So My Long Term Plan - Lens & Camera Goals

[Far-Out-Dude]

So my long term plan over next 3 years is this:

1: I will be getting a Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS II USM Lens later this month, this will connect to my Canon M50 for taking pictures of wildlife, particularly wild turkey and whitetail deer. It will also be used for landscape and birding.

2. Next April I want to get a new camera, something better for the lens. I am disabled but think I can save between $1500.00-2500.00 depending on how much I am willing to go without. I once built a computer by going a month and a half out of a 4 month period without eating (Not all at once) and think I can still do the same.

3. If my GF has not left me by then I want to get the Canon RF 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS USM Lens by April 2025 which will be a main landscape lens.

Now a big question I have is should I trade the EF model (100-400mm) in for the mirrorless model when I get the camera, is there any difference in performance to warrant such an action?

Thoughts on this?

[ebiggs1]

" Is there any prime lens that would perform as the 32mm EF-M lens "

Any Canon prime lens in the 30+mm FL range do as well. The Canon 35mm f/2 IS as the Canon EF 35mm f/1.4L II USM come to mind. Plus what I consider the best IQ lens, perhaps of all lenses made, the Sigma 35mm f/1.4 DG HSM Art. It is the only Sigma prime lens I still own and I have had many of them. However, I don't believe these will work on an M series camera.

[ebiggs1]

" I intend to get it printed on metal, ..."

You know Red River Paper has a faux metal paper that is pretty fantastic. It has the metal look but you can print it on any photo capable home printer. I have used it  for several years now with my Canon Pro-100 photoprinter.

They also have a faux canvas paper that's also pretty fantastic, too.

[Far-Out-Dude]

Thank you for the suggestion, I only have a small HP printer at this time and it is not a photo printer and also is not capable of printing the size print I would like which is 24x36, it was a gift from my GF. My other problem would be framing and the weight of it, that is why I looked at canvas and metal.

I eliminated canvas for this photograph at least because it would for all extensive purposes crop the picture which I do not want at all. That left me with metal which is by far the most expensive but would also be the second lightest or maybe even the first lightest depending on how a canvas would be framed from behind and the hanging hardware if any on a canvas. 24x36 was the smallest I could go without removing quality from the image and without having to crop it at all on metal. I did not even consider glass because to be perfectly honest I am a walking accident.

[Far-Out-Dude]

" Is there any prime lens that would perform as the 32mm EF-M lens "

Any Canon prime lens in the 30+mm FL range do as well. The Canon 35mm f/2 IS as the Canon EF 35mm f/1.4L II USM come to mind. Plus what I consider the best IQ lens, perhaps of all lenses made, the Sigma 35mm f/1.4 DG HSM Art. It is the only Sigma prime lens I still own and I have had many of them. However, I don't believe these will work on an M series camera.

EB
EOS 1DX and 1D Mk IV and several lenses!

Would they have that same combination of width and magnification as the 32mm EF-M? I liked the pictures from that above all other EF-M Prime lenses I had looked at.

[Tronhard]

"However, I don't believe these will work on an M series camera."

There is an EF to EF-M adapter available, which will take both EF and EF-S lenses and when I used the adapter it worked for both  types.

[Far-Out-Dude]

I think you meant that as a reply to ebiggs1 I know it will work fine if it is an EF or EFS lens with the adapter I have from Canon. From the add on the site I bought it from:

                                                                                                            "The Canon EF-M lens adapter kit for Canon EF/ EF-S lenses enables you to mount Canon EF and EF-S lenses onto the Canon EOS-M mirrorless Digital Cameras (M3, M5, M6), which has an EF-M lens mount. It is fully compatible with all lens functions, including image stabilization and autofocus." This is the model number. Mount Adap EF-EOS M (N)

[ebiggs1]

Whether an adapter is available or not and whether it works or not isn't the point here. The point is a 35mm or 32mm lens is a 35mm or 32mm lens no matter what camera it is used on. Now there are some equivalency differences  when comparing camera to camera but not lens to lens on the same camera.

I don't like adapters and I don't use adapters. I know they make an adapter to mount almost anything to anything.

[Far-Out-Dude]

I know I am new but I can't say I agree with you, I have seen pictures with 50mm of different configuration from Canon like the Nifty 50 vs the 1.4 and they do look different off the same camera. I am going to have to come back and reply, the dog has decided it it petting time, sorry.

[ebiggs1]

" I have seen pictures with 50mm of different configuration from Canon like the Nifty 50 vs the 1.4 and they do look different off the same camera."

Not only does it require the same FL, 50mm in this case, but the lenses have to be set exactly the same. I.E., each 50mm lens will need to be at the same aperture and at the same distance. Those specs being the same the result will be the same. It is not possible for it not to be. Now if you are referring to color rendition and QA and the such,  yes, there can be a difference there. But 50mm is 50mm is 50mm no matter what camera it is use on. Once a lens is made nothing can change its FL or its AOV. Camera sensor size being equal.

"...  I can't say I agree with you ..."

You are not disagreeing with me. You are disagreeing with the law of physics

[Far-Out-Dude]

"Now if you are referring to color rendition and QA and the such, yes, there can be a difference there." I am not 100% sure I understand that. Could you educate me further please?