EOS RP with EFS Lenses?

I have been using Canon APS-C cameras for a very long time, specifically the EOS 350D, 450D and 7D. But before that I used full frame film cameras, i.e. the Canon AE1 and A1. I've wanted to go back to full frame for a long time, but I couldn't afford the lenses that made it worthwhile. So now that my 7D is 10 years old, I'm torn between getting the M50 and the RP. The M50 will work well with all my EFS lenses. The RP will also work with EFS lenses, but will crop the image - apparently it does this automatically.

I still can't afford the lenses that I'd love to have, specifically the EF 70-200 F2.8 and the EF 16-35 F2.8 (and a few primes), but if I had the body, they would always be a possibility, one day. And I can always rent them.

Has anyone used EFS lenses with the RP? Do you like the results? How about the M50? I assume the quality with the M50 will be similar to the 450D or (hopefully) the 7D.

It's really your decision and the budget.

So for $1300 + if you sell the EF-S lens

Can you get a good L lense and body?

May be 5D2 can get you the L lenses.

I think lens is more important, but everyone has different criteria and really depends on what you enjoy shooting.

You can shop import model as well or refurbished on Canon.

M50 / M6 / M5 + adapter + EF lenses, just try to find one that would make sense to you.

As for RP, it does come with EF adapter for now, and works with all your exisiting lens.

And DSLR don't really kept value unless they are rare limited copies, L lens do keep pretty good value if one takes care of them.

Hi StevenSHH, thanks for your input.

So far as I know, Canon's full frame cameras have never been able to work with EF-S lenses. The RP with its adapter apparently does. What I'd like to know is how well it works - is it just as good, better, or worse than with an APS-C body? Although the RP body is almost double the price of the M50, if it works at least as well as the M50 with EF-S lenses, and lets me use L Series lenses full-frame in future, it might be the better choice for me.

All my EF-S lenses added together cost more than the RP body, so if I can get the same or better results (with EF-S lenses), and have the possibility of using L series lenses in future, I'll go for it. But if the RP doesn't do as well as the M50 using EF-S lenses, then I'll go for the M50 - I can always rent full frame when I need it.

DaveSemm said:

Hi StevenSHH, thanks for your input.

So far as I know, Canon's full frame cameras have never been able to work with EF-S lenses. The RP with its adapter apparently does. What I'd like to know is how well it works - is it just as good, better, or worse than with an APS-C body? Although the RP body is almost double the price of the M50, if it works at least as well as the M50 with EF-S lenses, and lets me use L Series lenses full-frame in future, it might be the better choice for me.

All my EF-S lenses added together cost more than the RP body, so if I can get the same or better results (with EF-S lenses), and have the possibility of using L series lenses in future, I'll go for it. But if the RP doesn't do as well as the M50 using EF-S lenses, then I'll go for the M50 - I can always rent full frame when I need it.

Click to expand...

The RP does work with EF-S lenses, but it isn't FF anymore, so it completely defeats your reason for going there. In fact it offers lower resolution than your 450D, so I am not sure it would be an upgrade over over either of the older cameras you mention, never mind the 7D.

The R and RP automatically crop the frame when a APS-C lens is fitted - down to around 11Mp I think in the RP's case. The M50 remains a 24Mp image with an adapted EF-S lens.

No free lunches :-D

Colin

I have only use EF-S lens for video ub R, to answer your question, I think both EF / EF-S works equally as well in both systems M (M series up to M6) or R (Although I have never use RP before).

My question would be: "do you see yourself carrying heavier equipment or lighter?" M series is for minimalist, RP is kind of compromise.

Best of luck

When the R came out I dropped my M5 and ef-m lenses and have never looked back

The R and the RP** both only force a crop with EF-S lenses. With non EF-S crop lenses you can do any crop or none that the body shows in the list. When I made the change to the R, I had a 50-50 mix of crop and FF, I had already dropped EF-S for EF-M when I brought the M5.

Its true you do drop a lot or resolution with the crop but it still makes a great picture. To think you cant get a great pic from a 10 mpx camera is silly at best.


Sigma 18-35 A in crop mode on an EOS R



I think you have a good idea, stick with it.

--
"Just one more Lens, I promise....."
Dave

** from the RP users guide page 119

Just a thought .. if your 7D still works why don't you buy the 70-200 lens you want and use it on that camera? Then in a couple of years get the RP Mark II or whatever they call it.

