RF native or EF with adapter

[Busted Knuckles]

RF 100-500 vs the Tamzooka.

The RF produces a better image at 500 and cropped to effective 600 that the tamzooka. Focusing is faster as well

RF 24-105 vs EF 24-105. Soooooo close, Really can't tell a difference in thiddle 2/3rds of the frame.

Going to keep the 100-500 going to send back the 24-105.

My 2 cents.

[neuroanatomist]

I think I’m repeating myself, but in general the RF lenses offer a meaningful improvement over their EF counterpart, at a substantially higher cost. The RF 24-105 is an exception to both – it’s not meaningfully better than the EF version, and it launched at the same price as the EF version it replaced.

[HDNitehawk]

The real question does the "meaningful improvement" justify the "substantially higher cost".
My impression of the RF 24-70, RF 70-200 and RF 100-500 are that they do offer meaningful improvement with IS and the added length of the 100-500.
But the amount of improvement versus the cost really does make the upgrade a Luxury Purchase and not a Necessary Purchase.
Just my opinion.