It is Jonathan's Fault.... :)

[Kayaker72]

Hi Mike...

As I recall, you already have the RF 100-500, correct? What are the EF lenses you would swap out.

Regarding the conversion in general, the advantages I see of RF lenses:

• A few of them offer dual AF motors which does, IMO, lead to faster AF. This does include the RF 24-105 f/2.8. Having used this lens since it was released, it is exceptional. This also includes the RF 100-300 f/2.8. Neuro and Jonathan are both using this lens and it looks like a stellar piece of kit.
• Video. EF glass typically had USM motors, which makes a slight clicking sound that you can hear in video. It is not necessarily loud and I've asked people about it and it does seem that I am the one that notices it. But. the motors in RF lenses are much quieter if not silent. This was the primary reason I picked up the 24-105 f/2.8.

In terms of IQ, there are some lenses that are better, but are they noticeably better? I tend to think not. A few examples:

• RF 15-35 f/2.8 vs EF 16-35 f/2.8 III @ 20 mm (which they both have in common)
• RF 24-105 f/2.8 vs EF 24-70 II @ 24 mm and @ 70 mm
• RF 85 f/1.2 vs EF 85 f/1.4 @ f/1.4. Here I can see a difference, but I usually give myself a bit more DoF and here is the comparison at f/2
• Etc

IQ is often a push between the generation of lens mounts, IMO. Canon is on record as saying they have been designing for higher MP cameras for a while.

That said, there are some RF lenses with no real EF equivalent, like the RF 28-70 f/2, the RF 100-300 f/2.8, RF 10-20, etc.

As I have been thinking about my RF lens transition (going to hold off at least 1 more year), a killer RF kit, IMO would be (with my order of preference if I was building a kit from nothing):

• UWA: 1) RF 10-20, or 2) RF 14-35 or 3) RF 15-35
• Light weight UWA: RF 16 f/2.8 (I am already using this for my "just in case" UWA lens while traveling)
• Astro lens...please
• General purpose range: 1) 24-105 f/2.8, 1a) 28-70 f/2 (I am becoming more tempted by this lens), 3) 24-70 f/2.8, or 4) 24-105 f/4
• Portrait: 1) RF 85 f/1.2, 2) RF 70-200 f/2.8, or 3) RF 50 f/1.2 and/or RF 135 f/1.8.
• General Purpose/lighter weight Telephoto: RF 100-500, and distant 2) one of the 70-200s, mostly if size/weight are important
• Large wildlife: 100-300 f/2.8
• Wildlife: 100-300 f/2.8 with 1.4x TC (and really, even at 600 mm with a 2x tc, this is not bad, mostly AF speed)
• Birds: RF 200-800

Edit--of course, the RF 400 f/2.8, EF 600 f/4 fall into this category.

I do wonder if I will ever fully transition. But I do not want to be stuck traveling with 2 RF lenses, an EF lens or two and then realize I forgot an adapter. I would prefer to be strongly in one camp or another. Thus, I do suspect I will migrate in a year or two.

What I am waiting on can be found in my RF lens wishlist. That said, I have three of the lenses on my list: RF 16 f/2.8, RF 24-105 f/2.8, and RF 200-800. "Transitioning" may not be that big of deal in a year or two.