Generally, I would say that there is no need to buy a shiny new body at full retail price if you don't have the lenses to go with it yet. Maybe if the timing is just before going to an exotic location, etc. in that case it might still be worth it, although you might not get to know it fully. But just by waiting 6 months, I managed to obtain the EOS R at its lowest price ever.

Upgrade lenses first, then by the time you get to upgrade the body, you will get it at a reduced price, win-win. The only real reason to use crop lenses on these is to use the cropped 4k video modes with a wider angle of view.

Also try the M50 and see if it fits your hand, it is indeed a very small camera, and something like an 80D may be ergonomically better, even though it is not a mirrorless camera (and it will be on clearance soon, so decent deals can be found).

"But just by waiting 6 months, I managed to obtain the EOS R at its lowest price ever."

You must put some value on using the R or you would not buy one. The 6 months you lost waiting could be greater value than the money you saved.

"Upgrade lenses first, then by the time you get to upgrade the body, you will get it at a reduced price, win-win."

No this is not right if he wants to get RF and not EF lenses. Why would someone want to buy new EF lenses than the R? only to replace every EF lens with RF at some point? The focus alone is enough of a reason to upgrade not to mention the sensor and I am finding the FV mode very compelling. NO EF lenses with an adapter are NOT the same as RF lenses.

"The only real reason to use crop lenses on these is to use the cropped 4k video modes with a wider angle of view."

Or because you already have a set of crop lenses.

davel33 said:

You must put some value on using the R or you would not buy one. The 6 months you lost waiting could be greater value than the money you saved.

No this is not right if he wants to get RF and not EF lenses. Why would someone want to buy new EF lenses than the R? only to replace every EF lens with RF at some point? The focus alone is enough of a reason to upgrade not to mention the sensor and I am finding the FV mode very compelling. NO EF lenses with an adapter are NOT the same as RF lenses.

Click to expand...

Yes of course, but another reason why I waited is that I also bought some lenses to go with it...

I already pointed out there that are cases where it worth going for the new, but for most people, it might not worth it. In this case with crop lenses for this particular, it doesn't make much sense, although I also pointed out that the crop sensor mirrorless cameras are also undersized, it was Canon's decision to segment all these models.

Your nitpicking is kind of funny, considering you are mostly using EF lenses as well.

I use both RF and EF and I can't really say there is anything wrong with EF lenses. A physical manual focus and distance indicator is more useful to me than having a control ring. Of course RF lenses are nice and a bit better balanced, but for the most part, they are (and will be) very pricey. (But as I wrote before, after the stocks get filled enough, prices will start to drop, it is always the early adopters who pay the highest prices)

I don't think the OP said he wanted an RF lens. He said he wanted the 70-200 2.8. If money is a concern he would probably go with the EF and still get great results. He seems like he is willing to make compromises but was looking to make a wise investment for the future. This is why I suggested to keep the 7D and buy a lens. If he gets another new body he will just stay in the cycle of lens envy he has been in for a long time.

When I bought the RP it was because I wanted to use some of my money for L glass which I have never had before. Or else I would have bought the R and still not had any new lenses.

DaveSemm said:

I still can't afford the lenses that I'd love to have, specifically the EF 70-200 F2.8 and the EF 16-35 F2.8 (and a few primes), but if I had the body, they would always be a possibility, one day. And I can always rent them.

Click to expand...

Why look at those expensive f2.8 lenses right away ? There are a lot of cheaper FF lenses that your RP will benefit more from than when using EF-s ones. The old 17-40 f4 for instance, or an EF 70-300 Version II. Go FF all the way, or stay with crop, at least that’s my opinion.

davel33 said:

"But just by waiting 6 months, I managed to obtain the EOS R at its lowest price ever."

You must put some value on using the R or you would not buy one. The 6 months you lost waiting could be greater value than the money you saved.

"Upgrade lenses first, then by the time you get to upgrade the body, you will get it at a reduced price, win-win."

No this is not right if he wants to get RF and not EF lenses. Why would someone want to buy new EF lenses than the R? only to replace every EF lens with RF at some point? The focus alone is enough of a reason to upgrade not to mention the sensor and I am finding the FV mode very compelling. NO EF lenses with an adapter are NOT the same as RF lenses.

"The only real reason to use crop lenses on these is to use the cropped 4k video modes with a wider angle of view."

