RF 15-35 vs RF 14-35

[Sittatunga]

+1.

Additional notes: The old EF 24-85 is an excellent and inexpensive lens that's great for general landscape while hiking because it's so small and light. Available on the used market. Pair it with the CP adapter or the ND adapter.

It takes 67mm filters, so it's going to be a lot cheaper just to buy the filters than the filter adapter.

Remember, though, that the filter adapter works with all EF lenses, not just the 24-85. These filter adapters--on the rear of the lens, no less--make sticking with EF lenses for landscape compelling, even if not considering the cost savings over the absurdly priced RF lenses (plus filters).

I wrote that reply before I'd tried a filter adapter. Things are rarely as simple as they seem. I bought the 16-35mm f/4 for my EOS R before the RF 14-35mm f/4 came out. It was a luxury, as I already had a Sigma 12-24mm, but I was hoping for improved image quality and there was a doubled cashback on offer... It's also usable on my DSLR but ridiculous on my various EOS M cameras. I also bought the Kolari filter mount adapter, mainly for the Sigma lens which doesn't take filters.

RF lenses better, you say? Watch YouTube for comparisons of the EF 16-35 f/4L IS to the new sort-of-equivalent RF version. Sharpness and detail differences are miniscule and in the field probably non-existent.

First of all, a 14mm lens is very different from a 16mm lens unless you're just using it to cram everything in, which can make for very boring photos. The whole point of ultra-wide angle lenses, particularly ultra-wide angle zooms, is to manipulate perspective by getting insanely close and moving around by inches. The RF 14-35mm lens is 84mm diameter × 100mm long × 540g, and takes 77mm filters. The EF 16-35mm lens is 83mm diameter × 136mm long × 765g on the Kolari adapter with a plain filter fitted, and also takes 77mm filters. The price of the RF lens is £1780 from store.Canon.co.uk, the EF lens is now £1390, plus £360 for the drop in filter mount with polarising filter, plus £370 for the variable ND filter. So the EF lens is maybe £30 cheaper with the adapter and half a pound heavier. You can see why I bought the Kolari version. It's not cheaper to buy the filter mount adapter unless you use it with a lot of different EF lenses that you already own. The big drawback with the Kolari version is that my EOS R crashes if you remove an EF lens from the adapter while it's mounted on the camera even if the camera was switched off at the time. That rather takes the shine off it.