Any reason to update 50mm ef to rf?

[jazmin8]

Have the old nifty 50 and am excited about new mirrrorless. Is the any optical reason to upgrade to the rf version? Or is it just if you don’t want to use an adapter.

Is the autofocus or sharpness noticeably better on the native rf?

[shadowsports]

Greetings,

What camera do you own?  I owned the EF 50mm f1.8.  I used it with my 6DII from time to time.  Very sharp and nice broken.  I retired it when I went mirrorless.  

The differences between each might be classified as mainly objective.  Image clarity corner to center, softness of the bokeh balls and the anti reflective coatings used. 

Beyond that come other performance enhancements.  Things like focus acquisition and max frame rates.  

This is not across the board as the EF version can perform differently depending the the body.

In the long run a RF lens is going to be a better match paired with a mirrorless body.  Optical quality will be very close.  You may see faster focus acquisition, frame rates and improved clarity due to lens coating.  With that said, this is a $200 lens.  If it's a lens you use often replace it.  

[March411]

I have several EF mount lenses, both Canon and Sigma that I use on R bodies and the performance of the EF lenses has been very good if not excellent. Personally I have had virtually no issues and if you do a google search you will find that many professionals and enthusiasts are holding onto and using EF lenses. 

The share number of focus points in most Canon mirrorless bodies will greatly improve the performance of the EF lens and that not even diving into the conversation regarding advances in sensor tech in the R bodies.

Where the RF lens really does perform better, communication with the body. The RF lens mount has 12 electrical contact pins, compared to the EF mount's 8 pins, the added contact pins result in a significantly faster data transfer rate.

Image stabilization is another area where the RF lens will perform better as it can coordinate with the lens's image stabilization system more efficiently due to faster data transfer.

So with all that being said, if you can afford the RF lenses there are some reasons to use them on the R bodies.

Also, I tested many of the adapters, third party and Canon and would suggest going with the simple Canon Mount Adapter EF-EOS R for $129 new US (or used from a trusted reseller). I had communication challenges with the 3rd party adapters that at times caused the focus to rack or be extremely slow.  The adapter with the control ring, the ring is to close to the body and it makes it challenging to use, especially with longer lenses.

[deebatman316]

It depends on which EF 50mm F/1.8 you own. Canon has released 3 models over the years the most common being the EF 50mm F/1.8 II lens. I would suggest replacing this model. The AF motor is too slow, lacks a distance encoder for E-TTL auto flash. The AF motor is too slow to keep up with modern cameras. It also doesn’t support Dual Pixel AF to allow the camera to fully utilize the AF system. No smooth transition between aperture in video mode. The original EF 50mm F/1.8 is very similar to its replacement. But it uses an older slower AF motor called Arc Form Drive. The max fps of these old Arc Form Drive lenses is 3-4 fps max. There’s no way around this limitation due to the communication speed being very slow. Requiring the AF and aperture control to take place sequentially instead of at the same time. The newest EF 50mm F/1.8 STM solves all the issues with both older models. It will also be able to make full use of the highly advanced AF system found in the EOS R series.

[kvbarkley]

*If* you are purchasing the Canon EF-RF adapter for other EF lenses you own, the EF 50 will work just fine.

But do *not* buy the adapter just to use the EF 50, get the RF 50 instead.

[ebiggs1]

It wouldn't be the first thing I upgraded. And this, "But do *not* buy the adapter just to use the EF 50, get the RF 50 instead."

50mm just isn't that great of a FL to mess with a whole lot unless you have a specific use in mind or requirement.

[justadude]

I have the RF 50mm f/1.8 and my wife has the EF version ll.  Of course I had to try them side by side to see the differences when I first got mine a year ago.  I tried some shots on my R6 Mk ll in various light conditions and at different apertures.  Optically, I don't see any difference, even in the corners when I am viewing images at full screen size on my 24" iMac.  

The RF version is a little quicker to focus, but it's pretty marginal.  

Bottom line, in hindsight I would have been just as happy getting a used EF 50mm since I already have a Canon EF/RF adapter. The RF was cheap enough at only $200, but I could have bought a used EF that would have produced the same results for around $100.  Not a lot of difference in money, but I'd rather have the $100 saved in my pocket.  I'm weird that way.  🙂 

[Ron888]

I already had the EF (stm) version and decided to change to the RF version because it came with the RF camera kit i wanted.
I haven't done direct comparisons but i'm pretty sure it has creamier bokeh.It's something i noticed immediately so there must be some truth to it....? This based on daylight photos FWIW