EF Lenses on R Mount (f/1.2 portrait primes)

saltydogstudios wrote:

I've been interested in getting into the R Mount for a while now with the 50mm f/1.2 and 85mm f/1.2 lenses for portrait work - both natural light and studio.

Adding all of the above to my cart ends up being around $8000 USD for the body and both lenses.

But the latest DP Review video has me thinking - why not get the EF mount equivalents?

Sure the lenses are older and the autofocus and optical performance may not be as good - but with some used EF lenses, my cart is now half the price (body, two lenses and adapter).

Does anyone who has experience with both the EF and R versions of these lenses have an opinion on this?

With the lenses at less than half the price of the R mount versions, it seems like a no brainer - I can get started and then trade up to the R versions if/when it makes sense.

Is there any major reason I would regret getting the EF lenses?

I shoot portraits professionally. As you know, in studio, an f/1.2 lens doesn't do much as we are shooting more sopped down with studio lighting. How often are you shooting at f/1.2 and really need to shoot wide open? You can save a lot of money by going for f/1.4 and even f/1.8 lenses. The Canon 135mm is arguably their best portrait lens ever and that's an f2. I dont own anything faster than an f/1.8 and the only difference Ive seen when testing is the L lenses are slightly sharper and have a bit more punch and saturation. That can be added in post if desired since very few of us ever publish shots straight out of the camera. Just my 2 cents.