Ef 100mm macro vs RF 100macro

[kandchka1]

Hello,

I have a Tamron 90mm macro EF mount which I use on my R5 and 5D4. The lens is starting to show signs of failure and I am looking for a new one.

Is the RF 100mm much better than the EF version ?

Thank you for your advices !

[shadowsports]

Greetings,

If you are unlikely to purchase another DSLR, investing in EF glass does not offer the same return on investment as an RF lens.  The 5D mk IV is about 9 years old now.  It's still a great camera. 

One other thing, the RF version has going for it is it's spherical aberration adjustment ring.  This actually shifts the entire lens group inside the lens allowing you to shift emphasis between background and foreground.

If continuing to use your 5D mkIV for macro photography is imperative then your only option is EF.  If you are okay with relegating your macro photography to the R5, Then the RF version is a better investment option.

[ebiggs1]

I wouldn't buy any more EF glass. Go with the RF series.

[March411]

I would have to agree that with you owning an R5 the transition to RF glass would be the best way to go right now. I went through a similar struggle knowing that the EF lens could be mounted on my 5D Mk IV and my R5 with an adapter. It was a difficult decision going with the RF since it meant I was moving away from my EF bodies. 

The RF100mm F2.8 L Macro IS USM is an excellent lens and performs well on all my R bodies. Here's a sample image on the R50.

[p4pictures]

The RF 100mm F2.8L Macro IS USM is the best choice optically and for the future, though I still prefer the feel of the manual focus ring on the EF version, and I use manual focus more often when doing close-up work.