Or because you already have a set of crop lenses.

Click to expand...

I think you are barking up the wrong tree.

Perhaps re-read the thread from the beginning. The OP made it very clear that the intent was to use EF-S lenses at this stage, with an aspiration to get good EF (or perhaps RF) lenses later on - at least I thought so.

Hence my comment that it made little sense to downgrade from a 18Mp APS-C body to a 10Mp APS-C body. With EF-S lenses the RP is NOT a FF body - period. And I believe (and I am happy to be corrected) that the OP wanted a FF body to use with the EF-S lenses.

I did not say that it was not possible to get a decent photo with a 10Mp camera - of course it is - I owned them for several years.

But if the OP thinks that buying a still expensive 26Mp FF is going to produce 26Mp FF images with EF-S lenses, then that is an incorrect assumption and somewhat of a waste of money unless the EF-S lenses are going to replaced quite quickly with EF or RF lenses.

Colin

Andy01 said:

davel33 said:

"But just by waiting 6 months, I managed to obtain the EOS R at its lowest price ever."

You must put some value on using the R or you would not buy one. The 6 months you lost waiting could be greater value than the money you saved.

"Upgrade lenses first, then by the time you get to upgrade the body, you will get it at a reduced price, win-win."

No this is not right if he wants to get RF and not EF lenses. Why would someone want to buy new EF lenses than the R? only to replace every EF lens with RF at some point? The focus alone is enough of a reason to upgrade not to mention the sensor and I am finding the FV mode very compelling. NO EF lenses with an adapter are NOT the same as RF lenses.

"The only real reason to use crop lenses on these is to use the cropped 4k video modes with a wider angle of view."

Or because you already have a set of crop lenses.

Click to expand...

I think you are barking up the wrong tree.

Perhaps re-read the thread from the beginning. The OP made it very clear that the intent was to use EF-S lenses at this stage, with an aspiration to get good EF (or perhaps RF) lenses later on - at least I thought so.

Hence my comment that it made little sense to downgrade from a 18Mp APS-C body to a 10Mp APS-C body. With EF-S lenses the RP is NOT a FF body - period. And I believe (and I am happy to be corrected) that the OP wanted a FF body to use with the EF-S lenses.

I did not say that it was not possible to get a decent photo with a 10Mp camera - of course it is - I owned them for several years.

But if the OP thinks that buying a still expensive 26Mp FF is going to produce 26Mp FF images with EF-S lenses, then that is an incorrect assumption and somewhat of a waste of money unless the EF-S lenses are going to replaced quite quickly with EF or RF lenses.

Colin

Click to expand...

Using EF-S glass is a viable solution if you dont make huge prints or crop heavily.

1- You get a FF camera simply to have the OPTION of going FF when you need/want to, as in, shooting with a 10-18mm like I used to do on my 12mp 1100D, you get the same experience but with a bit better IQ & a much better EVF, much better noise performance, and you have a FF sensor whenever you want to put on that 50mm to get FF shallow DOF.

2- If you do video. 4K video on the EOS R & RP is an APS-C crop, and using FF glass is wasting all these large optics. The 10-18mm is the only solution for UWA 4K video on the EOS R, giving a 16-35mm IS STM lens.

3- If you own third party EF-S glass that covers FF. You'd be amazed on how many crop lenses work wonderfully on FF chips, giving the full 26/30mp resolution or at least 24-25mp after cropping the very edges. Examples:

-Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8 is a 16mm f/2.8 Prime on FF

-The Sigma 30mm f/1.4 covers FF wonderfully

-I just made a thread on the Nikon 35mm f/1.8 working brilliantly on a FF 24mp D610


-Sigma 18-35mm f1.8 is a 24-35mm f/1.8 FF lens

-Canon's 24mm f/2.8 nearly covers 90% of FF

So it's about having the FF sensor as an option when you need it. And you also get things unavailable on any APS-C camera, like 4K recording, clean 10bit output, C-Log internal, the large 3.9m dot EVF, large battery & grip, briiliant Wifi implementation (it's the one feature I like most about the R, I press the shutter and go share on the phone, it's too slow on the Crop Canons), it's weathersealed, has a top Oled screen, has three dials, has Eye AF in and works in Servo & video,

You're not just paying for the larger sensor nowadays, these are fairly cheap to produce in 2019.

