RF or EF? Which Lens is BEST for Your Camera? | Ask David Bergman

[@brianode11]

I’ve been using all my “old” EF L glass adapted on my R6 for a few years now. There’s just something about how some of the older EF glass renders images.

[@swistedfilms]

My 70-200 EF paired with my R6 looks amazing! It helps that the R6 is basically a 1 DX Mark III in a smaller body. It's the same sensor and processor combination. And it's a BEAST! I once took a shot on the fly and didn't have time to lower my shutter speed and the ISO shot up to 4000 and it still looked incredible! The color was all still there. I've been tempted to get the R6 Mark II but I just haven't been able to justify it for the shots that I'm taking with my R6. But maybe I'll treat myself later this year.

[@KaarloMedia]

I've been using and buying new (used) EF glass for my R5 during my four years of owning one. The only use case where there's a discernible difference in RF vs. EF is high paced sports shooting, where the RF linear motors and other mechanics can keep up better with fast moving subjects. The MASSIVE benefit of EF is adaptability. I can use the same lenses on my cinema cameras without any hassle. The RF lineup doesn't even have some of the specialty lenses I've grown fond of. I'm a full time professional for both video and photography. I'm currently rocking (and loving): - 8-15mm fisheye f/4 - 14mm f/1.8 - 24mm f/1.4 - 35mm f/1.4 - 40mm pancake f/2.8 - 50mm x 2 f/1.2 + f/1.4 - 85mm f/1.4 - 100mm macro f/2.8 - 70-200mm f/2.8 - 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 + 1.4 extender

[@DR_DOOM_3298]

I shoot a 5D mkiv & an R6 and am still exclusively using my EF glass on both and will be for the foreseeable future.

[@jonathantr4932]

I am using EF lenses on my R6. It works great, just as fast as before, and actually improves the old glass because I now have eye detect auto focus and all the modern tricks of a mirrorless camera even though I'm mostly using EF lenses.

[@PeteCocoPhoto]

Great vid as always David. I didn't buy a good RF lens until about 2 years into owning the R5. Until then I used the 70-200 f/2.8 EF (original version) and it does a great job. But once I got the RF50mm f/1.2, I couldn't believe the difference in detail and even dynamic range. That's my favorite lens for my portrait work right now.

[@razorbackphotos]

Being a long time 6Dm2 serious amateur shooter doing mainly landscapes and nature, I didn’t have the big need for high end glass. I built a decent kit of EF glass focused on that but recently with the prevalence of good EF glass being dumped on eBay, I’ve increased my inventory of higher end EF glass (mostly L) at ridiculously low prices. Recently I joined the mirrorless side with the addition of a R6m2 and then during BF sales this year, added a R5. Now having updated EF glass kit, L and non-L, and use of the adapter, I find it works great for me. I’ve started adding some RF glass as I can. I still have the 6Dm2 but don’t shoot it as much anymore. Love your focused clips to answer real-life questions. Thanks. Landon

[@stubones]

My EF lenses are best because they are already paid for and get the job done... My EF lenses work beautifully on my R6 ii and R3.

[@samtoscano6891]

I agree. I retired a few years ago and am a bit more discerning as to where my 'disposable' income goes. Photography is my main hobby and while I'd love to have a couple of the newer RF lenses, I have EF lenses that cover the mm range. As I get older, weight of the glass may become a factor and I'll trade up to the RF lenses at that point (if my vision holds out, lol).

[@stubones]

@@samtoscano6891 Same boat. I do make most of my income from photography, but I'm not wealthy by any means so my EF lenses will stay. I'd love to upgrade at some point, but not yet,,,, Happy shooting :)

[@ME2K23]

​@samtoscano6891 indeed, price of RF lenses is crazy!

[@mjpt57]

@@samtoscano6891I’m retired too so that gels with me. I had an EF70-200 f2.8L. Great lens but big and heavy. Bought the RF70-200 f4L. when it was on sale. Shorter and much lighter. I do miss the f2.8 capability with it, though.

[@anthonygargiso2536]

I felt the same way and then I bought the RF 50 1.2 and it was game over. Bought the rest of the RF lenses I needed within the year and sold my EF for a fraction of the cost. The RF's just work better and who wants that adapter on their camera? The image stabilization on many of the RF lenses is unreal. I still have the EF 16-35 on the adapter. It works fine but I just don't like having it on the camera, feels dated. I bought a lot of the RF lenses used for 30-40% cheaper. Photography is a side job for me.

[@odysseepictures-michaelmul9334]

I must say I was very happy to see this video but not for the reason you may think. I was watching videos from David and other on a regular basis until....COVID!!!. Then the world changed and everyone went into hiding, including my subscription to the channel. I then happened to find this in my youtube feed and I am happy to say that I have subscribed again. Great content as usual!

[@HulonPhillips]

Great video! Just got my first mirrorless and I’m using all my old EF L series lenses. Love my R6 With my 24-70 2.8 but can’t wait to get the smaller 70-200 2.8 looks so much lighter and manageable.

