best Audio Recorders
Tascam XLR-2D amzn.to/3hGN2JD
Tascam Portacapture X8 amzn.to/40kgMNM
Sennheiser MKE6600 amzn.to/3WyVfhw
Sennheiser MKE 416 amzn.to/3FRALKk
DJI Wireless MIC amzn.to/3upatJP
More Gear I use
Tamron 24-70 G2 amzn.to/3YDOa1b
Lexar 256GB V90 II Professional Card amzn.to/3PPLsBE
Godox X2T/ TT600 Flash Comobo amzn.to/3HXHVzp
Atomos Ninja V+ amzn.to/3YHB2Id
My Camera's
Canon R6 Mark II amzn.to/3ixYBmo
Canon R6 amzn.to/3VMqYve
Canon R7 amzn.to/3H0SWiV
Zhiyun Crane 2s amzn.to/3VLKc4G
Drones:
DJI Mavic 3 Pro Fly More Kit amzn.to/3Wgwo2i
DJI Mavic Classic amzn.to/3BWeg5R
DJI Pro Controller amzn.to/3GdBczL
DJI RC Controller amzn.to/3VeQQiV
Best USB-C Charger for Canon amzn.to/3Hc3LyC
360 Tour Gear
Samyang/Rokinon 12mm Full Frame amzn.to/3Y3GMvq
Samyang/Rokionon 8mm APS-C amzn.to/3Hm9D6S
Panorama Head amzn.to/40lyHnf
My awesome music - www.epidemicsound.com/referra... 
Кино
Definitely love this sort of content.
Too many youtubers just suggests the RF lenses as if all of us could afford it 😅
This has been my go to plan when getting the Canon Eos R8 and Im glad someone is sharing their experiences.
More so from you, someone whos definitely able to afford this lens as this is what youre doing for a living.
Really appreciate the cold heart truth. Cheers from Malaysia.
Greetings! Have you gotten your EF Lenses? I have an R8 with the RF 24-105 F4 as my workhorse, and currently in MY as well! Looking for an EF 70-200mm in the market. i would love to know what EF lenses you got. Cheers!
A good thing of the EF lenses is that it can be adapted to any mirrorless camera. I currently use EF lenses with Sony, Panasonic and Fujifilm. It's the best lens mount out there.
That's true! And there is a lot of good deals on that glass.
I am using my old Canon EF 100-400 Mk2 + 1.4 TC Mk3 with my new Fuji X-H2S - works amazingly, far better than it did on my 7D Mk2. But................ the Canon EF 100 L Macro does not focus well with the Fuji and works sporadically with insect specific auto focus. But RF glass and Canon's action against 3rd party lenses was reason enough for me to leave Canon for the first time.
EF can be used on older EF DSLRs AND Canon MLCs. RF only on RF bodies...a big issue. I understand why you can't use RF glass on EF bodies, but it's just a silly design from Canon imho. I'll only stick to EF glass for this reason.
All true - and you can shoot EF lenses with auto-focus, image stabilization and weather sealing on film with something like the EOS 1n or 1v. That's why I just recently bought into the EF system instead of any other full frame system.
EF lenses have the worst build quality. For the amount of money we pay we get cheap plastic. I own a red ring EF 16-35 f2.8 that snapped above the mount without ever falling to the ground.
Imagine this: my cheap apsc Viltrox lenses are all metal and light years better in terms of build quality than the red ring EF plastic lenses.
I sold my EF glass in '21 for top dollar, and quickly. Listings wouldn't sit for more than a day or two before a buyer would show up. Today, I see tons of EF lenses on Marketplace sitting despite crazy low asking prices. Too many motivated sellers trying to unload now has shifted the supply and demand. Great time to build a DSLR kit though, I've seen 5D IV listing for crazy cheap.
You are right! Those prices have dropped fast.
i just bought a LN 5d4 for $1500 to back up my 7-year-old 5d4
You can get some good deals on EF glass now. I think the coatings on the RF glass makes it better but you can get great results with EF if you know what to buy.
I love the RF L glass even at the price. I have several of these loved lenses including the RF 15-35, 24-70, 70-200 & RF50f1.2. I have a lot more EF lenses than RF lenses and will keep them as well. They work great for how I use them. I consider the RF lenses my core lenses and the rest are specialty lenses. Everyone has different needs and different budgets though.
I just purchased the RF 50mm f/1.8 per you B&H Promo. Thank you for posting the info. Your video has given me much info for purchasing lenses. Just purchased my 1st Canon Mirrorless Camera. Plan to watch your other videos. Very informative!
I haven't made the jump to Mirror-less, but you have confirmed the way I plan to go, keeping my EF glass and use adapters. Great video!
Thank you! That's the most cost-effective way to switch to mirrorless.
just be aware that some EF lenses don't retain full functionality on RF bodies. For example, an older mark 1 500f4 L will only hit 20fps and not the full 30fps on the R3, and DPAF coverage is ONLY 80% of the viewfinder, not the full 100% that the mark 2 500f4 enjoys. Does it matter in the field? Not really (at least, from my experience). The same applies to other older EF glass - my 70-200, non IS mark 1 lens works without issue. My 300f4 IS L too. And a host of other Canon EF lenses. None of them with performance hits like my mark 1 500f4 too.
If you have money you MUST buy rf lenses !!!
I so agree about the Tamron 70-200 G2. I have tried a lot of lenses (though admittedly no rf lenses), and the Tamron is my favorite. I never understood when people talked about colors from a lens until I bought it. The shots look pre-edited straight from the camera. I particularly like how it represents green (I always find myself adding some blue hue to greens in lightroom because yellowish grassy nastiness is gross as a background- but not with this lens). And yes, it’s tack sharp!
I loved my EF 24-70 mkii, untill the day it let me down bigtime at a wedding, due to the aperture control module inside packing up - a problem that apparently frequently happens to some of the EF zooms, after a few yrs of use. I am switching to RF now.
I partly agree. The telelenses rf 600mm and rf 800mm are not that bad considering the price of less than 1000€ (although they have a constant f11), and they work with the advanced autofocus of my R7, which you cannot say from ef or sigma/tamron lenses. But I agree that for macro, wide or standard lenses, you can go with ef lenses using the rf adapter!
I am 100% with you. I own the Tamron you mention and it is great on my R5. I kept all my classic EF glass and it isn’t always as sharp as RF glass but those lenses have unique character missing in the newer glass. The RF28-70 is my favorite lens but my adapted EF135 f2 is right there for way less money in terms of quality!
The EF 135 f2 seems like a really good option over the RF 1.8 version and you save $1000. How is the focus and detail with your R5?
Great informative video! I needed this.
