Lens Upgrades for the EOS R6 Mark II

[Teacherbytes]

I recently bought an R6 Mark II, trading in an EOS 80D with the EF-S 18-135 mm kit lens and an EF-S 10-18 mm. Now, the lenses I currently have are the RF 24-105 mm F4-7.1 STM (kit lens), EF 70-300 mm F4-5.6 USM II, and the EF 50 mm F1.8. I would like to get at least one or two RF L lenses. What would be the best way to upgrade to better RF lenses for landscape, travel, street, and walking around? 

[Tronhard]

Hi and welcome to the forum:
Are considering keeping your EF 70-300 and EF-50mm lenses or would you sell those to fund the RF glass?

Without a budget figure it is hard to make sure we sit within your financial comfort zone, but I do have some suggestions.

Super wide angle the RF 14-35L f/4, compact, light, brilliant optic and it takes a conventional 77mm filter thread, which is rather unique for such a wide angle.  See some sample images here:
Broadening My Horizons - Canon Community
Making Light of the Big Commute Home! - Canon Community
Since you have an existing RF 24-105 f/4-7.1 you could retain it for that range.
For the third choice, you could then go for the RF 100-400 f/5.6-8 IS USM.  While the f/stop may seem high at the long end, the significantly better performance of the sensor allows for a lot more ISO flexibility.

Thus, in three lenses for a relatively modest investment, you would have a range from 14-400mm to replace your 10-18, 18-135 and 70-300.

One other possibility for a walk around lens is the rather excellent RF 24-250 IS USM.  I got it as a stopgap while I was waiting for availability of my RF 24-105 f/4L, but I actually use it more.   It is rather the ultimate travel and walk-around lens.  There is a series of sample images I have posted in the Share Your Images section:
Moody Morning the the R6 & RF 24-240 - Canon Community
Trying out the RF 24-240 on Wildlife with the R5 - Page 2 - Canon Community
Diwali in Auckland, NZ - Canon Community

IF you were prepared to invest in a seriously more expensive option:
RF 14-35 f/4 L
RF 24-105 f/4 L (replacing the current RF 24-105)
RF 100-500 f/4.5-7.1 L
These are all pro-grade lenses but that combination will come at a price...

[justadude]

Hey Trevor, have you ever used the RF 14-35L f/4 on any night sky photography?  I hear a lot of good things about that lens, but I'm hesitant because of the F/4 which generally will not gather enough light under very dark skies - for example on a 10 second exposure of the Milky Way or Northern Lights.  

[Tronhard]

Gidday Garry! 🙂
I honestly don't do a lot of nigh sky photography, so it would be inappropriate for me to comment from an astronomical photographer's point of view.   I have seen some comments on this site (you may be able to do a search), and definitely on the web.

Living in Auckland, NZ's largest city is not too good for astronomy in general and by the time evening comes around these days I am too exhausted to stay up late to venture out to clear skies.   Sorry, but best to be honest.

[Teacherbytes]

Whether to keep the EF 50mm and EF 70-300 mm depends on whether RF equivalents would be worth upgrading. I used both lenses with R6 Mark II with an adapter, and the photos came out well. If RF lenses, especially L ones, are close in quality to the EF lenses, then I will stay put. I have considered the 24-70 and 70 to 200 L lenses or swapping the 24-105 F4-7.1 for the 24-105 F4 L and then trade the 70-300 for the 70-200 F4 L. Decisions, decisions.

[ebiggs1]

You already have the 24-105mm zoom it is going to hard do better for a GP lens.  I would take the advice above an consider sells those lenses. Your next purchase should probably be a longer FL lens or a very much shorter FL lens. No points duplicating what you already have. Check out the 100-400mm for example.