[@JaredRibic]

I never knew that RF meant "Reimagined Focus" I also started with the EOS R and used the "control ring" adapter so I could continue using my EF lenses. Later I upgraded to the EOS R5 and started adding more and more RF lenses. By the time I got to the EOS R3, I was 100% RF glass, although I do keep my EF lenses and adapters as a backup. Loving the RF 28-70mm f/2L and the RF 135mm f/1.8L IS.

[@garyrobinette351]

I think the best approach is to keep those EF lenses and use them with adapters on mirrorless camera bodies until they fail. The only RF mount lens I purchased was the 600mm f4 because that is my daily driver and I wanted to lose a couple of pounds of weight carry around. I have found that my EF lenses work extremely well with the adapter so there is no big rush to change everything over.

[@andrewcvisuals]

I don't know what it is about the EF-L primes specifically, but they have a very niche look / feel that I prefer over most other lenses in the price range, including the new RF versions. For clarification: I'm currently shooting on a Blackmagic 6KFF for video and an EOS-R for photo. So it's also nice that I can adapt them to both systems.

[@michaelclark9762]

Back in the EF era Canon's lens designers made decisions based on a lens' intended purpose. If a lens was being designed to make portraits, it was designed with things like smooth, creamy bokeh given priority over things like flat-field performance needed for use cases such as document reproduction. "Portrait" lenses weren't flat-field corrected to within an inch of their life just so they would perform better shooting the edges of flat test charts. This was because that same flat-field correction also causes out of focus areas when shooting three dimensional subjects to be a bit harsh. These days, though, if anyone wants to sell lenses they must bow at the alter of the God of the Flat Test Chart. Even if one wants a specific lens to use imaging a three dimensional world, they must accept lenses with their first design priority to reproduce perfectly flat, two-dimensional test charts carefully aligned parallel to the camera's sensor.

[@JohnEboyee]

I've got some wonderful EF L glass and a 5DIV and 7DII. Picked up the EF-RF adapter on sale a few months ago. I'm moving methodically and should be all RF in about 15 years at this pace.

[@Mariner1460]

I have a slightly different take-get the lens that best meets your own criteria, regardless of the mount. That’s the real beauty of the RF mount and its adapter system. That reduced flange distance is a huge gift to lens designers. For photographers, it just means we have more options. Although RF lenses have the potential to be technically better than EF, for the reasons you mention, that does NOT mean that they are always the best choice when considering one’s next lens. For example, I have totally switched over to all R bodies, but I have not “upgraded” any lenses from EF to RF. Instead, I have bought RF where it offers new capabilities (e.g. 28-70 f/2) and EF when there is no “better” alternative (e.g. Sigma 28 and 105 f/1.4 Art series.) Sure, if I were shopping for something like a 24-70 f/2.8, I would likely get the RF, if budget allowed. But, that’s because it is probably the best of type available, not just because it mounts natively to R series cameras. Shopping for a fast 35 prime? I’d probably go EF (Canon or other.)

[@photoquent]

What a great question! I have been using Canon's mirrorless cameras for just over four years now and I am still using some old EF glass, where it is simply not cost effective in upgrading. I have had no problems with the adapter and it has all worked seamlessly. However, RF glass is amazing, especially some of the new lens types such as the RF 24-105 F2.8 and their primes are simply out of this world; the RF50mm 1.2 is probably the best lens I have ever bought. If you are using the EF 100mm macro I would highly recommend upgrading as the RF version is incredible. However if you are using the EF 24-105 F4 (especially the EF MK I version) I would recommend that you do not upgrade as it is not worth the cost. The new flange distance does have some disadvantages, especially with teleconverter. So if you are using the EF70-200mm with either the EF 1.4 or 2.0 teleconverter then if you upgrade to the RF 70-200 you will be unable to use the RF teleconverter. I believe, but have not tried but you can use the adapter then the EF teleconverter and then the EF lens - but I am sure someone will tell me you cannot!

[@StephanieFerrante_]

Hey. I upgraded my camera from the Canon Rebel t6 to the Canon R50. I made the decision to get the adapter and use my older EF lenses. For me it made financial sense to do that. I enjoyed the video. Thanks for the content and hard work.

[@destrewilliams6589]

I love being able to use the drop-in filter system with all of my EF lenses on my R5 via a Kolari adaptor.

[@ivannachoo]

For me, i have stuck with EF. Even though I dont own a canon DSLR anymore. I find the autofocus to be more accurate on the R bodies with EF lenses. I can also adapt EF lenses across other brands like Sony, which I have used with great success. However, there are some new RF lenses, which do not exist in EF form (ie. 200-800mm) i would like to try. But at the end of the day, get what you need to get the image you want. These are just tools.

[@nitakayg]

Mix and match. Kept the EF 24-70 2.8 ii and my EF 400 mm 4.0 DO ii. Incredible lens, no RF equivalent, it has an adapter attached to it at all time and I can add 12K to the retirement account.