Im glad you have this video. I have the Tamron 70-200mm 2.8 and was thinking of getting rid of it and switching to the RF version. But now I think I’ll keep it. I did get the RF 100-500mm and it’s a HUGE upgrade from the Tamron 150-600mm I have. That was a winner.
I did end up buying the RF 70-200 f4 and was blown away on how sharp and most of all compact & light it was for everyday use in my bag. I ended up selling the Tamron g2 because I just never took it out anymore. Convenience won in that battle. I find myself always looking at the RF 100-500 but not pulling the trigger. Do you miss the 600mm from the tamron? How is the weight and size? I liked the tamron 150-600 but way too big for me to justify bringing it places.
Thanks for this info mate. Well presented with no stupid unnecessary background music - excellent! Although I'm with Sony at moment, I'm thinking of jumping to Canon R5, so will go looking for more of your videos. Thanks 🇬🇧
I haven’t purchased any RF glass yet, because I just can’t justify it. The EF glass works so good on my R6. I recently picked up the EF 85mm 1.4 IS. It is so phenomenal on this camera. I also love the 100-400mm mark ii version and even with the 1.4x Teleconverter, it does a great job and takes sharp photos. The classic 135 mm F2 performs really well on mirrorless as well.
I have rf 24 1.8 - its AMMMMAZING lens !!!)) AMMMMMMMMAZING !!!
@@Dmitrii_88The EF 85/1.4 L IS is a great lens
Awesome review, I agree with you. I bought the R6 and R7, was too hasty & sold my EF lenses (with the exception of my EF 85mm 1.4) to purchase RF Glass. RF Glass is amazing, but I'm sorry I sold my EF Lenses. I mainly use the R6 paired with the EF 85mm 1.4 L and love it!!! I miss my Sigma 50mm 1.4 Art Lens, selling it was a "huge" mistake. I do have the RF 50mm 1.8, RF 70-200 F.2 and RF-s 18-150 all great lenses, but regretful that I sold my EF glass.
I use mostly EF L glass on my EOS R due to price. Usually buy second hand lenses! As an enthusiast and not a pro I can’t justify the new RF prices yet. Still love the camera and the lenses and I’m very happy with the results.
Awesome video Jared! There's some real gems on EF mount that I just don't think we'll see Canon release anything similar for a while. The Sigma 28mm 1.4 is one of my favourite lenses of all time.
I agree! I want to go on a renting frenzy now. The sigma 105 1.4 EF would be an interesting fit. Any experience with that lens?
Do the R7 with speed booster and the Tamron 70-200mm. This is outstanding information. Keep it coming.
To answer your question on EF glass... I got my dream lens for a steal last year.... 300mm f2.8 - it was rough on exterior but works fine. Anyway I used it with R7 and the images of birds for fun were amazing. It was actually too long at times. Worked perfectly on sports and portraits also. I am now getting R6 MarkII when it gets off back order July 3rd and cant wait to try it. Also use 24-105 f4 and 16-35 2.8 EF glass is great on the R systems. Good job
Enjoyed your commentary and advice. My current lense library includes a 50 mm ef 1.8, bought for 50 dollars at a pond shop, very noisy. Ef 17mm to 40mm L F4, Rf 24mm 105mm L F4 super sharp and finally Ef 70mm to 200mm L F4. Looking a possible blackmagic in future, with faster glass.
Check out B&H deal below for the RF 50 1.8 for $99. Not silent like your 24-105 but a big upgrade.
I'm on a R6mkll I use the RF 15-35 2.8 and the RF 24-70 2.8 but still use the EF 70-200 2.8 lll and it works great I love them all!!
I'm still using a 90D and there's not much between it and the R7 sensor wise. I have the Sigma 18-35 1.8 (APS-C Beast) and today I picked up a second hand copy of the Sigma 24-105 F4 for $400 (that's 1/3 the cost of a of new lens) and it is in mint condition, so along with a 10-18 and the Canon 75-300 IS USM II, I have a pretty well rounded hobby kit, which will convert nicely when I eventually purchase an R7 mark x. I don't see a compelling case for change at present. Yes they're lighter and blah but the sensor is not offering twice the value.
The new RF are made on new equipment and they are really sharp lenses. I bought a R5 in August 2020 with the RF 24-105 f4 and it is very sharp. In October I traded my other camera and lenses and only have RF glass now. Don't regret it at all. As with everything, it's horses for courses, everyones needs are difference
Everyone has their particular needs, but I personally couldn’t get away from using adaptors quickly enough. I only have my Sigma Art 24mm and 35mm that basically don’t have enough value to sell because I couldn’t replace them with anything. And they’re lenses I only use at weddings, so I don’t REALLY need to replace them anyway…so they stay and work great when called upon. But yes, I agree. The EF 24-70 versus the RF 24-70, I really wish I still had the EF. I will be sending my RF 24-70 into Canon for a third time in 2 years to have dust removed. It has honestly been a terrible lens for me beyond its optical performance.
You just saved me a lot of money! I am getting an R8, and now I’ll keep my old lenses. I already am getting the adapter anyways, but I won’t be in a hurry to get RF lenses or be tempted to sell my EFs for RFs. And you saved me $70 on my first RF lens!
I got an R5 a year and a half ago, and still only use ef mount lenses with it; I kept my sigma primes, macro and my 70-200 f4, I've bought a 16-35 EF since then, and plan to next get a 24-70 f2.8 II EF. I love the adaptor with a polariser always in place, and can use it with all of my lenses, and even when they have their lens hoods on!
Thanks Jared for this great video! I also "screwed" up. First I bought the R7 after long considerations. Found that the real desirable lenses (few) for the RF-mount are extremely expensive.
Then I bought some used EF lenses (70-200 F/2.8 and 300 F/4) which with adapters are just amazing value! These can even be used on my Fuji X-H2 (40mp) with a Fringer adapter.
I’m with you, man. I don’t understand all the angst over lenses for the RF mount when the Canon adapter system works so incredibly well. I LOVE the Sigma Art primes on my R bodies where they all share the same VND and CPL filters via the drop-in adapter, and pick up the bonus of IBIS. As for RF 24-70, looks like a great lens, and I’d take one. But, I just don’t love the “standard “ zoom enough to pay for it. When I “need” the zoom, I find the WAY cheaper Sigma 18-35 f/1.8 on the R7 will get the job done.
did you face any lens vignetting issues while shooting with 18-35 in your R series body?????
@@mohiminulahmedsami2150 nope. As an APS-C lens it’s perfect on the R7. Maybe you are thinking you could use it on a full frame R body. You can, but Canon will force the body into crop mode to eliminate the vignette. I have a friend who shoots that way and doesn’t mind the lower resolution for his particular use case.
@@Mariner1460 thanks man.. 😊 i am planning to buy R8... i may go for sigma 24-70....
