Don't Buy Canon RF Lenses - I screwed up!

Most people should NEVER buy Canon RF mount Lenses. There are better lenses out there for a fraction of the cost.

Best Audio Recorders

More Gear I use

My Camera's

Drones:

360 Tour Gear

[RamonLinares]

A good thing of the EF lenses is that it can be adapted to any mirrorless camera. I currently use EF lenses with Sony, Panasonic and Fujifilm. It's the best lens mount out there.

[doohanlim]

Definitely love this sort of content.

Too many youtubers just suggests the RF lenses as if all of us could afford it 😅

This has been my go to plan when getting the Canon Eos R8 and Im glad someone is sharing their experiences.

More so from you, someone whos definitely able to afford this lens as this is what youre doing for a living.

Really appreciate the cold heart truth. Cheers from Malaysia.

[nubscrub]

I sold my EF glass in '21 for top dollar, and quickly. Listings wouldn't sit for more than a day or two before a buyer would show up. Today, I see tons of EF lenses on Marketplace sitting despite crazy low asking prices. Too many motivated sellers trying to unload now has shifted the supply and demand. Great time to build a DSLR kit though, I've seen 5D IV listing for crazy cheap.

[mbrauwolf]

I haven’t purchased any RF glass yet, because I just can’t justify it. The EF glass works so good on my R6. I recently picked up the EF 85mm 1.4 IS. It is so phenomenal on this camera. I also love the 100-400mm mark ii version and even with the 1.4x Teleconverter, it does a great job and takes sharp photos. The classic 135 mm F2 performs really well on mirrorless as well.

[rdm]

I love the RF L glass even at the price. I have several of these loved lenses including the RF 15-35, 24-70, 70-200 & RF50f1.2. I have a lot more EF lenses than RF lenses and will keep them as well. They work great for how I use them. I consider the RF lenses my core lenses and the rest are specialty lenses. Everyone has different needs and different budgets though.

[gerrya]

If you ever want to have an RF camera converted for IR/UV photography, most RF lenses have an IR light inside (To help with focusing I think I read). That will of course mess with your photo.

EF lenses do not have that issue.

[mattsmith]

I bought my first RF 'L' lens for my R8 yesterday -- the 24-105mm F4. I seriously considered the Sigma Art 24-70 f2.8 (roughly the same price), but went with the RF due to it being much lighter (700g vs 1kg), more compact, and the extra reach. Another big (but possibly odd?) consideration for me was filters; I used to shoot with the Canon EF 24-70 2.8L (ver 1), until it died of natural causes, and so I still have a bunch of quality 77mm filters for it. The 24-70 EF and RF options have moved away from that size filter, but the 24-105 still uses it, so that has saved me hundreds of dollars.

[jvan]

I haven't made the jump to Mirror-less, but you have confirmed the way I plan to go, keeping my EF glass and use adapters. Great video!

[cp]

I use mostly EF L glass on my EOS R due to price. Usually buy second hand lenses! As an enthusiast and not a pro I can’t justify the new RF prices yet. Still love the camera and the lenses and I’m very happy with the results.

[Mariner]

I’m with you, man. I don’t understand all the angst over lenses for the RF mount when the Canon adapter system works so incredibly well. I LOVE the Sigma Art primes on my R bodies where they all share the same VND and CPL filters via the drop-in adapter, and pick up the bonus of IBIS. As for RF 24-70, looks like a great lens, and I’d take one. But, I just don’t love the “standard “ zoom enough to pay for it. When I “need” the zoom, I find the WAY cheaper Sigma 18-35 f/1.8 on the R7 will get the job done.

[KAGilligan]

Agree, the Tamron EF 70-200 f/2.8 is amazing and works GREAT with my Canon R5 Mark 2 and the EF to RF adaptor. I've used it professionally, it is terrific. No way I am paying an additional $2, 000 for the Canon 70-200. Thanks for the video.

[JamesReader]

Awesome video Jared! There's some real gems on EF mount that I just don't think we'll see Canon release anything similar for a while. The Sigma 28mm 1.4 is one of my favourite lenses of all time.

[MegaSoundscapes]

I bought quite a bit of EF L glass over the past few years because it went for relatively cheap and because they are plenty sharp and I like the rendering better. The only RF glass I bought so far are 4 of the non L lenses, the 16, 35, 50 and 80. I payed around 1300 EUR for all four of them used and I like them because they are sharp, small and light. I can carry all four + my camera in a relatively small bag. EF L when it counts, RF for convenience. And: I bought a Canon 5D which I love and the EF L glass comes pretty handy here. Sharpness is not everything ;-) .... Thankx for the video and your thoughts on this matter !

[skfineshriber]

I used to be a Canon user, but having used LUMIX cameras alongside my 5D III and 77D I came to the conclusion that their older crop sensor had virtually no better IQ than my 20MP MFT cameras, and the G9 was making my 5D III seem like a brontosaurus. After leaving Canon behind I bought a LUMIX S5 and discovered Panasonic was making fast, FF, weather-sealed lenses of excellent quality that are half the price of RF glass (or even less). AND Sigma is producing incredible lenses as part of the L mount alliance that are about half to two-thirds the cost of RF lenses. Canon makes great gear, but they sure are tough on the wallet these days, unless you’re okay with extra-slow, consumer zooms.

[fbCleaner]

I partly agree. The telelenses rf 600mm and rf 800mm are not that bad considering the price of less than 1000€ (although they have a constant f11), and they work with the advanced autofocus of my R7, which you cannot say from ef or sigma/tamron lenses. But I agree that for macro, wide or standard lenses, you can go with ef lenses using the rf adapter!

[charlesjames]

I adapt EF lenses for my R5. They work great. The first RF I bought was the 28-70 f2. It is my favorite lens. I have EF 24, 35, 50, 24-70, and 24-105. 15-35. I don’t use them much at all. It has a prime look in a zoom.

[ThreeCeeProductions]

I am 100% with you. I own the Tamron you mention and it is great on my R5. I kept all my classic EF glass and it isn’t always as sharp as RF glass but those lenses have unique character missing in the newer glass. The RF28-70 is my favorite lens but my adapted EF135 f2 is right there for way less money in terms of quality!

[whfowle]

I already have a full set of Canon EF glass so I don't need to pick RF versions. So, just for travel purposes, I bought three non L RF lenses: 50 f1.8, 15-30 and 24-200 zooms which cover everything I will need and are a lot lighter than the L glass.

[peterjulianphotos]

I'm still using a 90D and there's not much between it and the R7 sensor wise. I have the Sigma 18-35 1.8 (APS-C Beast) and today I picked up a second hand copy of the Sigma 24-105 F4 for $400 (that's 1/3 the cost of a of new lens) and it is in mint condition, so along with a 10-18 and the Canon 75-300 IS USM II, I have a pretty well rounded hobby kit, which will convert nicely when I eventually purchase an R7 mark x. I don't see a compelling case for change at present. Yes they're lighter and blah but the sensor is not offering twice the value.

[saralang]

Im glad you have this video. I have the Tamron 70-200mm 2.8 and was thinking of getting rid of it and switching to the RF version. But now I think I’ll keep it. I did get the RF 100-500mm and it’s a HUGE upgrade from the Tamron 150-600mm I have. That was a winner.