[@PhotogPilot]

After moving to Micro Four Thirds back in 2012 (it served me well), I've decided to go back to full frame with an R5 II and the new version of the RF 70-200 Z as the first purchases. The sale of my old system offset the cost substantially and I intend to expand the RF stable when the need, and finances, allow.

[@timhughes4259]

I have a great collection of EF glass (mainly L primes) from 11mm to 600mm which was adapted to a pair of R5s, and now a pair of R1s. I’ve tested some RF lenses including the RF 28-70 f2 mentioned and prefer the results from the EF primes in that focal range. I have switched to the RF 85 1.2 and RF 135 1.8 that’s all so far. I see a very slow transition - thank you Canon.

[@charliehawkins7479]

I don’t have any problems with ef-s and the adapter works great you can pick up efs and ef for very reasonable price for the most part until the price comes down a bit on the rf lenses

[@steve-4045]

I have a Canon 6D II and a range of EF lenses. When I decided to upgrade, I considered getting a 5D IV when I found a good price for it, but decided it made more sense to get something more advanced. I decided to consider a mirrorless camera, though I really like seeing through the lens with an optical finder. I did realize that I was using Live View fairly often, so thought an EVF might not be too much of a switch. Instead of getting an R-series Canon, I got a Fujifilm 100S. As long as I would be having to buy new lenses and adapting old ones, I might as well switch to a new system. I wound up getting two GF lenses and using two EF lenses adapted. The latter work so well that I don’t feel an immediate need to buy more GF lenses. So as expected, I found myself in a similar situation as those moving from Canon DSLRs to Canon mirrorless.

[@RWAquariumPages]

For rapid firing, i believe some ef lens won't shoot at max fps in mechanical shutter

[@mltv5736]

not only in mechanical actually. Some old supertele have artificial limit on fps even in electronic shutter mode. I have 200/2 myself and on r1 and r6m2 it is limited to only 15fps, while lens itself is capable of much more. I think, that some of first gen IS or pre-IS supertele have the same issue

[@michaelclark9762]

@@mltv5736 The lens is not capable of more. The servos actuating the aperture diaphragm aren't fast enough to go more than 15 fps if one desires to AF between each frame. Face it, the EF 200/2 was introduced in 2008 when the fastest EOS body ever made was the EOS 1D Mark III with 10 fps maximum frame rate.

[@50GTMach1]

I was using version one Canon ef 16-35 2.8, version one 24-105 f4, and a version one 80-200 2.8l {I purchased the magic drain pipe in 1996} last year I upgraded the lenses and the 5d mark 3 camera to R5, 15-35 2.8l, 24-105 2.8l, and ef 70-200 2.8l viii. So sometimes the upgrade deciding factor is how old your gear is. I found the Rf Image quality is much better than the version one ef lenses for sure.

[@jamessipos6817]

Good piece on lens mounts. I am into Nikon with the same situation. Currently have a D70 & D810 with four lenses and a Z30 & Zfc with three lenses. I use the “D’S” for close to home work and the “Z’s” for travel. So far it is working out pretty good but there is always when no matter where I am that I wish I had the “other” outfit.

[@Tumbleweed1961]

I'm currently shooting a 6D and R6 with adapted EF glass. I have one lens that had been rather frustrating on my 6D and that is the Sigma 150-600 C. When I first bought it I was using a T3i prior to upgrading to the 6D. The frustration with this lens has been focus searching and front/back focus with the 6D. The focus search was expected and not severe, but the F/B focus was nonexistent on the Rebel. It was the 6D that gave me fits with F/B focus and no amount of micro adjust solved it. I resigned myself to using it strictly on the T3i. long comes the second hand R6 and the lens has found its way back into my full frame stable. The focus search dropped some, but the front/back focus went away completely. When it hits and locks focus it's spot on. Sharper even than some of my FD L and SSC glass I have adapted. futher info needed. I used the Sigma Dock to micro adjust to the T3i and did micro adjust in the 6D body. Since it held focus on the Rebel I decided it was a communication issue with the 6D body and stopped combining them. Having given the Rebel to a new shooter early last year I've reset the lens to factory default and use it strictly with the R6.

[@jamesdavis9987]

I have heard that if you have late model EF-L glass it’s very similar to RF glass and with a Canon adapter you may not notice a difference. I agree that native is usually better, but lots of late model EF L lenses can render professional quality results.

[@craigpiferphotography]

I haven't bought any new lenses since I got my R5, so I'm using the adapter and am happy with it. At some point, if I need a new/different lens, then I'll likely go the RF route. At least now I still have the flexibility to use my old 40D if needed.

[@rickymundy8663]

David what a great tutorial. Before I bought my first mirrorless Camera the Canon R5 I had to do a lot of research. I to own big assortment of EF type L lenses both prime and zoom. The articles concerning which lens are best the using with adapter EF or the R type were all over the road. Before I decided to purchase the R5 I called Canon tech support. I needed to know that after spending money on the R5 that the quality of my photos would l be less using my EF lens with adapter on the R5. The tech told me the exact same thing as in this tutorial. The tech explained the the adapter was only a spacer to main equal distance from the sensors. I made the purchase to the R5 after that call. I’m glad I did as my EF lens make very good pics with the R5. I too have two older non R cameras. I plan the covert to R lens. I will hang on to my EF lens until I have no need for them. Thanks again for the great tutorial. Your viewers should know that your opinions matter and you are very knowledgeable. Thanks again.