Yep, as an RF 24-70 owner myself I think it's one of the few lenses worthy getting native (along with the unique ones). It focuses so much faster than any of my EF lenses do on full frame cameras to the point that I actually have to unlearn waiting for a brief moment after AF confirmation before taking the shot.
For other lenses less reliant on speed - eg an EF 85/1.4 - adapting is an excellent choice.
Just bought the 50mm 1.8 using the code. I wanted a light weight lens for the use on my gimbal. Fits the bill perfectly. The only lens I sold was the 50mm1.8 EF version to a co-worker.
I bought quite a bit of EF L glass over the past few years because it went for relatively cheap and because they are plenty sharp and I like the rendering better. The only RF glass I bought so far are 4 of the non L lenses, the 16, 35, 50 and 80. I payed around 1300 EUR for all four of them used and I like them because they are sharp, small and light. I can carry all four + my camera in a relatively small bag. EF L when it counts, RF for convenience. And: I bought a Canon 5D which I love and the EF L glass comes pretty handy here. Sharpness is not everything ;-) .... Thankx for the video and your thoughts on this matter !
EF all the way. I went from the Canon 600d which I owned for 3 years to the R6 last year, then purchased second hand EF L glass over the year rather than RF and use the EF/RF adaptor with control ring. I now have the 16-35 f2.8 L iii, 24-70 f2.8 L ii, 70-200 f2.8 L ii, 100-400 L ii and 85mm f1.2 L ii
I adapt EF lenses for my R5. They work great. The first RF I bought was the 28-70 f2. It is my favorite lens. I have EF 24, 35, 50, 24-70, and 24-105. 15-35. I don’t use them much at all. It has a prime look in a zoom.
yep kept the EF and did buy the meike slip in filter ef to r mount. I can put a polarizer on the lens and ND in the Meike for amazing images especially in water / reflected surfaces etc.
I to this day use C100 MK II’s for my video production needs. And I picked up an R7 to have a easier gimbal/broll cam. For the R7 I use the sigma 18-35 1.8 and the sigma 50-100 1.8, and the efs 24mm pancake 2.8 with the meike drop in vnd filter. It’s a bloody beautiful combination. I have zero need for EF glass, although I’ll probably grab that 50 for kicks 🤣 great vid, thanks!
I'm new to Canon's RF mount system so I only have two EF lenses with adapters. I have five other lenses which are all RF and pretty much cover all my needs. I do like the speed booster concept and may be willing to try it on some 3rd party lenses if Canon drags their feet much longer on allowing 3rd party makers to adopt the RF mount and start producing alternatives to Canon's overblown pricing.
You also better cover all your needs with 5 different, super expensive lenses.
Im personally pretty happy with this (very affordable, cheap) lens setup:
- 10-20mm 3.5 ultrawide (Sigma)
- 17-55mm 2.8 (Canon EF-S)
- 28-105 3.5-4.5 USM, very compact and useful or alternatively another cheap 28-135 3.5-5.6 IS USM (Canon EF/Full frame)
- 150-600C Sigma, my main telezoom after regretting once a too short 70-300mm.
But the thing is, mostly i have only 2 lenses with me and they serve me well enough for pretty much any needs except astrophotography or portrait where i would have to take sharper and faster primes.
- 17-55 2.8 Canon + 150-600C Sigma as somewhat acceptable small setup
- 10-20mm and 28-135mm for city trips, very tiny and light package. Alternatively to the (garbage!) 28-135 the premium "kit lens" 17-55 2.8 but its mostly too short without additional crop
I shoot with that Tamron on my R6 mkii, and it's absolutely amazing. I shot with the RF version side by side, and there's ZERO reason to buy the RF, unless weight is an issue for you.
Still rockin' several EF mount L lenses on my R6 MK II, but 'll be glad when 3rd party RF mount lenses are available.
I have an R7 and I am mainly using either the RFs 18 - 150 mm or the EF 100 - 400 L II. Not planning to buy RF lenses as they're either too expensive for the good quality glass or too slow on the affordable end. I have a number of EFs lenses that work with the R7 + adapter.
I already have a full set of Canon EF glass so I don't need to pick RF versions. So, just for travel purposes, I bought three non L RF lenses: 50 f1.8, 15-30 and 24-200 zooms which cover everything I will need and are a lot lighter than the L glass.
Everyone on my channel has told me to sell all my EF lenses. I’m glad I have followed my gut feeling and not done that. For the more the more I use Mirrorless cameras, the more I want to gravitate back to dslrs. If you notice I have not made any video for almost a month I have gone back into finding myself paying off all the credit cards, which I have done and now the question do I need the next greatest thing or so-called greatest thing because the new lenses are awesome but how much better are they. They can in 28 to 70 if two lands is one exception that is worth spending the money on if you want to replace at least 3 EF primes. I’ll make a video on that. The 50 mm 1.8 RF and the 16 mm 2.8 are a steel for what they are. Keep up the good work, and you are a good man however, this kind of sound advice for light suit well with the gear junkies that want a new camera and a lens every two weeks.
You are right! A lot of photographers buy and sell gear all the time. I have actually been using canon since Canon AE-1 Program. Learned in a dark room in the late 90s. I do get the itch to try new Camera bodies and used to own panasonic G7 and GH5, but when Canon went mirrorless they filled those needs. What Tech Enthusiasts like us need to remind each other is that no gear is worth going into debt over. I pay cash for all my gear, so it hurts when I buy something. Makes me really have to think about it and make sure its worth my money. In practical terms I think about how many jobs does it take to cover the cost of that equipment and then I sober up ;). Took me 3 months to consciously set aside money and save up for my Macbook Pro Max. The 28-70 f2 would knock out a bunch of primes and be excellent. This stage of my career I like the idea of portability and the RF f4 lenses are more attractive to me. I look forward to seeing your next video.
I bought my first RF 'L' lens for my R8 yesterday -- the 24-105mm F4. I seriously considered the Sigma Art 24-70 f2.8 (roughly the same price), but went with the RF due to it being much lighter (700g vs 1kg), more compact, and the extra reach. Another big (but possibly odd?) consideration for me was filters; I used to shoot with the Canon EF 24-70 2.8L (ver 1), until it died of natural causes, and so I still have a bunch of quality 77mm filters for it. The 24-70 EF and RF options have moved away from that size filter, but the 24-105 still uses it, so that has saved me hundreds of dollars.
I have the 24-70 2.8 RF and although it is tac sharp at 2.8 I am considering the 24-105 RF because of portability in travel. Lighter and more compact. I’ve been shooting with the 70-200 f4 RF and I can’t believe how good the IQ is and how small it is. I owned the EF version 1 ten yrs ago and the quality was good on that.