Yes, as I said above, it is certainly an option, especially if there is a plan to replace EF-S lenses with EF/RF in the near future. I did not get the impression that lens upgrades were going to be forthcoming in the near future (if a new body was purchased).

However, it doesn't seem to make much sense to buy the RF when it is bleeding edge, newly released, and probably as high a price as we will ever see - all when there is no intention to use the FF capability in the near future.

Better off sticking with older APS-C bodies and spending money on FF capable lenses until the lens collection matches a (probably much cheaper or better) FF body some time in the future, OR, buying a cheaper APS-C mirrorless body like M5 or M50 with adapter to tide over until FF lenses are purchased.

Colin

Andy01 said:

Andy01 wrote:.

Better off sticking with older APS-C bodies

Colin

Click to expand...

Colin, I highly disagree. I want the EOS R for many reasons other than FF, and if Canon had an APS-C body with the R features yes that statement would be correct. I want the 3.89m dot huge EVF, I want the S35 4K with DPAF capability. I want the advanced 5666 point AF system. I want EYE-AF, that now even works in video & in Servo AF. I want C-LOG. I want clean HDMI out. I want the 10bit ProRes HQ capability. I want the advanced ergonomics with three dials, top OLED panel, m.fn bar (yes, love it for Manual Mgnf). I want the genius Manual Focus assist system. I want the awesome battery grip with much larger individual batteries over any APS-C model. I want the amazing real-time Wifi/bluetooth connection to my iPad Pro. I want the easy-to-use 4K timelapse feature.

Plus after all these things I can't get in any Canon APS-C, I want the capability to put on my 50mm STM to shoot lovely portraits with FF DOD aesthetic when I need to.

PLUS, Canon just leaked they're adding a 12bit RAW video option to the EOS R to be shown at NAB at the 3rd of April.

In short, I would have bought the EOS R if it had a 12mp APS-C sensor. I'd buy the 8mp APS-C C200 if I had the budget, and the EOS R is basically a mini C200 with an expanded sensor area for when you want it!

I guess it's different strokes for different folks

Ebrahim Saadawi said:

I guess it's different strokes for different folks

Click to expand...

And perhaps different needs (OP makes no mention of video, which you use extensively), and budgets. The RP is a somewhat different beast to your R, so a few of the benfits you mention just don't exist with the RP (like the EVF). Different cameras for different folks as well.

If you are on a budget, then buying a newly released and still premium priced body that will be severely handicapped with the lenses just doesn't make much sense.

Colin

Thanks everyone for your comments and suggestions. Everyone has their own requirements so the various points of view are expected and have been helpful and appreciated.

My main question was who has used an EF-S lens on the RP and what did they think of the results. For me, ideally, the results should be close to what I currently get with my 7D, and the overall experience should be similar. But it will allow me to start using EF lenses the way they were designed to be used. I plan to eventually get a few decent EF or RF lenses, but I can start right away with my lowly 50mm f1.8.

Some context: this could be my last camera - I'm in my 60's and retired - and I'd like to start re-learning full frame photography. Back in the 80's and 90's when I used full frame film cameras, APC and crop factors were not a thing. When I got my EOS 350D, it was a big step up from digital point and shoots, so the crop factor didn't seem to be a big deal. But there have been occasions where I wished I had a full frame camera and the 70-200 f2.8.

There is admittedly an emotional aspect to this: if I get the M50, it will be a continuation of what I've been doing for the last decade. If I get the RP, it will be both a return to my full frame days, and a new way of working. I know what I want to do with full-frame, but I will also have a lot to learn, and this is what is driving me to go for the RP.

You'll be paying $1000 for a 8mp camera in crop mode. You'll be cutting in half the resolution you have now.

I wouldn't recommend a FF camera without at least your main lens being FF as well.

I didn't realize you already had a EF 50mm to work with. I have the 15-55 EF-S lens but I honestly never use it. I never even used it on my 50D so I am not sure of how to do a fair comparison. I would think, with no valid proof, that while the resolution would be lower the RP than your 7D, that the advancements in technology would more than makeup for it if you are not planning n making large prints.

You will love the feel of the RP I think. Wish I could have some more practical experience to offer you. My original post was intended to reverse your lens priority so that you could experience the 70-200 sooner rather than later, but if you want to get the body first, I think you will be more than happy with the RP and your EF-S lenses.

Let us know when you make the call and post some of your thoughts and results.