[@paulbernardi2597]

Great advice as always David! Love all of your videos.

[@petrpohnan875]

I am using EF and RF lenses on my R cameras. I use EF when there is no substitution in the RF lineup like Sigmas 40/1.4 and 105/1.4. And also I keep the EF 70-200/2.8 III since I did hate the long throw if the RF and non-compatibility with teleconverters. A HUGE advantage of the EF lenses is thet I can also use them on my GFX medium format camera. And especially those two Sigmas mentioned above just shine on it.

[@HR-wd6cw]

If you still have a dslr in any system (Nikon, Canon, or Sony) then you should stick with the DSLR lenses (as all three offer an adapter for their mirrorless systems) for as long as you have the DSLR. If you don't plan to use certain lenses on the DSLR and only the mirrorless, then buy those in mirrorless form but you cannot use them on the DSLR due to their design (and for all manufacturers, their DSLR and ML mounts are different). (For Sony, this is their A mount on the DSLRs and E-mount on mirrorless, in case anyone though they used the E-mount on the DSLRs). That being said, some older lenses may still be nearly as good as the newer lenses and may cost a fraction of the price, so there are times that even if you don't have a DSLR, it may make some sense to buy older DSLR lenses and adapt them to save money and still get good image quality. But ideally for the best results, aside from the exceptions mentioned above, you should try to stick with mirrorless lenses for mirrorless bodies. The flange distance and also the diameter of the mount have played roles (for Nikon and Canon at least) to allow them to make some lenses that were not possible on the EF and F-mounts such as super fast lenses like you mentioned -- f/2 zooms and even some f/0.95 lenses like the Nikon Z 58mm Noct lens, although there were previous "Noct" lenses that were fast, but those I think were limted to f/1.2).

[@JGZphotography]

Could you explain the differences in data communication between RF and EF lenses using an adapter? I assume that the lens optics are of the same quality as Canon L lenses and that light is not considered operational data.

[@tarjei99]

Using an EF lens with the RF filter adapter is rather attractive. E.g. the polarisation filter with an EF 100-400 ii on my R6.

[@LeCitadin1960]

I'm in both teams. I used to have a 6D Mk II and a 70D, so I had EF lenses, a Tamron 24-70 G2 f/2.8 and a Tamron 70-200 G2 f/2.8. I love both lenses, so when I sold my 6D for an R6 and my 70D for an R7, I kept both lenses that I'm still using today. I also own a Canon RF 100 Macro f/2.8 and the RF 50 f/1.8 lenses. For my R7, I also have the superb Sigma Art 18-35 f/1.8 that is dedicated for the EF mount. It used to give focusing problems on my old 70D, but now it works perfectly well on the R7. No more back or front focusing problems.

[@garrywatters1140]

I have an R5, R6 mk2, RP and finally a 1dx body. I kept all my L glass and use an adaptor and find they all work just as well as they do on a DSLR. I have an assortment of RF lenses as well and find that they are superb.

[@mstrathmore]

I still use my 16-35 on my R5. Over time I have moved to RF, often financing a new RF lens partly with a sale of an older EF. Here are my thoughts: 1. EF glass is great. 2. RF glass is better. 3. The size and weight advantages of RF really make a difference, especially when travelling. 4. Lenses like the 100-500L are almost impossibly good, with mirrorless enabling apertures and small sizes that just weren’t possible before. 5. If you’re travelling, you can almost get away with a single RF lens: the 24-240: it has no right to be this awesome given how bad it looks on paper, but it is. 6. For things like wildlife photography, I find the autofocus superior on RF (which may be subjective). Finally, I wouldn’t go and buy the same lens in RF that you have in EF, simply to have the new version; however if some of the benefits above apply and you have the cash, go for it!

[@markconnelly1806]

putting a filter into the lens body from the side will increase chance of dust getting into the lens?

[@jaytcapinpin]

I have been using EF lenses since I began shooting in 2011. When I switched over to mirrorless in 2018, I adapted my EF glass without any issues. My clients are happy = no need to upgrade.

[@countrykilo]

Started with Canon m50->RP->now R8. I'm still rolling with my ef 24-70 m2 (still holding off for rf version) but traded ef and upgraded to RF 50 f1.8 and 70-200 F4.

[@gregfisher216]

We both the EOS R in 2021 . We bought all RF glass because at the time we could .The lenses are quite expensive . I slowly traded in my EF glass on RF glass. I still have a 16-35 F4 EF which is a fantastic lens even using the adaptor . I couldn’t trade it because camera store said that mount was messed up . They don’t make the 16-35 F4 in the RF mount . So I guess I will keep it for now .