I'm running R5. I will never part with my EF135mm L 2.0. It's sharp (enough) and most importantly, organic in image quality. For theater and ballet, my use, it's a steal and full of beauty
That Tamron 24-70 is a great lens i kept the 16-35 f4 and I sold off all my ef glass and went out and loaded up on really good vintage glass.
Thank you so much Jared for putting up this video. I'm in the process of deciding which new R series camera to pick up and it looks like it's going to be the R7 but then I was. Looking at the art lenses and their way out of my range? Especially if I pick up the R7 camera so I have a bunch of the EF lenses not a bunch but a few you have a bunch. I have a few I just have to dig them out of my garage since we moved. But this is a good video. I learned a lot thank you very much.
My next video will talk about the R7 with a speedbooster. Aiming to release it tomorrow morning if I can finish the edit tonight so Stay tuned.
Thanks for this video. I still use all EF L series lenses on both my R and R6ii using the standard canon adapter. RF L series glass is crazy expensive. I’m in Canada and Canadian retail prices for RF L series fast lenses nearly start at 3k and up… The EF L glass already costed me a lot to build my kit (wedding kit) I don’t want to go through rebuilding it again. I still have them cuz I had the 5d4 before upgrading it to the R6ii. For the EF lenses I still use in my wedding photography kit is for zooms is 16-35 f4L is, 24-70Lii, 70-200Lii, for primes I have the 35Lii, 85F1.4L is, and 100L macro & they all work well with the adapter. I use to have the 50f1.2L but I sold it a whiles back and want another 50 again. Was looking at the RF 50L but the price scares me away from it. So the RF 50mm f1.8 and the RF 35mm macro is tempting cuz of the much cheaper price 😂
You may also want to rent an RF L lens first to compare the experience with your EF.
@@JaredHoyman thanks. Never thought about that. 😂
Hi Jared, I personally uses the meike adaptor with built in ND with all my EF lenses on my R6 2 and totally no regret, I find the RF too sharp and prefer the EF softer look for video, For my bmpcc OG and 4k with the speed booster I can also use the EF lenses. In fact I have a whole range of super takumar lenses with EF adaptor and find the soft look so organic. Like you said, its much cheaper. Thanks for the Video 🙏
I use my Sigma EF 50 mm f1.4 Art and the Sigma EF 105 mm f 2.8 on my Canon R6 and they are both amazing
I'm deep in RF lenses...deep. But I still have the trinity of EF lenses, the 85mm F1.4L IS USM, and a 300mm F2.8L IS USM and have no plans of selling any of them. But its not why some may think. Having those EF lenses allows me to use legacy DSLR's, which I love. There is just a character on older DSLR's that I can't let go of. I know RF and mirrorless is the future so I'm ready there, but I love using older cameras as they still produce some amazing results. I'm also looking at film photography. If I were to purchase a 1V or an EOS 3, I'd be ready from day one with a bunch of great pro glass to start experimenting with film photography. RF and mirrorless is the future so keep chipping away at it, but keep that EF glass. Its still extremely valuable and useful.
Me too. I adapt EF glass to my Sony cameras. Good lenses, and reasonable for what you get.
Thanks Kanye. I'm buying a Canon R5C this week. Been researching Lenses. This was interesting food for thought. Thanks.
Canon EF lenses also adapt perfectly to Nikon Z with the Fringer EF-NZ adapter. I use my Canon 100-400 IS I with my Z6ii and Z8 and AF works like native.
I started buying used EF lenses when I had my 90D, had 1 EF-S the 10-18, first lens was the 70-200 F4, eventually bought an older 28-70L 2.8, the 17-40, the 70-200L IS II, 100-400L IS ver 1, and the Sigma 150-600 C. Grabbed a few yellow ringed EF lenses, the 85 and 100mm macro with the anticipation of eventually going with a RF body in the near future. I bought the R7 right away with the kit combo as that was all that was available at the time. Picked up the RF 16, RF 50 and the 100-400 so far and have been happy with them. I am a hobbyist, would I like some L series RF glass? Sure I would, but I can't justify the price, as a full time photographer it makes sense to invest in those lenses and write them off for the business. Never been a Tamron fan as it seems the AF is slower from reviews I've seen, which if AF speed isn't a issue they might be a option. I'm shooting more with the R6MII than my R7 now, it is just a better camera all around, but I wish it has a 32 mp sensor vs the 24.
Tamron 10yrs ago was very slow. They have greatly improved. I love the reach you get on the R7, but full frame does give you nice wide shallow depth of field. I did just buy the canon 70-200 f4 rf refurbished on canons website for $1,350 so you can get deals. I'm still in the real world testing phase, but I'll report back in a upcoming video on my thoughts of that lens.
such a great reminder that the ef lens didn't stop working just because a new rf one came out. I screwed up also, one of my all time fav was my 70-200 2.8 ef ii lens, my best images were from that lens from the past 15+ years (maybe had the non is version before also) i sold mine for cheap thinking i'd upgrade to the rf version one day. these days i shoot prime for some reason, i don't know why, i can't get past the f1.2 bokeh everything stage. i shot my boys running an obstable course yesterday and the 85 1.2 rf focus was spot on, rarely missed focus, the issue was framing, with a fixed focal length some shots needed to be cropped or it was too close. a 70-200 would have been much better for that situation. my other thoughts was the 135mm, i want the rf but it's so $$ and i rarely use the focal length, so i'm looking at some used 135mm ef lens just to sastify that itch. first world problems keep up the great video! new sub here!
Welcome aboard! I picked up a 70-200 f4 rf, but still hanging onto my tamron 70-200 2.8 g2 ef for similar reasons you stated. Mobility and price of the rf f4 is great, but the option of adapting ef to non canon bodies and using speed booster on the r7 is a nice option.
Great job!
I think everyone has to find their own way even if you have no ef glass. My experience is that RF autofocus speed and sharpness are a step up, however they don’t appear to be as durable or sometimes as comfortable to use (coming from a dslr user with plenty of EF glass). Right now myself I would like a RF super zoom say at f4 to keep cost down and I’m also interested in a speedbooster for my R7
I don't know if they sell it anymore, but I got a locking EF-RF speedboater from viltrox that is pretty great. All the benefits of PL on EF. Love it.
I have an R6 and used to have a 2nd hand Sigma 150-600 on it. I became frustrated by its occasional poor performance. After a lot of soul searching I bought the RF100-500 and I do not regret it. I don't miss that last 100 mm . I love the close focus. I no longer need my shoulder harness when out and about I can hand hold for hours, I'm getting much better shots, it is my main lens.I bought an EF ii 70-200 f2.8 2nd hand for my R6 and love it, but what a monster weight and pushed out by the adapter. I can't see a time when I'd by the RF 70-200.
