EF vs RF lenses - a few things to consider

I have a few EF Lenses that I will probably keep because, for their intended uses, they work fine on my R5 and I have no compelling reason to get rid of them.  However, in deciding whether to replace an EF lens with an RF equivalent, one should be aware of some of the features that are available with the RF lenses that are not available with an EF lenses.

Whether these "features" are important enough to warrant changing from EF to RF is of course a personal choice and would depend on how important these things are to your use cases.

1. Distance scale shows up on screen and in EVF while in manual focus (RF:yes, EF:no)

(Many EF lenses do have a distance scale on the lens whereas none of the RF lenses do)

2 . High Speed Display (Makes screen/EVF display look smoother when shooting in HS Continuous mode in SERVO). Only available when using RF lenses.

3.  ON-lens control ring on RF lenses only.  Can be programmed to adjust 12 different operations on the camera (Aperture, ISO, Shutter speed, exposure comp., etc).  Personally this is something I can take or leave and find I don't use it all that much anyway, but some people love it. NOTE: You can get this feature with EF lenses if you purchase the more expense adaptor that has the control ring.

4. Manual focus ring sensitivity can be set to vary with rotation speed OR the degree of rotation.  This option is only available when using RF lenses.

Lastly of course is the issue of image quality and AF speeds. In most cases, with the EF lenses I plan to keep, the Image Quality with these lenses on my R5 is slightly better than it was on my 5D4.  The AF on my RF 24-105 L is faster than AF speed is with my adapted EF 24-105, but not so much so that I'd feel it would have any noticeable impact on  my shooting.  Your milage may vary.

I do see some more RF lenses in my future, but because some of my EF lenses work sufficiently good, I will probably still maintain a few of my EF lenses for the foreseeable future.  I may eventually end up with only RF lenses, but I'm in no big hurry to make the complete transition.

Basil Fawlty wrote:

I have a few EF Lenses that I will probably keep because, for their intended uses, they work fine on my R5 and I have no compelling reason to get rid of them. However, in deciding whether to replace an EF lens with an RF equivalent, one should be aware of some of the features that are available with the RF lenses that are not available with an EF lenses.

Whether these "features" are important enough to warrant changing from EF to RF is of course a personal choice and would depend on how important these things are to your use cases.

1. Distance scale shows up on screen and in EVF while in manual focus (RF:yes, EF:no)

(Many EF lenses do have a distance scale on the lens whereas none of the RF lenses do)

2 . High Speed Display (Makes screen/EVF display look smoother when shooting in HS Continuous mode in SERVO). Only available when using RF lenses.

3. ON-lens control ring on RF lenses only. Can be programmed to adjust 12 different operations on the camera (Aperture, ISO, Shutter speed, exposure comp., etc). Personally this is something I can take or leave and find I don't use it all that much anyway, but some people love it. NOTE: You can get this feature with EF lenses if you purchase the more expense adaptor that has the control ring.

4. Manual focus ring sensitivity can be set to vary with rotation speed OR the degree of rotation. This option is only available when using RF lenses.

Lastly of course is the issue of image quality and AF speeds. In most cases, with the EF lenses I plan to keep, the Image Quality with these lenses on my R5 is slightly better than it was on my 5D4. The AF on my RF 24-105 L is faster than AF speed is with my adapted EF 24-105, but not so much so that I'd feel it would have any noticeable impact on my shooting. Your milage may vary.

I do see some more RF lenses in my future, but because some of my EF lenses work sufficiently good, I will probably still maintain a few of my EF lenses for the foreseeable future. I may eventually end up with only RF lenses, but I'm in no big hurry to make the complete transition.

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.

Ephemeris wrote:

Basil Fawlty wrote:

I have a few EF Lenses that I will probably keep because, for their intended uses, they work fine on my R5 and I have no compelling reason to get rid of them. However, in deciding whether to replace an EF lens with an RF equivalent, one should be aware of some of the features that are available with the RF lenses that are not available with an EF lenses.

Whether these "features" are important enough to warrant changing from EF to RF is of course a personal choice and would depend on how important these things are to your use cases.

1. Distance scale shows up on screen and in EVF while in manual focus (RF:yes, EF:no)

(Many EF lenses do have a distance scale on the lens whereas none of the RF lenses do)

2 . High Speed Display (Makes screen/EVF display look smoother when shooting in HS Continuous mode in SERVO). Only available when using RF lenses.

Is this correct?

Is what correct?  The fact the distance scale shows up on screen in Manual focus mode with the RF lens, or that High Speed display is only selectable with the RF lens?  As far as I know, both statements are accurate, but I could be wrong.

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).

Basil Fawlty wrote:

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).

Ditto Basil. I don't have the Sigma 150-600 but I do have the Tamron 100-400mm I bought in 2018. I just tried it with the R6MKII and it focuses very well. My only complaint for this lens just like when I used it with the 5Ds is the contrast of the images are just ok. I guess I'm used to the colour and contrast of L lenses but then again the price is more affordable to me than the 100-400 L. If ever I would go to the zoo or an Alaskan trip, this is the lens I will bring.

Didn't know about the distance scale.

Thanks for the information.

