Zeee
•
Forum Pro
•
Posts: 25,627
Re: Will Canon allow EF lenses to work on future RF bodies?
Zeee wrote:
Basil Fawlty wrote:
Zeee wrote:
Messier Object wrote:
I think the answer is YES, EF lenses will continue to work if not explicitly supported,
however there is no guarantee that there won't be future camera features which will only work with RF lenses because of certain EF lens electromechanical performance limitations. And perhaps Canon will contrive to make that happen
Peter
Like I said. Those extra 4 pins in the R system may eventually make an expensive new body not perform optimally with an EF lens. I have read from members here that the AF 100-500 AF acquisition is faster than the EF 100-400II on an ML body. If acquisition is faster then tracking is better and IS/IBIS responds faster. Does this make an EF lens obsolete. Not by a long shot but may be very noticeable one day.
I do know that AF is insane with my R7 compared to my R5. Not that the R5 was bad. The tech just keeps improving.
I have only had my R5 for a couple of months and so far my only RF lens is the 24-105 that I bought with the camera. I have no doubt that AF is probably much better with an RF 100-500, but when I went to Bosque Del Apache with the R5 and my Sigma EF 150-600 C, I was more than happy with the AF performance. (I did make camera AF and lens corrections per Duade Paton's suggestions). At no point did I feel like I was having issues with AF that made me feel compelled to run out and buy a RF 100-500. Again, that's not to say the RF lens wouldn't be better - I'm sure it would be - but what I have is serving my needs just fine and I came away with some amazing images.
I had to drive past Bosque. I was scheduled but the next day was a complete white out with snow. The water pipes in the hotel in Albuquerque froze. Someday I'll get there.
I'd be surprised if you did. I shot with and R and the EF 100-400II. I was just saying that members here posted they felt the 100-500 AF was a bit faster. Buy the time I got my 100-500 I had sold my 100-400 so I could not compare. Real world difference is not going to make any significant difference.
I had to leave and was running out of time. I was not trying to say EF lenses for 3rd party don't perform. In photography 1 second can make a huge difference. Before the ML days shooting using single point with TS set to -2 the bird could stray off the AF point during a burst and you got a second to get it back on before the camera refocused on something else. At 10 fps or more of in focus shots makes a difference.
I would find it hard to believe that Canon made all those adaptations for nothing. I believe they doing something for me. A slight edge in AF, tracking, etc, improved keeper rate and I'll take it. I would have no issues shooting with my EF 100-400 if I had to. Great lens. I never came home empty handed.
I will acquire more RF lenses in the future, I'm sure, but I don't feel like I'm unable to get great images with the many EF lenses I currently have.