I've eyed the 100-500 for the last few yrs. I may have to rent it. How is it for travel and weight? That's my big concern.
@@JaredHoyman I think it's good , small and light. I use it a lot. Great for Landscape and almost macro whilst out doing Bird photography. By my standards a hell of a lot of money but worth it
Great video once again.
I almost bought the Tamron you have used. Up her in Canada is was $1100 on the used market.
I decided to get the RF 70-200mm F4($1,900 Can) because it's small and the weight is under pound. Also the Ra6mark 2 can handle very hi ISO which also opens up a new door to F4 glass. I already have Bigma Sigma lenses 150-600, the 14-24f2.8 and 35 F1.4. They all work great and are also amazing. I never regret buying Sigma .
For Canon glass I have 50mm F1.8 and my boy " Old Blue" Canon 24-105mm f4)
I have to tell the EF glass work amazing on my Canon R6mark 2.
If you want to think about being practical and base things on what you need vs what you want. Ef glass or 3rd party EF will get it done every day.
That being said me buying the RF 70-200mm F4 kinda makes me a hypocrit. Lol.
I did pay more but I needed something small easy to carry for a 2 or 3 day shoot.
Just today us RF users will have more options with Sigma finally coming to Canon RF System.
Anyways using the adapter for me works great , auto focus is incredibly with every lens I have.
The only mistakes made is from me.
Perhaps with 3rd party coming soon to RF the used EF glass will get even more cheaper for the rest of us.
Thanks for commenting and I love hearing about people getting the RF 70-200 F4. I wouldn't sell my Tamron 70-200 2.8 G2, but I have been thinking about getting the 70-200 F4 RF for travel and street photography. The fact its a pound or less is awesome! My G2 weights a ton! Most portrait photographers stop down to F5.6 anyways to make sure the subject or subjects are in focus, so the F4 wouldn't bother me. BTW...all Photographers are hypocrites. It's admitting it that makes it OK.
@@JaredHoyman Lol. I guess the first step Shangula is admitting your a hypocrite.
Yes the the 70-200 f4 is sharp and at 100mm and especially 200mm you can get really blurry back grounds.
I would say this lens is as sharp as a Sigma but has that Bonus of light weight.
This lens is about the size of the 24 -105mm perhaps 1/4 inch longer.
Its amazing how new technology can these lenses , smaller and faster.
You are all selling me on the idea of getting the 70-200 f4 RF...STOP IT! You had me at hello. Dang it...now I have to explain to my wife why I bought that too.
@@JaredHoyman ok I will stop. I don't want to trigger your GAS
@@JaredHoyman The 70-200 F4 RF is a great lens, I got it second hand and it is one of my best buys. I have a R6m2, like to shoot indoor sports in poorly lit venues (about EV 7). I normally use 1/1000, F4 and ISO 8000 to ISO 16000. After processing with DxO 3, I get sharp noise free pictures. The low light performance if the R6 is amazing, this combo leaves the F2.8 unnecessary. However I still regret selling my Tamron G2 70-200 F2.8, built and heavy like a tank but great quality.
I prefer EF to RF because the adapters add some versatility. The Metabones Speedbooster Ultra actually very slightly improves image quality due to the compression of the light path. It is like when you interpolate and image to a larger size but then print it smaller. Also, since I shoot the R7, carrying a regular adapter and the speedbooster is like carrying another lens. With the speedbooster any FF lens will be a stop faster & more wide angle, but with a standard adapter that same lens is slower and more telephoto.
An adapter with a filter slot allows me to put filters on my bulbous extreme wide angles, which I could never do before.
Plus I have lenses that canon doesn't even make, like my 6.5mm FF ultra wide, 8-16mm, 300mm catadioptic, or my 300-800mm f5.6.
I’m still wondering if I should go with a 55-210 mm RF lens, I think this video just gave me more insight on just buying an adapter instead. Thanks a bunch.
Jared, thank you for a very cool informative video. Just two days ago I bought the Canon R6ii (before they reduced the $$$!) and my first lens to go with it is an RF 85mm f2. After watching your video you made me realize that you have a point. As an enthusiast its really not worth the cost for such a premium price to pay for RF lenses. So buying an adaptor to go along with Sigma EF lenses makes good sense. Although my question to you is (as of now) would you be patient for Sigma to come out with full frame RF lenses or would just simply go out and get an adaptor and buy EF lenses? Your input would be greatly appreciated.
From a carry around lens I love the rf 16, 35, 50. Those are great small and relatively cheap lenses. However I will always keep my ef l glass. It’s hard to beat.
I rely on my Canon R7 with a number of RF lenses, primarily the RF 100-500 zoom, which I use for birds and wildlife. It's a fantasic combination: lighter than the EF lenses I replaced, the OIS works well with R7 IBIS, and the image quality is simply stunning. While I appreciate your perspective I wouldn't trade my system for anything. In the end, I guess it depends on your specific application.
I agree! I wouldn't give up my 15-35 rf. It my money maker and nothing compares. For many people an EF will fit their needs while deciding what direction they want to go.
@@JaredHoymanI previously used the Sigma 150-600C with the EF mount. But I experienced "AF pulsing", which has been described by others with both third party and older Canon EF lenses, where the AF doesn't keep up (there is an excellent series of RUclips videos by Duade Paton with more details). Although I was initially reluctant to "move up" to the RF 100-500 due to the price, it also eliminated this problem, which was mildly frustrating, in addition to the other advantages I mentioned above. It seems to be very lens-specific, though.
EOS R8 user here.
My current lens: Canon RF 24-105mm f4 IS L USM, Tamron 70-200 f2.8 G2 and Tamron 35mm f1.4.
I'm planning to buy a RF 16mm f2.8 for wider end but if have extra cash will buy RF 15-35mm f2.8 instead.
Another person made the comment, but I will reiterate it. Glass will outlast the bodies we buy and in most cases are more important for the image. The 15-35 2.8 is amazing if you can save up for it.
I have an R7 with a sigma sport 70-200 2.8. Great lens, great combo for indoor sports. I shoot ice hockey. I picked up a rf 70-200 f4 used , for travel purposes. The rf is 1/2 the size and weight. What I didn’t expect was how much better the stabilization is with the rf r7 combination. The rf is tack sharp every time! The sigma has stabilization but isn’t as good. It has replaced my sigma 2.8 shooting indoor hockey even at f4. I’m debating on a sigma 24-70 2.8 or rf 24-70 2.8 for indoor concert photos. The rf 70-200 f4 has me leaning toward the rf version.