[@robcoventry574]

Great video as usual, David. One thing I would add is frequency of use and convenience, similar to your point of “at your own pace”. I upgraded my 24-70 and 15-35 first. Then I got the RF 100-500. I’m still hanging on to my EF 70-200 because I don’t use it as often. I want to upgrade badly for convenience because I hate that adapter. It makes the lens too long to carry.

[@Kiwi0Six]

Now have an R3 & R5 (& a 5D that my husband borrows - posting from his account). started with the adapter and one RF lens, but only buying RF lenses going forward. Selling off my specialty EF lenses and will sell them all once my husband goes mirrorless. I love the capability and small size of the RF lenses!

[@BrianKilgore-b4d]

When I bought an R8 I got an RF kit standard zoom lens and an RF 85 f/2. Lens. And I bought 3 Neewer adapters, which live on an EF 50 f/1.8, an EF 35 f2, and an EF 70 - 300. Everything works well. -- BAK --

[@reinhard8053]

I used the EF100-300 on an R7 and wasn't happy. The AF just didn't work well. And no stabilization. So I switched to an RF100-400. I mainly use special lenses as EF (Macro...) and the EF-S 10-22 on the R7.

[@lrfarias]

Since 2022 I've been using a EOS R + Control Ring adapter. Never had any locks or bugs. It has been flawless since ever. I don't have RF glass (Im still collecting EF lenses).

[@AlainLafleche1]

I use my fujifilm x-t4 using EF lenses with my Fringer Pro, i also have fuji lenses. I have also a Full frame Canon 6d MK II where i use my ef lenses. No problems, everything work fine for me :-)

[@Michaelcohnmedia]

I’m in the same situation. My only question is if I use a EF 85mm prime on my R with the adapter is it still 85mm and does the framing area or aspect change at all?

[@samtoscano6891]

Thanks for bringing up this topic, David! I'm mixed body - 5DIV and R6II. Still use all EF lenses, both prime and zoom. What I've found on the R6 is that some of the lenses function better than on the 5D - maybe my imagination, dunno. E.g., the EF85 1.2 used to be a difficult / temperamental lens on the 5D but it rocks on the R6 - much faster focus and sharper. It's like rediscovering a lens on the R6. Same with my EF500 4.0, much faster on the R6. I'll eventually upgrade the lenses to the RF, but I'm in no hurry as I've invested in EF 'glass', which was the philosophy for many years. Some of the newer RF lenses have peaked my interest, so I may add selectively going forward. I was on a shoot yesterday where I used both bodies and it gets a little confusing remembering how to use some of the older features on the 5D especially, since I use the R6 as my main camera most of the time, e.g. moving the focal point - R6 shows there is much to be desired when switching to the 5D.

[@swistedfilms]

Your experience with the EF 85 f/1.2 is common. It always had problems on EF bodies, and it seems that a lot of that was the fault of the autofocus that simply couldn't keep up with the demands of such a fast lens. But the RF system gave that lens new life. But I treated myself to the RF 50MM f/1.2 and let me tell you, that thing is SHARP! And it seems that the 85MM f/1.2 RF is just as good. I haven't been able to justify getting one but maybe someday. You mentioned that 500 f/4. I'm going to look into that. I'd like to see how well that does out in the field for wildlife.

[@thomastuorto9929]

It is the AF of your R6II that is rock'n compared to your 5DIV that is rock'n. All the reason to upgrade to mirrorless!

[@samtoscano6891]

@@thomastuorto9929 It is. I simply love the option on the R6II that locks on the eyes - be it a human or a bird / animal. This eliminates much of the need to focus and compose on the 5DIV.

[@samtoscano6891]

@@swistedfilms The EF500mm / R6II combo works well with bird photography. Locks into the eyes quickly so you can minimize the number of out of focus shots. Good luck!

[@andrewade7017]

Great video David as always! I just purchased the R5 F4 24mm -105mm kit during the holidays from B&H at a fantastic deep discount to complement my 5D Mark IV, EOS R and 1DX cameras. I plan to add 2-3 more RF lenses down the road (hopefully, Canon will allow 3rd party lens makers access to the RF mount for full frame cameras in the near future). Unfortunately, full transition to RF mount lenses will not be possible for me as I also heavily invested in the now discontinued EF-M camera (M50 II, M6 & M6 II) line along with a plethea of EF-M lenses from both Canon and Sigma. Similar to the EF to RF adapter (I own all 3 versions), Canon also produced a EF to EF-M adapter (I also have the Viltrox EF to EF-M speed booster adapter) that allows me to use all of my EF "L" and Sigma EF Art lenses on my EF-M camera bodies. Lens camera life should be simpler!😂

[@janplexy]

I hate the adapter, but I love my EF 70-200, so much better build quality over RF

[@TeddyCavachon]

I bought an EF 24-70mm 2.8 L and EF 70-200mm in 2004 when finally upgrading a DSLR and didn’t make the jump to mirrorless until 20 years later with two R6mkII bodies I got with the RF100-50mm and RF800mm f/11 for photographing birds and small animals. I waited for the R6mkII because if the desire to shoot video and with 24 or 30 fps Clog3 @ ISO800 I find it much more convenient to control exposure using my EF lenses with a VND EF-RF converter instead of a VND on the end of the lens. I’ll shoot stills with the RF100-500mm on one of the R6mkII bodies and the EF24-70mm or EF70-200mm on the other with and without a EF 2x converter I also have. The only EF mount lens range I’ve replaced with RF is my EF-S 10mm-22mm which still works on the R6mkII but only in crop mode and with an effective FL of 16mm - 35mm. I replaced it with the RF10-20mm f/4 zoom for the R6mkIIs but still use the EF-S 10-22mm on my 50D.

