Re: EF vs RF lenses - a few things to consider
José B wrote:
I just got the R6MKII. So far the EF to RF transition via adapter is very seamless. I know RF lenses are lighter, smaller, faster to AF and have terrific IQ but I really see no compelling reason at this time to start dumping my excellent EF lenses to RF. I intend to keep all of my EF lenses as I am with the 5Ds.
The only RF lens I would be interested in the future is if Canon would have an RF version of the 200/2.8 L II. I hope it comes out in the near future albeit I think there might be a 50% price hike from the original new price of the EF version. Having said that I have no qualms of getting a used EF version.
I currently have a Sigma 150-600mm Contemporary lens (EF mount ). I recently took it to Bosque Del Apache, using Camera AF and Lens settings suggested by Duade Paton. I was extremely happy with that lens on my R5. The AF speed and accuracy was great. I won't sit here and tell you that it is as fast as an RF 100-500, but I can tell you it was fast enough that I was quite happy with it. The IQ and sharpness was also great, even at 600mm. So, while I'm sure the RF 100-500 is a fabulous lens (lighter for sure), I am not in a hurry to "upgrade" because:
1. I already own the Sigma
2. The IQ and AF performance is quite good
3. My Sigma has 100mm more reach
4. My sigma, while being about 1 pound heavier, is still quite manageable hand-held
5. My sigma is a half stop brighter on the long end (6.3 vs 7.1)
If I wasn't happy with the performance of my current combo, I might consider the RF, but I am so I won't (at least not at this time).