We are in very similar boats. I have the 24-70 2.8 RF and it performs amazingly at indoor events. My Tamron 70-200 2.8 G2 is super sharp, but weights a ton. I'm about to pull the trigger on a Canon 70-200 f4 RF. If I do portraits I'm either stopping down to 5.6 or shooting a Prime wide open.
I totally agree with you .. if you guys don't shoot extremely fast subjects then the Tamron is more than a good lens to choose from
And even so...most of my ef glass has gotten quicker to focus with the R6.
Thanks for a promo code, man. It worked great, got this 50mm 1.8 for half price at B&H, subscribing now to you channel. Great practical content, useful tips- what’s not to like?
I"m using the Canon 180mm L 3.5 Macro with my Nikon Z and Sony. Bought it used and yes heavy but I just really like the images I'm getting from it. The R7 with speed booster may be in order.
Using the EF Holy Trinity+ (70-300 instead of 200) with my R6II. The RF lens is still too crazily expensive now. Only got the RF 24-105 kit lens that came with it.
The size and weight of the true Canon RF glass is "worth their weight" versus the savings of buying the EF Canon or Tamron/Sigma versions combined with RF adapters. With my old Canon 70-200L IS I use to use a monopod all the time, but now with the RF 70-200L IS, I took the collar off and rarely shoot with a mono pod when using that lens.
You're right! The weight is a huge difference. All my L series RF glass is amazing. I'll keep my tamron 70-200 g2 but because of the weight I'll pick up the 70-200 f4 rf for walk around and travel. There are some amazing features you can do on the R7 with adapted Glass like the speedboosters.
Still shoot with 5d3 and will soon go over to mirrorless. Was thinking about changing brand because they are so god Damn expensively and no middle ground with great third party options . But this made me rethink and just keep my ef lenses and buy a r6 or something . Plus now that tamron and sigma announced they will start making rf-a lenses that gives me hope that in the future I can buy native sigm at lenses I sure love them )
Buy the R6 mark II for better battery life, or the R8 (has the same sensor)
. :)
Excellent. Thank you for this video. I am moving EOS R mirrorless and your video is an excellent help to rethink not selling the EF lenses.
Did you create the R7 with speed boost.? Would love to watch it too.
Yes…I have a speedbooster vid out there.
I don't really care about additional sharpness of RF glass, but I am envious of smaller dimensions:
- EF 70-200 mesures 3.3" (84.6mm) Ø max by 7.6" (193.6mm) long, 44.205 oz. (1,253.2g), no collar
-RF version measures 3.54" (89.9 mm) Ø max × 5.75" (146.0mm) length. 37.7 oz. (1,070g) no collar
It's only 6% fatter, but 33% shorter and 17% lighter. That's substantial.
That does make a difference. I have the 70-200 f4 rf and it's smaller and lighter than my 15-35 2.8 rf and 24-70 2.8 rf. I keep it in my bag all the time because of weight and small foot print.
the idea I can get an adapter is a life saver for my budget and great need for f2.8. .. luckily I can get the 24-70 mm Ef used and get the adapter and still save heaps of $. I'll still put my sigma prime lens towards trade in though because all I need is the 24-70 mm lens. no real need for prime lens as I would have thought.
This is basically why I haven't bought any RF lenses, or sold any EF lenses yet. The EF lenses can be adapted to Sony, Panasonic, Olympus, and maybe more cameras in addition to the Canon RF cameras. Now I buy manual focus lenses in PK mount for brand agnostic mirrorless lenses. I haven't made up my mind yet if I'll buy RF lenses or just jump ship, but I doubt I will be buying a whole set of lenses for any mirrorless mount, most of them are wacky prices and they're all super proprietary, wheras with the manual focus lenses, I'll be able to use them on whatever mirrorless camera I prefer at any given time. I think the lenses I'd be most likely to buy for any of the mirrorless mounts would be the manual focus ones too, since they're generally pretty cheap. I can't see going out buying a two or three thousand dollar lens that's more proprietary than one I could have for under 1000, if I haven't got one like it already.
I am a quite newbie in this area. I have recently bought R10 and RF 50mm f1.8 STM lens. I mainly do street photography and planning to click portraits. I am planning to buy a zoom lens. Should I invest on the RF 24-70mm USM lens. That's quite pricy though. Please suggest me what should I do.
You may one to try the canon 24-105 f4 Rf. You can always rent it first to see if you like it. Here is a link where to find it for purchase. amzn.to/3ZvUnNv
However the rf system as a whole is much more light weight, has better autofocus motors and sharper so professionals shooting sports, photo journalism and people freelancing can fit more in their bag with the full frame bodies offering more to their clients giving a reason to charge more.
Sigma 28-35mm 1.8 on my R7
Curious if the speed boosters works with that lens
Honestly, when I got my R, it had pretty bad compatibility with EF lenses, being slow, struggling to focus, and just not working right. However, after a few updates, most work fine. Now with an R7, I use my two Sigma lenses most (50 1.4 A, and 150-600 C). The biggest surprise had to be with two of Canon's most well known lenses. Generally, prime lenses are seen as better than zoom, but some lenses I tried were weird. The Canon 50mm f1.2 L EF lens was absolutely horrible! When I compared it to the RF version and the Sigma 50 f1.4, the Sigma came out on top if you don't mind a slight focus noise, and a metal case rather than plastic. But the EF one was not great on the R. And with the 70-200 after the updates to the firmware, they're pretty much the same, but the RF one is faster, so I like it better for birds. But the other surprise is that the kit lens from the R, the 24-105, doesn't work nearly as good on the R7, as when I use the Sigma 50. Either Sigma is that good, or that kit lens should not have had the L series label. I traded in the EF version with the camera that it came with, and now I wonder if the EF one works better on the R7. I might have to borrow a friend's and see what it does. I do hear that in both cases, the 24-70 is better, and I used the really old one with the weird lens hood that was attached to the part of the lens that didn't move, and it was great at the time, so if I could afford it, I'd like to see what they'd do. But for now, I'm going to keep my eyes out for used Sigma lenses at my local store.
I just picked up an F4L 24-105 is II for $500 CAD and a F4L 70-200 is for $450 CAD. They are both in perfect condition. So many pros dumping their EF lenses right now you can really find good deals. For F2.8L zoom or a Macro lens I would go with the RF for the better light gathering and the control ring, but for F4 it literally doesn't make any difference for a general walk around lens.
I have most of the RF L zooms, but I am tempted to either pick up a sigma 24 1.4 ef art or a 24 1.4 ef L. Sigmas is pretty affordable used and even new.
Still sporting mostly ef glass. I love my sigma sport 70-200, and my daily carry sigma 100-400.