[@StarLightDotPhotos]

Thanks for the great video, David!

[@cliquemediaproductions]

I've upgraded several lenses to RF. I have two EF lenses, and I am not sure when or if I should upgrade them since I have an adapter for my R5 C.

[@nickditoro]

I've taken a slightly different turn on the subject of using EF lenses and adapters. I recently traded in several Canon bodies (both DSLR and mirrorless) for a Leica SL3, which uses L-mount lenses. I kept my Canon 7D Mark II for sports, however. Since I still needed EF glass for the 7D Mark II, and am not able to immediately afford L-mount lenses, I chose to buy a good EF to L-mount adapter by Sigma. Other than a slight delay to achieve auto-focus, my Canon EF lenses work beautifully on my Leica camera, sports excepted.

[@a.k.1960]

Please give the details of the adapter as I am in the same dilemma. Thank you.

[@rangersmith4652]

When I bought my R10, I already had a number of EF and EF-S lenses. I'm keeping my Canon DSLRs and my EOS 650 film camera. I've bought some RF lenses, especially physical small ones, but I'm not duplicating any of my EF/EF-S. They work quite with the Meike adapter.

[@truthseeker6804]

use original adapter for optimal result

[@JBoy340a]

Just moving to a R5. I plan on replacing my 100-400 with the 100-500 for Wildlife shooting.

[@ojones_photo]

I run two R6ii and still have an 7Dii collecting dust. I'm currently mixing and matching the EF glass on the R bodies and slowly upgrading. The bigger the glass the longer it will be before i can move over to the R version. However i own a 400mm EF III and its optically identical to the RF version and i save money buying EF over RF.

[@blackpat28]

been shooting the R6 with the EF adapter since 2021 . never had any issue . but i think it different for everybody . the adapter fit can make or break the experience

[@HanifBarnwell]

Same , not sure what the hullabaloo is about.

[@raymondforbes4295]

I don't bother upgrading my current lenses (35/1.4, 85/1.2, 24-105/4) as they work great on my R5. Instead, I just added RF lenses that enhanced what I already had. In my case that was the 24-105/2.8 and I am sure I will add the 28-70/2 at some point.

[@villageblunder4787]

Still waiting to buy my Sigma RF 35 f1.4.

[@timewellspent2009]

I'm still using EF L lenses on my R6. Glad to know that I'm not loosing image quality.

[@michaelclark9762]

Well, yes and no. You're not losing any image quality versus using the EF lenses on EF bodies. But if the RF "version" (i.e. same focal length and max aperture) of a particular lens is better than the EF version, then you are losing the difference in image quality you could be getting with the better lens.

[@oldfeziewig]

Only one RF mount and that is a nifty 50 and the rest are EF adapted to RF. I have 4 adapters for easy switching on my R6 MKII and Eos R. That said I will hang on to the EF because I use a Fringer EF to Z and shoot EF glass on my Z7.

[@recordbutton1845]

Mixing and matching. Loving some RF like the 800 though. Have some quirky adaptations. Tamron mirror in Nikon mount to Canon. Tilt and shift. Maybe I'm a gearhead who takes pictures. Haha. Always enjoy your content Mr. B.

[@jensemand]

As you described I have a lot of older EF lenses, different bodies and some newer RF lenses. I've been waiting for Canon to make a a new wide RF L-lens for long now. I got the new RF 24mm, but oh boy I was disappointed. It a sharp lens, but it relies heavily on lens correction. I've think Canon gave up on the high demanding pro still market. The newer RF VCM lenses are made for video. You may be better of with an older EF lens.

[@EJL88]

The throw on the older RF 70-200 is a pain. I use it for everything other than sports. I use my trusty old EF 70-200 with my R5 when I shoot sports. I know there is a new RF 70-200 too. It's just not economical for me to get the newer lens. Outside of that I mainly use my RF lenses.

[@photoquent]

Do you use an EF teleconverter with the EF70-200 on your R5, I believe that is possible. If you convert to the RF lens you cannot use a teleconverter due the flange distance.

[@stubones]

I use my ef 70-200 ii on my mirrorless bodies and it works beautifully.

[@reinhard8053]

I just bought the EF70-200 II with the 1.4 extender. The RF is just too expensive (new about 3x compared to a used EF). Works fine on R6Mark2 and R7. But otherwise I mainly use new RF lenses.

