EF Lenses Compared To RF Lenses

[Cantrell]

All,

I have an R10 with RF 100-400mm, RF-s 18-45mm, RF-s 18-150mm, Sigma 50mm ART, Sigma 18-50mm, and a Tamron 150-600mm F5-6.3 Di VC USD G2 lenses. I look at the Canon section of Facebook several times a week. I noticed that individuals are selling and looking to buy EF lenses more frequently than the RF lenses. Why are the EF lenses more popular than the RF lenses? Are the EF lenses better quality or are there just more of them? 

Thanks in advance for your response.

[Waddizzle]

Popular?  If many people are selling off their EF lenses, why do think they are popular ?

[March411]

Canon has been producing EF lenses since 1987 and they say they produced over 150 million EF lenses. So it would be safe to say there are more EF lenses currently available on the market. My personal experience and much of what I read is showing that with the Canon adapter the EF glass performs better on the R bodies then it does on DSLR's. I did have to do some firmware updates but now both the Canon and third party EF mount glass performs fantastic on all of my R bodies with the simple Canon adapter.

So you come to next part of the story, the cost for the EF glass. It is now is extremely competitive to the RF glass and is an outstanding option if someone wants to move to MILC without the added expense of RF glass. Canon gave their consumer the ability to selectively upgrade to RF glass without hurting them financially or having to compromise IQ/performance.

My only concern, maintenance long term, parts availability will become a challenge.

I think there is a bit of misinformation floating around on the inter-web regarding EF glass. While it is true that "older" glass with the EF mount has some compatibility issues there is a  lot of EF lenses that will perform at an outstanding level.

If a lens has the ability to complete firmware updates most of the time it resolves compatibility issues. There was a recent post here where a member was having issues with a Tamron 18-400mm lens. This lens was launched in Jun 2017 and some here suggested it wouldn't work on an R body. The member used the simple Canon adapter (which I also prefer), upgraded the firmware and now has a working lens for his R7.

So is the quality better, no, is it as good or very close, yes. Is there more EF glass on the market....absolutely and most of the time at a lower cost for a comparable lens.

[Cantrell]

March411,

Thank you very much for your explanation. What does MILC mean?

[March411]

Sorry, I need to stop doing that....

Mirrorless interchangeable-lens camera

[Cantrell]

March411,

Thank you for the meaning of MILC. 

[shadowsports]

Greetings,

I don't track these type of statistics too closely, but know there are more EF lenses in existence than RF.  

Mirrorless technology has certainly eclipsed DSLRs and EF lenses from a performance standpoint overall.  It doesn't mean DSLRs or EF lenses are bad, they are still alive and work great.  

Many EF lenses can work well adapted to an R series body.  However, no further development is taking place.  The highest level of performance will be realized using RF/RF-S lenses on a R series body.  Focus speed and subject tracking are examples.  

EF lenses aren't necessarily more popular. I fully transition to RF a couple of years ago.  It comes down to need and one's budget.

Since you have an R series body, it's probably best to continue investing in RF/RF-S series glass from a long-term investment standpoint.

[Cantrell]

Rick,

Thank you for your response.

[March411]

To expand on Ricks post, even with an EF lens you will realize faster focus and subject tracking on an R body. It will be far superior to an EF lens mounted on just about any DSLR. It's simple math!

Using the 5D Mark IV and the R5 as an example. The 5d Mark IV has 61 AF points the R5 has 5,940 AF areas (changed the focus point naming convention). 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.

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.

This is completely an opinion, using both EF and RF the focus rate and tracking to me seem very comparable. Do I sometimes miss a shot due to a lens tracking and searching? Absolutely, with both RF and EF lenses.

ebiggs1 mentions in his post below that "I do think it is smart and a good idea to go all RF if you own an R series camera", and I agree with that statement with a couple conditions.

• You own good EF glass and want to transition over to RF slowly due to expense.
• Due to expense you currently can't afford RF glass but can purchase the same lens in an EF mount at a significant savings.
• You are not a professional photographer completing projects for hire where the speed of the lens can impact your ability to fulfill the obligations of your job.

Most importantly, it's vital to realize that EF lenses at some point will not be a repairable commodity. I have local support which has confirmed they will be able to support my EF glass for both Canon and third party for 5 years. The best part, they are 30 minutes from my house.

[Cantrell]

Marc,

Thank you for the additional information.

Reese