Thank you. I ended up selling almost all my EF L based glass for RF L back in 2020 and 2021 when upgrading my original R body to the R5. That was the 50/1.2, 85/1.2, 100/2.8, 135/1.8, 15-35/2.8, 24-70/2.8, 70-200/2.8, 24-105/4, and 100-500. I still have my EF 300/2.8 L, 35/1.4 L II and rebought my 70-300/4-5.6L. Was it silly, maybe, maybe not. Will see what the R5 II is. The new RF 35/1.4 L VcM is nice but… Also shooting Sony and own a lot of their GM, GM II, and G glass. Need to decide what to do but really like your post. Take care.
Thank you! What did you mean by “decide what to do”? Was it about getting the 35 1.4 RF or just having Sony glass supplement? As a Sony and canon shooter what do you like about Sony compared to canon? I’m always curious since I have never shot Sony.
@@JaredHoyman I need to decide if I continue to shoot both Canon and Sony or just commit to one or the other. Originally shot Canon DSLR like the 5DIi, 5DIIII, and 5DIV along with a 1DX. Started to really like mirrorless for its smaller size so bought into first Fuji and then Sony.. Both Sony and Canon are great systems but Canon has been extremely slow in bringing out top quality L primes less than 50mm and while I like f/1.2 lenses (owned EF 50/1.2 L and EF 85/1.2 L II) they didn’t refresh their 35mm, 24mm, and slow on getting to the 135/1.8L and some others. Also Canon restricted offering of third party is becoming a bigger problem as Sigma is really producing very high quality DG DN Art lenses at a reasonable price. Also, Canon’s bodies take for ever to come to market like the the EOS R5 II taking a year of rumors and I’m still not sure what we will get. Also Canon’s new hybrid approach to lenses like the new RF 35/1.4 L has me questioning what the lens is best at compared to the 50/1.2L and 85/1.2L I already own.
The biggest mistake I made is to purchase the RF100-500 and sold the EF100-400. Why? Because the RF Extenders limit the RF100-500 to the 300-500 zoom range. Never thought that will bother me, well, it turned out it does, extremely. Despite of that, the optical quality of RF100-500 and RF Extender x 1.4 are awesome. Don’t have the RF x 2.0 Extender, can’t say anything about it.
The only EF Mount Lens I have is the Sigma 150-600mm f/5.0-6.3 and it is awesome
I use sigma/tamron primes on my R5 and no need to update but I'm happy I sold my tamron 70-200 2.8g2 and bought the RF 70-200 2.8. images look the same quality wise but the reduction in size and weight means I carry the lens more and not leave it at home so often like I did the tamron.
I upgraded from 7Dii to R7, and purchased a Sony A6600 before the R7 was even announced.
I use EF 70-300L, 100-400L mkii, sigma 150-600 contemporary, 100mm L macro, sigma 17-70 f2.8-4 OS HSM.
I have adapted all my lenses to the A6600 and they well reasonably well. You do not get edge to edge AF, and the ficus speed is slightly slower. I do have 3 Sony e mount lenses one being sigma 18-50 f2.8 which is a great sharp lens.
As for R7 all the Canon EF L glass works amazingly well, especially the 100-400L mkii. The sigma do have slight pulsing even after firmware updates via the Dock.
What I am writing for ( if the rumours are true ) is sigma RF 17-70 f2.8 for APSC RF cameras. I will buy this lens if it is available, as can jo have no decent fats walk around lens for ASPC RF cameras.
Sigma 3rd party rf will be a nice addition.
My first video of yours so can't really comment on the channel content yet, but really enjoyed your presentation and manner, nice work Jared. 👍
Thank you! I appreciate it!
I have been a photogarpher for 53 years and have no plans what so ever to switch to MILCs. I am perfectly happy with my EOS 5DsR (51 MP, FF) and 90D (33 MP, APS-C). And my EF 11-24mm, 300 2.8 II, Sigma 24-105 Art, Tamron 45 1.8 and 90 2.8. And a few more. (a Sigma 135 1.8 are incoming...). Ps. I rarely miss animal-AF.
I think mostly depends on your work. I still have both ef and rf, and as I still the sigma ef 35mm 1.4 is pure magic, I will never regret to buy the RF 24-70 because is the most versatile lense I have owned, focus fast, reliable, and gogogochopchop beast. So more than good and bad, affordable or stupidly expensive lenses, is more about your style, how you work and what kind of photography you do, at the end, a lens is a pure tool.
Agree!
I don't know I compared the EF 24-70mm II with the RF 24-70mm and the picture quality is about the same the AF too. Also I prefer the mechanical focus ring compared to focus by wire of the RF. The EF L is build like a tank and the RF L reminds me on a chepo plastik lens. I saw a RF 15-35 L fall apart for no reason at all, broken on the barrel before the mount. So I doubt that the RF lenses will last for decades like the EF did. Also I recently got a Tamron 24-70mm G2 with the Tap-In console for 450, sharp, fast and reliable AF and the EF 16-35mm F4 for 400 bucks or, I just bid 310 on a EF 100 L IS Macro and it's as good as mine . Soooo I don't see much advantages in RF right now.
I have been enjoying your presentations on the Canon 50 mm F1 .8, your presentation
why not to buy Canon RF lenses and less one that I saw was on I was fired. There is quality information in your presentations. I currently have a Canon RF 6 and 7. I use the following EF lenses on both cameras: the 24-105 mm F4 L, 100-400 mm F4-5.6 L II, 70-300 F4-5.6 L. when you did your presentation on the reasons for not buying Canon RF lenses you brought up the Viltrox Speedbooster .71.that interested me I have a concern because I had a Viltrox EF-RF adapter that was not good and had to be replaced with a Canon adapter. I want to use it with my R7.I'm concerned about the quality because of my prior experience. Do you recommended for use with the above lenses?
Thanks for watching. I'm currently testing it with the r7 and 70-200 g2 tamron. This should be in this week's video so hold off till I give my thoughts. With all 3rd party adapters there are pros and cons and I'll do my best to lay them out so you can decide for yourself.
Im planning on picking up a R6ii soon and will keep my Zeiss Classics. I can't wait to try out the manual focus aids. Currently using my trusty 2012 6D.
I use to own the 6D as well. It was an awesome camera.
Update: I purchased the R8 and used the savings to get the Contax Zeiss 135 2.8 and 25 2.8.
I love my RF glass. Don't care if it's expensive. Third party lenses just aren't as sharp by my eye.
went all in on the rf system: R5, R8, and lots of rf lenes including some L lenses. absolutely loving the rf stuff! that said, i have decided to keep some of my favorite ef gear: 90D, 70-200 f4, 50 1.8, sigma art 30mm f1.4, and a few others.
How do you like the 30mm sigma art? I've been tempted to pick up the 24mm prime.
@@JaredHoyman havent used the 24, but the 30 is a great little lens 👍
A video on the R7 with speedbooster would be good. How sharp is it?
