Friday rant: The future of Canon RF and 3rd party lenses

David Pavlich wrote:

sportyaccordy wrote: EF glass doesn't take advantage of the shorter registration distance or all the advances in optical design and manufacturing over the last 5 years either. In the end it's a move that only hurts the users.

Why does this matter when the EF based lenses work BETTER than they do in the DSLR counterparts? Maybe you could see a difference if you pixel peep at 200% and that would encompass a few people on DPR. 99% of people that look at my photos could not tell the difference between my R5/70-200 f2.8 II and someone's R5/RF 70-200 f2.8 unless they did the 200% pixel peep.

Having said that, I wish I had the budget to replace all of my lenses with RF versions, but since my EF lenses work so well, I'll spend the money elsewhere.

David

It's not just about image quality, though a gap is forming in some cases where Canon has not provided an RF update. It's the whole user experience. For example when I had my R I just wanted a simple 45-50mm that was small and light but also addressed my gripes with the EF 50 1.8 STM. To this day no such lens exists. RF 50 1.8 carries over the same problems for 2x the price and all the decent EF 50s (Sigma 50 1.4s and Tamron 45 1.8) are massive. With a lot of RF primes you lose USM. And you lose some capabilities and performance with adapted EF glass. So yea the pictures will probably look the same but they will be less enjoyable to get.