[@3-piece129]

@@photoquenton the new RF 70-200 Z, you can.

[@EJL88]

@@photoquent No converter, just the adapter. If I need the reach for high school football, I use the crop setting in my R5. Our HS games are Saturday morning with plenty of light.

[@nyambe]

I think the adaptor should be included in the box

[@reinhard8053]

For some cameras it was. I got my R7 with the adaptor.

[@paulpisanitv]

love these segments...David you rock! Ty!

[@StarLightDotPhotos]

EF is better because you can use them on any mirrorless if you decide to switch away from Canon. I am selling all my RF lenses because I started adding Fuji bodies to my setup. The only two RF lens I am NOT going to sell are my RF 28-70 f/2 and my RF 70-200 f/4.

[@JeffreySigmund-o9m]

Thank you for all the information.

[@charliehawkins7479]

I have both a T8i and a R8 I just use the ef-s I have and buy rf when I can and I have an adapter

[@mvp_kryptonite]

Rent the lens 1st and understand if it suits, it’s not an automatic RF must buy. Some of the RF glass are too sharp lol. Myself, I’m waiting for a super zoom L lens otherwise I’m having loads of fun with EF glass going for great value on the used market.

[@reinhard8053]

When I bought my R7 I tried the EF18-135 with adapter, but that was so bulky I rather took the RF-S 18-150. That combo is so much lighter and smaller. For my R6Mark2 I bought the RF24-105L4 and RF14-35L4 because I only had very old (and not L) fullframe lenses with that focal length range. The EF70-200L2.8 because of the price.

[@vykoden9462]

But, is that new RF 600mm as sharp as an L series lens?

[@sportsshooter2574]

Honestly I would keep the EF glass ( as long as it is L or decent quality primes) and buy a second adaptor. The RF lenses are bulkier and very expensive and for the past 3 years with my R6 I see no difference in AF speed / IQ etc. etc. Plus some of my lenses like the 85/1.8 and 40/2.8 became IS lenses with the R6 and the AF improved using the eye detect AF. You can also buy 2nd hand EF L lenses that you would have to spend a fortune for the equivalent RF.

[@elliotresnick5433]

Just curious why you didn’t mention L-line vs non-L glass in this discussion. First, how much are you giving up attaching non-L lenses on an R5 or R5 mk2 vs L-line glass? Are you better off using an adapter and L-Line EF glass vs buyer a non-L RF lens on an R5 or R5 mk2?

[@timhughes4259]

This is a great question. From my testing the EF Ls perform flawlessly with the adapters so I’ve kept most of them. I have a couple of RF L which I’ve found are better. If you like zooms then there are some interesting ones that only exist in RF.

[@obsidian00]

Seeing as I am still on my 1DXMKiii, EF lenses are what I am on AND when I do make the jump to a Canon mirrorless body, I will continue on with EF “L” series glass…WHY…$$$ 😅

[@swistedfilms]

The R6 is basically the 1 DX Mark III anyway. That eye autofocus though...

[@samtoscano6891]

BTW, do you have any experience with the EF adapter for the mirrorless bodies that incorporates the drop in filters? Any image denigration? Any light leakage issues? I'm considering one of these, especially with the ND filter options. This would eliminate the need to carry around screw-on filters for all of the different sized lenses. It seems like I always don't have the ND filter for the lens that I'm using... This would build a stronger case for keeping the EF lenses.

[@marchinderickx8193]

Thanks for your comments. Do you have any experience with the Canon adapter and 3rd party lenses (Sigma, Tamron, Samyang,....)?

[@ColinRobertson_LLAP]

I have three RF zooms and three EF primes. Would love to upgrade those RF primes, but Canon has been seemingly dragging their heels to release new RF versions of their tilt-shift lenses... 🤨

[@jh52photos]

Thanks for the video, David! I have a R62 and R3 but have yet to purchase a single RF lens. My adapted EF lenses work flawlessly, including my beloved 70-200 2.8 ii an my 20+ year old 400 2.8 ver 1. Here’s my question for you: am I imagining things or do my EF lenses function BETTER on my R bodies (e.g. faster autofocus)? Regardless, I’m pleased with EF glass and likely to add a few more EF lenses from the used market before I buy my first RF lens (although the 70-200 Z is enticing). Thanks!

[@L.Spencer]

I have a lot to learn about lenses!

[@kreygscott]

Very sound advice David. I recently purchased a Sony A7R III as my main camera for shooting landscapes. I purchased the Metabones V adapter to use my Canon L lenses with my Sony. Because I shoot Landscapes professionally, auto focus is not a requirement for my process. So far it's been great however I've always preferred Canon bodies and would very much love to return to the camp. So my question to you David, is from your personal experience which Canon you'd reccomend for my profession that has a similar dynamic range to my Sony? Thanks in advance.

[@ChuckleDrums]

Canon R5

[@kreygscott]

@@ChuckleDrums Thanks much. I really appreciate you taking the time out to answer. Would you say the dynamic range matches the Sony A7R III? Do you own or have used the R5 personally?

