EF 17-40/4 L US, EF 16-35mm/2.8 L USM II or Samyang AF14/2.8 on EOS R?

[No-Frills]

I want to complement my R equipment. I have the EOS R and may follow. I need sometimes more than 24mm and bokeh isn't an issue.

The Samyang AF14/2.8 may be a good option. But I can't mount a filter. I photograph often in harsh conditions, e.g. constructions aereas.

My second thought: can the EF 17-40/4 L US or EF 16-35mm/2.8 L USM II image quality keep up to the R/R5?

My last considaration: the EF 17-40/4 L US is cheaper than the EF 16-35mm/2.8 L USM II and maybe a cheap substitute until another options ar available. I hope that Sigma or Tamron launch a soon a similar lens. Or Canon comes with somethng affordable in the range of 15 to 18mm.

[Waddizzle]

You have an RF mount body.  You should only consider RF mount lenses, especially if you are considering an R5.

[ebiggs1]

"You should only consider RF mount lenses, especially if you are considering an R5."

This only makes sense.  And, stick with Canon unless there is no Canon to consider.

[John_SD]

---

@No-Frills wrote:

My last considaration: the EF 17-40/4 L US is cheaper than the EF 16-35mm/2.8 L USM II and maybe a cheap substitute until another options ar available. I hope that Sigma or Tamron launch a soon a similar lens. Or Canon comes with somethng affordable in the range of 15 to 18mm.

---

The typically reliable Canon Rumors has recently stated, in no uncertain terms, that Sigma will begin making RF mount lenses in 2021. Hope it's true. 

[WagerD]

I bought the 16-35 EF L 4.0 is right before buying an R6 (R5 on its way). Great lens at a great price, and works excellently with the R6 and Canon adapter.