I haven't dumped EF and DSLR's but I have trimmed down to 4 that I still use, and have all of the EF lenses that I've collected over the years, which are quite a few, from consumer to the L series. I have 3 R series cameras, the R5, R6, and R6 mark II and don't use EF glass on any of them. I started using RF right away. I won't rehash what others have said, but will add that the 20mm flange distance allows for better sharpness and IQ, like on my RF 15-35mm f/2.8L the image is sharp across the sensor at 15mm and the same for my RF 50mm f/1.2 L and RF 100mm f/2.8L macro. My other L lenses are sharp, but there is some barely perceivable falloff in the corners. Since these are tele, I'm generally cropping so it's of no concern. I'll also mention that RF lenses have 12 contacts opposed to the 8 of EF and this allows for much faster communication for AF and IS/IBIS coordination. In general, RF out performs EF. It's true EF adapted works fine but when you have the chance to compare to RF counterparts, you can see the difference in response. Yes, the cameras play a big part in that, but the new tech in the lens has to keep up, and does. BTW, this is my 3rd mount change... FD, EF, and RF. As for prices, compared to what the other lenses for previous mounts, the prices are comparable when they were released to RF, accounting for U.S. dollar value at the time. Heck, IIRC I paid near $800 for a FujiFilm FinePix E900 PnS in 2005 or it could have been the Sony ShureShot. My wife was still shooting 35mm film at the time. I wish I could remember what I paid for the Rebel XSi shortly thereafter 🙂
Newton
EOS R5, R6, R6II. RF 15-35 f/2.8L, 50mm f/1.2L, 85mm f/1.2L, 100mm f/2.8L Macro, 100-400mm, 100-500mm L, 1.4X.