[@ChuckleDrums]

@ I haven’t used the Sony A7RIII but I have owned the Sony A7RV and currently own the Canon R5. If you look at spec sheets the Sony has a very slight dynamic range advantage but nothing I’ve ever noticed in practice.

[@kreygscott]

@ Thanks mate.

[@branimirteodorovic2297]

Only you can give a good answer to something that I consider to be stupid question (because of course newer lenses are better). Great job!

[@mjpt57]

My first canon was a 6D mark 2. So, I have a number of EF lenses for it. Then I got an R6 with the adapter (control ring one). I have pretty much replicated a lot of my EF lens collection with RF glass with the exception of a Tamron 150-600. None of the RF super Tele lenses are really that affordable (thanks Canon) so for that one I’m sticking with the Tamron. I can’t tell the difference between the RF24-105 f4 L and the EF version when used on my R6. So, I wonder to myself why did I spend that dough. Some of the EF mount (Canon, Sigms and Tamron) lenses do autofocus slower than any of the RF glass, though. You can hear their motors going rrr, rrr, rrr as they try to focus on the subject. But they get there eventually. Not good for Motorsport or birds unfortunately. That’s the issue I have with the Tamron 150-600 when out there. So I tend to use the RF100-400 even though it doesn’t have the reach. One day I might get the RF100-200. Will see. Still costs $3,000 AUD here in Australia.

[@dtgenty1]

I tried shooting a wedding with the R and 6D mark I a few years ago and hated using a mirrorless and DSLR. Definitely ditch the DSLR and get a second mirrorless camera.

[@stevenpbm]

R5 with ef L glass. As i dont make money from my hobby, i dont see any reason to upgrade. The adapter is a non-issue in practice.

[@IAmR1ch]

I have a canon R5 and a 1dx body. I only have EF lenses. I have all the lenses I want so I will not be getting any RF lenses. Some day I may upgrade to a RF 24-70 2.0 or an RF 200-800 but it may not be for a long time. I just don't need those lenses because I already have it covered.

[@kenthomson8516]

Great vid, have sent question and hoping to receive reply David.🙏🙏🙏

[@TheWildlifeGallery388]

I have a EF 1-400 ver2 Lens that worked great on my 90D - However on the R5 it really struggles to find focus and is very slow - however I have a Version 2 EF 600mm prime and it works flawlessly on the R5 - I'm not sure why the 1-400 struggles so much - I have 2 RF a 24-105 F/4 and the all new RF70-200 2.8 Z - the new 70-200 produces excellent results

[@keithw8646]

I bought an R5 a couple of years ago and all my lenses for it are RF. I used my older EF with adapter initially, but slowly added four RF lenses for my kit. Just got the new RF 70-200 Z for Christmas (thanks to my wife). Nothing I’ve used before is as good as the R5 with RF glass. I use the EF lenses with a couple of DSLR bodies I still have. Great video, as always, David!

[@patrickryan43]

Thanks, great video 👌

[@unaby_unaby]

Still using my old DSLR/EF combination, just because of the price and unsureness about staying with Canon ecosystem in the future...

[@markconnelly1806]

The never ending debate about lenses. The proof is in the final image.

[@Lubo54]

👍👍👍 DAVID...EXCELLENT

[@stevemcmahon6803]

EF is a dead system. Canon is no longer making EF glass or bodies and they have already stopped servicing many older models of both. It’s just a matter of time before the rest join them. If you already have EF lenses it makes sense to adapt them but not buy any more. No one seems to have mentioned this.

[@frankfeng2701]

Reasons to get/keep EF glass: - Primarily shoot stills. - Owning multiple systems, brands, and/or formats. - Take advantage of the adapter functions, e.g. speedbooster, drop-in filter, tilt-shift, teleconverter, etc. - Save cost. - Get focal lengths not available on RF, at least for now, e.g. TS-E lens. Reasons to get RF glass: - Primarily shoot video and want smooth & quiet AF. - Own an RF body and want sync IS. - Save weight. - Get focal lengths not available on EF, e.g. 24-105 f/2.8. For reasons not listed above, it'd be wise to select mix your selections based on your particular budget and needs.

[@ChaitanyaShukla2503]

Have couple of EF macro lenses(100mm L, 180mm and couple of 3rd party lenses) and when it comes to RF I wont be buying RF 100mm L thanks to its design flaw but will be waiting for 180mm lens to come to RF before upgrading from EF 180mm L. When it comes to long zooms for my use case I really love the RF 100-400mm lens(rented it couple times) which I liked for getting photos of shy damselflies and butterflies.

[@photoquent]

What is the design flaw in the RF100mm?

[@jayplatt8798]

EF lenses are usually cheaper and are readily available on the used markets. They are a bargain. Mix and match with R bodies.

[@fountainvalley100]

EF lens days are numbered. The older ones are no longer supported.

[@bradleyrex2968]

Just a budget decision. RF lenses are better, but EF are pretty darn good.