Ephemeris wrote:

Sorry Basil, Number 2. I've not noticed this with my EF lenses. Maybe something to do with the speed of opening the aperture?

On my R5 just confirmed that indeed I can select High Speed Display with an EF lens as long as I'm in Servo and have High Speed H selected (not H+).

Either I have some out dated info or the limitation is not applicable for the higher end R5 and R6 cameras?

I am  a huge fan of the control ring on the lens   Not so much on the adapter   The problem is on a long lens you must remove your hand from the lens and move it back to the adapter and the front of your lens drops.  Its not huge but something to think about.

kikimora wrote:

davel33 wrote:

The problem is on a long lens you must remove your hand from the lens and move it back to the adapter and the front of your lens drops. Its not huge but something to think about.

No. You only need to hold the lens in a different, less convenient, way – supporting the lens with index and middle fingers and operating the control ring with thumb. Which is the same case as RF 100-500 by the way.

Thanks for the help, next time out I will try it

Thank you for your view on selected topics. Let me add my 2 cents:

Basil Fawlty wrote:

I have a few EF Lenses that I will probably keep because, for their intended uses, they work fine on my R5 and I have no compelling reason to get rid of them. However, in deciding whether to replace an EF lens with an RF equivalent, one should be aware of some of the features that are available with the RF lenses that are not available with an EF lenses.

Whether these "features" are important enough to warrant changing from EF to RF is of course a personal choice and would depend on how important these things are to your use cases.

1. Distance scale shows up on screen and in EVF while in manual focus (RF:yes, EF:no)

Reading this I realized that with the R6 I use manual focusing much less than I did on my previous DSLRs. The AF is so good. Even after almost 2 years with R6 I was not aware of this function.

(Many EF lenses do have a distance scale on the lens whereas none of the RF lenses do)

2 . High Speed Display (Makes screen/EVF display look smoother when shooting in HS Continuous mode in SERVO). Only available when using RF lenses.

Works flawlessly on my R6.

3. ON-lens control ring on RF lenses only. Can be programmed to adjust 12 different operations on the camera (Aperture, ISO, Shutter speed, exposure comp., etc). Personally this is something I can take or leave and find I don't use it all that much anyway, but some people love it. NOTE: You can get this feature with EF lenses if you purchase the more expense adaptor that has the control ring.

I was looking forward the on lens control ring before I bought the camera and RF lens. But very soon I found it redundant with R6's three dials and all customization possibilities. And also using it is somehow awkward to me especially with the zoom lenses. So I have it disabled.

4. Manual focus ring sensitivity can be set to vary with rotation speed OR the degree of rotation. This option is only available when using RF lenses.

Here I am absolutely ok with the traditional way and do not see any benefit with the variable sensitivity.

Lastly of course is the issue of image quality and AF speeds.

They do vary a lot for each specific lens. Unfortunately RF did not bring any broadly common asset in terms of performance or IQ. But with some lenses it brought so far unseen levels of distortion and vignetting, sadly.

In most cases, with the EF lenses I plan to keep, the Image Quality with these lenses on my R5 is slightly better than it was on my 5D4.

Fully confirm. And I would add the AF accuracy also increased on R6 with EF lenses.

The AF on my RF 24-105 L is faster than AF speed is with my adapted EF 24-105, but not so much so that I'd feel it would have any noticeable impact on my shooting. Your milage may vary.

I am fully in with you here.

I do see some more RF lenses in my future, but because some of my EF lenses work sufficiently good, I will probably still maintain a few of my EF lenses for the foreseeable future. I may eventually end up with only RF lenses, but I'm in no big hurry to make the complete transition.

RF lineup still lacks a lot of important lenses. So we can easily live either with Canon EF or 3rd party EF lenses. Especially Sigma Art lineup has some real treasures for "bargain" prices compared to RF price levels.

kikimora wrote:

Basil Fawlty wrote:

4. Manual focus ring sensitivity can be set to vary with rotation speed OR the degree of rotation. This option is only available when using RF lenses.

Well, there aren't too many EF lenses that could support that at all taking into account that this can only work with focus-by-wire lenses and most EF ones have actual, mechanically coupled, focur rings.

True. Good point

A couple of other considerations.

First, many (most?) of the RF lenses have a closer minimum focus difference than equivalent EF focal lengths. Really handy, and sometimes easy to forget it's there. Worth checking into if you're comparing EF vs RF.

Second, an edge case, but most RF lenses have an IR light. Which can wreck IR shots of longer than say a quarter of a second exposure. The 24-105 non L doesn't have it, but many I've seen and tested do. Admittedly most will never see this since they have the original UV/IR cut filter still installed. But IR users take note.

robgendreau wrote:

A couple of other considerations.

First, many (most?) of the RF lenses have a closer minimum focus difference than equivalent EF focal lengths. Really handy, and sometimes easy to forget it's there. Worth checking into if you're comparing EF vs RF.

Second, an edge case, but most RF lenses have an IR light. Which can wreck IR shots of longer than say a quarter of a second exposure. The 24-105 non L doesn't have it, but many I've seen and tested do. Admittedly most will never see this since they have the original UV/IR cut filter still installed. But IR users take note.

Thanks for the additioanl useful information!

so VERY true