Moving From Rebel T6 to R50, Travel Advice

[SheldonS]

Hello everyone! Based on some feedback in another post I went ahead and purchased an R50 to replace my Rebel T6. So far I do not regret it. The R50 is light and easy to carry on hikes! I also like that I can manipulate the display screen so I do not always have to get on the ground for some shots! I am also a bit overwhelmed by all of the options, which I know is a good thing once I get use to them.

As luck would have it, we are going on a trip where I want to make ample use of my camera. I only have the one RF that came with my camera. I do have the control adapter and several EF/EF-S lenses. Where we are going will more than likely involve landscapes, sun rise/set, I hope some wildlife or at least birds, and portraits.

Does anyone have suggestions I could use to come up to speed quickly? I hate to admit it, but I will be buying R50 for Dummies in addition to a handful of YouTube videos that seem useful from their description.

Any suggestions as to what lenses should I bring? I want to keep it light but effective. I was thinking my one RF lens as my main lens, then maybe the 50 for portraits and the 75-300 for any potential wildlife.

• RF-S18-45mm F4.5-6.3 IS STM
• EF-S 24mm f/2.8 STM
• EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS II
• EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 III
• EF 50mm f/1.8 STM

[March411]

@SheldonS you don't mention what came with the camera in your post, that information would be helpful in assisting you with any recommendations.

Also, while the RF75-300mm is a decent lens you may want to do some additional research.  Hopefully someone will correct me if I am incorrect but I believe that the RF mount was simply retrofitted from the old EF lens, not much else changed. It also uses the direct current electric motor which is not on par with the RF100-400mm Nano USM. Most importantly if you plan on doing wildlife photography with a 300mm it will most likely disappoint. It is in my opinion a fairly primitive lens.

At the very least I would look at the RF100-400mm. Many will tell you that 400mm while not perfect for wildlife is the bare minimum they would go, the extra 100mm will come in handy and the lens is considerably sharper, better focus tracking and has IS at about 5 stops. Just something else to consider.

[jrhoffman75]

My wife made the same transition.

If you are not prepared to purchase I would recommend at least renting the RF 100-400 lens that Marc mentioned. Lighter, higher quality and takes full advantage of the R50 AF system.

One thing we noticed. It might be how she was carrying it, but the Mode Selection button was frequently inadvertently moved off the desired mode. I disabled the button in settings and rely on the Menu screen for selection.

[SheldonS]

Thank you for the feedback. The RF lens that came with my camera is the RF-S18-45mm F4.5-6.3 IS STM.

[shadowsports]

I think @March411 and @jrhoffman75 's advice is solid.

I might trade these three lenses in and use that money to offset the purchase of a RF 100-400.  New, refurbished or used.  You can keep the EF 50 f1.8 if you want as well.  (For now) 🤔

• EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS II
• EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 III
• EF 50mm f/1.8 STM

There is nothing magic or special about the 18-55 or 75-300.  Although using them, adapted doesn't significantly increase what you have mounted to the camera, sticking with a native mount does maximize size and weight for carry.  

The 50 on your R50 is going to give you an equivalent field of view of 85mm which as you said is great for portraits.  

Technically you're missing focal length between 46 and 100 mm, but if you keep the 50, you're sitting between 46 and 85 mm, not 100% in FL per se but FOV equivalence.  Sometimes focal length overlap is unavoidable, and sometimes we all have one or more specialty lenses like the 24mm pancake.  It's super compact, but not when adapted.  Look at a few sites for trade-in, KEH, B&H, etc.  You may get more than you think, and this helps to offset capital expense.  I understand you've spent significant time and money building your stable of lenses.  In the long run you'll want to balance strategy and goals.  When possible, going with a native mount is preferred, but not mandatory.  

I might do something like this. 

RF-S 10-18

RF-S 18-150

RF 100-400

Or

RF-S 18-45

RF-S 55-210

RF 100-400

Of course there are full frame lens strategies as well.  All you wanted to know is what lenses you should take on your trip.  Nothing has to be purchased immediately and you can determine your own strategy.  Just something to think about for the future.  The RF100-400 is a really nice lens. I own one and the extra 100mm of reach over the 300 mm is well worth its cost.  I agree it will be a great addition to your existing lineup.  

[ebiggs1]

I am 100% in on buying the 100-400mm as Marc opined 400mm is minimum for wildlife, IMHO, as a general statement of course it depends on what the word "wildlife" means. Obviously there is a big difference between a hummingbird and a grizzled bear.

RF-S18-45mm F4.5-6.3 IS STM <-- you own

EF-S 24mm f/2.8 STM <-- no

EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS II <-- perhaps if you sell the 18-45mm

EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 III <-- no

EF 50mm f/1.8 STM <-- big no

"... maybe the 50 for portraits and the 75-300 for any potential wildlife."

You will find the 50mm to be one of the most difficult lenses to live with especially on a cropper. Its use will be very limited besides you already have a lens with 45mm included and if you buy the somewhat better 18-55mm you have 50mm for free. As to the 75-300mm I guarantee you will be dissatisfied with it for wildlife most of the time. Now of course these comments and opinions are of a general nature because we have no idea how you will actually use them. Plus most of the FL (or close enough) suggested is available in the RF mount and that is what you want to buy going forward. Don't buy new lenses in the EF or EF-s mount.

[TomRamsey]

Like everyone else I feel it would be much wiser to get the 100-400 over the 75-300 option.  The 18-55 may be a little better than your 18-45, but maybe replace it with the 18-150, or add the 24-105.  I feel zoom lenses make a strong case for traveling because sometime you just can't change lenses, so the less the better, plus less to carry.  Plus, when you do sunrises and sunsets, conditions change quickly, you don't want to be changing lenses as the light changes.+

[March411]

---

@ebiggs1 wrote:
Obviously there is a big difference between a hummingbird and a grizzled bear.

---

🤣 Well said, perfect for the grizzly may not for the hummer 

[SheldonS]

I noticed from all the great feedback that I did not clarify the list of lenses in my post. Those are the lenses I currently own. All of the EF ones are what I used, or my son used, on our Rebels.

That said, I know my next purchase will be the RF 100-400mm. Thank all of you so much for your words of wisdom and great advice!

[March411]

@SheldonS when you pick it up come back and give us your thoughts, if you like it or if we steered you down the wrong path (although I think you'll be happy). And if you get the chance some images.

Good luck, it was good talking to you.