What glass for EOS R7

[carvat]

So I just upgraded from 80D to R7. I'm just a bit lost to which lenses to keep/get. I have the RF-S 18-150 which I read is well rated, but it just seemed... Small. I know it's the dumbest thing ever to say but I was really taken aback at how cheap it feels, yet reviews seem pretty good. Mind you I also don't have great EF lenses so anyway all that to say, looking for advice.

I have an EF 70-300 USM II which I struggle with the softness at times for wildlife, a EF-S 18-135 (kit) which was fine I guess but not great, an EF-S 10-18 which doesn't seem well rated yet I really enjoy and finally a 50 1.8 which I barely use but is still quite fun.

I mostly do landscape with a bit of wildlife, and travel a lot so portability is a factor, but not to the point of sacrificing quality.

Which lenses would you say are musts, which are good quality for money (I'm a hobbyist) and which of mine could I repurpose with an adapter? Thanks

[p4pictures]

The EF70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS II USM lens is rather good, and I would suggest getting the Canon EF to EOS R mount adapter to use with it as an initial step with the EOS R7. This will help you determine if the lens is actually soft or if it was a limitation of the EOS 80D. 

The RF-S 18-150mm kit lens is quite a revelation and actually performs very well. I have one and it is sharp and good, while also being small and light. Great for a lens with an effective 28.8 to 240mm range. I certainly think it is better than the EF-S 18-135mm lenses. It is certainly a great travel lens in my view. 

The reality is that the EF and EF-S lenses you have can be used with the adapter on the new camera, and that is a good initial step. However there are other options with RF lenses. You might find that the RF 100-400mm lens is ideal for wildlife having a bit more reach than your current 70-300mm, and it is also great value. The downside is the f/5.6-f/8 maximum aperture which might need a little more light than your current 70-300mm. Don't be put off by its small size and light weight.

There is an RF-S 10-18mm lens that you might choose to replace your existing EF-S 10-18mm. 

RF-S10-18mm F4.5-6.3 IS STM 

RF100-400mm F5.6-8 IS USM 

[Wandalynn]

Since p4pictures mentioned the RF 100-400, I thought I'd jump in and say that when that lens was announced, I got on the preorder list. It's a terrific lens, a real bargain. I was at first concerned about f/8 at the long end but that's been pretty much a non-issue because Photoshop, Lightroom, and other processing apps have gotten so good at removing noise. Yes, there have been some times in very low light situations that I wish I had had a faster lens, but my general feeling is it's a great lens, especially for carrying on hikes. Very lightweight, and the minimum focus distance (weight and MFD are two of the main specs I look at) is about 3.5 ft. at 400mm. This is excellent, comparable to the MFD for the much more expensive RF 100-500 L lens at 400mm. I also find that the RF 100-400 gives me more sharp images than when I was using an EF 100-300 II--maybe the problem was me, I don't know. At some point after I got the RF 100-400, however, I started keeping my camera set on high-speed continuous shooting because sometimes the first image in a set wouldn't be as sharp as the second one (this is handheld). Just my experience.

If you decide to buy an adapter, get a Canon brand adapter rather than third party. Now you can find these adapters in the used market pretty easily. And I recommend buying only from authorized Canon dealers.