Yes. The RF lineup is not yet fully populated and Canon keeps coming up with some intriguing and unexpected lenses. Honestly, if I had an R, I would be a bit cautious about buying RF lenses for another couple of years for fear that a lens better suited to my style might be released. For example, buy the RF 70-200 f/2.8 now, or is the rumor true that a RF 70-150 f/2 is coming? Which would you prefer?Originally Posted by Sinh Nhut Nguyen
I will feel better once it seems the RF lineup is fully developed. In the mean time, EF lenses are known quantities and all reports I hear is that they perform as well or maybe even a bit better on the R cameras.
Plus, you could get the EF to RF adapter that holds filters and suddenly you have a filter set that works on all your lenses.
All that said, if I did pick up an R, I would be tempted by some of the RF lenses. By all accounts I read/watch, they are exceptional. And, eventually, I will migrate my high use EF lenses over to the RF equivalents for that reason. As an example, the RF 24-70 out paces my favorite lens, the EF 24-70 II at each focal length, 50 mm is the extreme as that is a weak point of the 24-70 II (and weak is a relative term, the 24-70 II is an amazing lens, but the RF is sharper).
So, this is interesting. The RF version is smaller, lighter, appears to be faster focusing, and some have claimed better IQ (especially bokeh, as it has an extra blade, sharpness, meh, depends on focal length IMO). If those mean something too you, get the RF. The EF version is internal focusing and has the zoom ring closer to the camera, I have seen a few photographers that state that really matters to them. If none of the above matters, save some money. Both appear to be exceptional lenses. I own the EF 70-200 f/2.8 II. I love the lens for casual shooting, although, I will say, I am falling more in love with the EF 85 f/1.4 IS for portraits.
Reply With Quote