I have the R7 with the EF 85 1.4 IS - it's amazing on a cropped body. I also use the EF 70-200 2.8 and the EFs 10-22 which don't miss a beat. I have the RF 50mm 1.8 which is optically pretty identical to the EF. The auto eye focus is a game changer with these lenses - almost a 100% certainty of a sharp shot of people and pets. I can't work out if the IBIS works with them though.
R7 and using the Viltrox speedbooster with a Sigma 24-70mm.
I have the R7. My current lenses are the RF 35 1.8, EF 70-200 2.8, and sigma EF 150-600. Just using the standard canon adapter. I’m happy with the results, but am curious if buying the speed booster would make enough of a difference to justify its cost. My next purchase most likely will be the RF 14-35 4.0 unless a better deal presents itself.
I think a speedbooster test would be a good comparison. I'll work on that.
@@JaredHoyman I am most interested in whether the speedbooster only gives more light or if it also affects better bokeh and blurring of the background.
@bilfoto it does both. I made vid on it a week after this vid.
Hello Jared.... So I just came across your channel and I did subscribe. I'm now retired and taking photography more seriously. I'm picking up the Canon r5 body and would love your opinion on a good everyday budget lens near 20-100mm. Are your choices in this video still it or have you found something better....thanks
I actually would highly recommend the 24-105 F4 RF ruclips.net/video/qZOwoWmCL_k/видео.htmlsi=xJ8VyPJyJGp6WvM9. Watch the video and I left affiliate links where you can get it at a reasonable price. The 24-70 2.8 is nice but the 24-105 gives you a tone in a smaller and lighter form factor.
I don't have any EF glass since I got into photography with the RF mount, but I will echo the price of the L series RF lenses. I actually just did what you mentioned and went with the 24-105 ƒ4 and it's a sharp lens. At the end of the day, I traded in the variable aperture kit lens and put it towards the L series lens. It was worth the investment given my limit amount of hardware. The bigger dilemma I have is if I should invest in EF glass with an RF mount camera. It seems kind of like going backwards, but there are some lenses where there isn't a well priced equivalent. A great example is the 100-500 RF glass versus the 150-600 Sigma EF glass. I have noticed that Canon has cut prices on a lot of different lenses. Maybe a few more of those cuts and sticking with RF will be worth it? I don't know.
I did a video a few months ago comparing the Tamron 150-600 and that is a beast. There is a huge difference in L series glass and I believe buy nice or buy twice. There are very nice sigma and tamron lenses though.
I love my Sigma 150-600! I got the C version rather than S because I like something lighter to carry around outside looking for birds and animals to photograph, or even at a concert getting photos from the back. the 24-105 RF came with my camera, but I find the Sigma ones do just as well if not better. If you want to get into portraits, I'd definitely recommend finding a used Sigma Art prime lens (I have the 50, it's great, but I've heard similar good reviews of the others), and for animals, the 150-600 is great, and even the 800 f11 from Canon's RF line isn't bad, but I still prefer the Sigma as the zoom and wider aperture makes it more versatile.
Jared I Feel your pain ! In 2020 .My wife decided that we would go Mirrorless! So we got on line to B&H photo. We bought 2 EOS R 's ,which at the time was the only one available .the R5 may have just come out , but it was crazy expensive . She got the 15-35 F2.8 , the 35mm 1.8 macro ,a 70-200 F4 . She got me the 24-70 2.8 and the 100 -500 F4.5/7.1 . She had the 24-105 f4 that came with her EOS R . I bought the 50.18 RF .I sold a lot of my EF glass to B& H . I still had the 16-35 F4 L and the 100mm 2.8 macro L series. I recently sold the 100mm 2.8 to B&H and was selling my 16-35 F4 to them but they couldn't buy because they said it mad a grinding noise when they mounted it on a DLSR. They are sending it back to me. I used it on my EOS R with the adaptor and it worked great ! My plan now is to get the RF 100 .28 macro from B&H . I guess I will keep the 16-35 for now .I think it will work great with the adaptor . I figured we more in Glass than what the cameras cost . My thing is , the Native RF glass is better than the EF, well sorta . If you have the coin get the RF glass .If you don't get the adaptor and you will get amazing images!
I don't disagree with you. If you have the coin get RF, but for most people the EF will perform well and no one will know the difference. I'm finding the lighter weight build of the RF and the compactness makes all the difference in my bag. I've been tempted to get the 100-500 RF. How are you liking it? Also, the 100mm macro rf has always interested me, but I'm not sure how often I would shoot macro.
@@JaredHoyman I love it it is nicely sharp . I prefer to use it with a tripod . The reach is handy . But as you know they don’t give them away . The 100 Rf 100 is just creamy and crazy sharp . I sold my Ef 100mm , which bought used back in 2015. I was going to sell my EF - 16-35 F4 which is an amazing lens but the bayonet ring had some scoring on it . I put my Ef adapter on it and Rock and Roll baby !
I have my R6 ii arriving tomorrow. I have the EF to EOS R adapter. The only question is if I buy "new" lenses, do I fork out lots of money for RF lenses or do I save lots of money and buy good used EF L glass.....? I have no plans to replace my 100-400 ii with an expensive RF 100-500. For sports we shoot jpg for onsite prints so I can use my R6 ii in 1.6 x crop mode if I need the extra reach.
My advice is to use it with your existing lenses for at least a week and see what you think you may want or need. Prioritize your lenses based on what is the money maker and aim for that to be a native RF L lens. Mine is the 15-35 2.8 RF and that was my first lens and the one I use every day for my business.
There are some third-party lens issues with the Canon R cameras. For example, the Sigma 150-600mm Contemporary (which is a fantastic lens for the money) has focusing issues with the R6 and even greater issues of focus pulsing with the R6ii. Sigma originally claimed compatibility but now admits there is an issue. At present, they do not have any known plans to resolve this.
Tamron has worked well on my r7 and r6 ii.
Your correct about the Sigma 150-600mm.
I have that lens with R6MARK2.
I do have the jumping focus point problem at times.
The tell you truth it's not that big of a deal. The auto focus still works 100 better then any of my DSLR did.
I may have low standards considering I upgraded from a Canon 6D mark1 . Lol
I have used both Sigma 150-600mm Contemporary and Sports. Sports doesn't have pulsing issues and faster / more positive focus grabber. Currently using the 150-600mm sports with R6 and R10
Good video...RF16...RF35....EF100/2 or Tamron SP macro 90/2.8...EF300/4 IS USM...2 RP bodies.
...but... as I am 70yrs young... I prefer to shoot my m43 gear...
cheers.
M43 is underrated. I loved my gh5 and mavic 3 m43 is an amazing image.