Good video topic and well presented. Thanks. I bought my first Canon mirrorless (EOS R) in 2022 after decades of using various Canon film and Rebel DSLRs. Since I didn't want to sell a kidney to buy RF glass, I bought the Canon EF/RF adapter and found that it worked as if the EF glass was made for the R body. I've since added a Canon R6 II and bought another EF/RF mount because, again, I refuse to pay a ridiculous amount of money for Canon RF glass. Frankly, since it's been over 6 years since Canon introduced the RF mount, I don't understand why they still haven't opened up their RF architecture to 3rd party lens manufacturers like Tamron (my favorite) and Sigma. I'm guessing greed, but that's now got me thinking about jumping ship to the Sony system, where I can get great 3rd party glass at 2/3s to 1/2 the price of Canon's RF glass. Anyway, I have absolutely no issues with using EF glass on either of my RF bodies. I will continue to do so until Canon allows 3rd party manufacturers, or I switch to Sony, whichever comes first.
@@lobanrahmantonoy4130 Surely you have more ambition than to use inferior cheap glass. I'll take the premium lenses at premium prices and aspire to improve my work to be able to afford them.
I completely agree with your assessment. I have a full arsenal of top notch EF L series glass. I went to the R-5 the year it came out. ALL my EF glass works flawlessly on the R-5. A good portion of my photography is of the avian kind. Once I was completely confident that the EF and mirrorless body combo was a win, I purchased the RF 100-500 mm and used it extensively prior to selling my old reliable EF 100-400 L series ll I have no intention of upgrading to the R5-ll but will be very interested in the R-7 ll whenever it comes out. When the R-7 came out initially, I decided to experiment using it as a teleconverter on my 300MM f2.8 series ll telephoto in low light and was pleased with the results. If they improve the mechanical shutter and processor on this body it will be a good upgrade. Keep up the good work 👍
I had been heavily invested in a couple of Canon F-1 cameras with MF mother drives and a bunch of FD L lenses. When Canon made the Big Bang switch to the EF-mount, my FD equipment was obsolete. There was no worthwhile adapter for either FD lenses to EF cameras or vice versa. I was torqued at Canon for a decade, but eventually I had to admit that Canon's Big Bang directly from mechanical to fully electrical mount was the best idea. It was certainly better than Nikon's tortuous transition, during which you needed a scorecard to figure out which lenses worked with which bodies and how much would be automatic. In contrast...and because the EF mount is all-electrical...the switch from EF to RF has been practically painless. In fact, I've been using R-mount cameras for three years and still use my EF lenses, which operate as well or slightly better on the R cameras than they did on EF cameras. I do leave the adapters on the R cameras.
I’m using the Meike adapter with the variable ND filters with my R6 MKII. It works fine with my mirrorless camera. I like my organs where the manufacturer placed them so no RF (L) glass yet. I have no complaints and I leave my adapter on the camera. I own a couple of RF STM lenses. Thanks for the insight
My opinion of the additional length is that it shifts the center of gravity forward a little bit and makes it slightly uncomfortable to hold. It depends on your config but mine is quite bad with a long and heavy lens like 70-200 II on a lightweight body like the R8.
Having a load of FD glass on my old Canon cameras, I was bummed when they went autofocus with the EF mount, and it took me ages to bite the bullet and finally purchase an EOS 3. Now I have a truck load of EF glass, and Canon have done it again, a different mount on their new system. The only saving grace this time is that I can still use my EF lenses by utilising an adapter, and I have had no problems in doing so.
The reason why you need an adapter is not because Canon decided so, its optics. The RF mount has less flange distance and EF lenses, designed for DSLR would not be able to focus on the sensor. Then there is the electronics: RF has a modern protocol for camera to talk to lens and if you want to use an EF lens, you need a translator.
I was a newspaper photographer and had 2 Canon F1 with FD lenses back in the day and a bunch of lenses. Then I got a Canon camera with EF mount so I could use the FD lenses on it with an adapter. Now I Purchased a new Canon EOS RP with RF mount so I got another adapter for EF lenses would fit the new Canon camera. I have a Canon 500mm mirror lens with FD mount and guess what I use both adapters with the 500mm and it works!!! Now all my FD lenses fit the new camera.
you can get (and I own) a FD to RF adaptor - allows you to get that less than perfect retrofocus lens element in the FD to EF adaptor out of the equation
Urth make the one I own - it's about 1/3 the price of the basic EF to RF adaptor as there's no electrical connections - my guess Viltrox and similar brands would be the same low price
From my XP... Shot back in the day with the R6 and EF 24-75mm F2.8... Every now and then this combo stopped working with the original canon adapter. Had to switch the body on and off. Later I've been running older EF glas on Sony bodies. Worked great with the mc11 for photo. AF actually more predictable. Just my 2c.
I prefer EF lenses on my R7. The only issue I have found is I seem to have some occasional glitches in cold damp weather. When this happens, I simply re-seat the lens and adapter. I use 3 EF to RF adapters: the standard one from Canon, a Meike adapter with filter slot (great for my bulbous wide angle or catadioptic lenses which have no filter thread), and my Metabones Ultra SpeedBooster (how did I ever live without this?). There Metabones adapter is a phenomenal I use it on all my EF lenses to gain 1 f-stop of light, negate the most of the crop factor of the R7's crop sensor, and to very slightly improve the perceived IQ of a lens. Examples: My old kit 70-300mm is brighter and has noticeably better image quality, and shoots like a 77-330mm f4.5 instead of a 120-480mm f5.6. My old "Sigzilla" 300-800mm f5.6 shoots like a 330-880mm f4.5. My 85mm f1.4 shoots like a 93mm f1.0 instead of like a 136mm f1.4 My 6.5mm f3.5 shoots like a 7mm f2.5 instead of a 10mm f3.5. The SpeedBooster can also be used with my macro and Tilt-Shift lenses.
Good and interesting content as always, Jeff. I have the Canon adapter for my R-7 . I only have one RF Len that I bought with the camera. So I have been using my amazing great ( and expensive) EF- lens. I simply cannot afford to buy / replace my EF lenses. My question has always been……. The new RF lenses are designed for the mirrorless cameras and even have more contacts in the lenses/ camera for……… more data transfer……? Are we leaving something ‘on the table’ by not taking advantage of every bit of new technology that the new cameras /lenses have to offer?
I do think by not using the RF mount to it's full potential we are leaving something on the table, however EF glass still provides Amazing quality, i think the main thing we are missing out on, is performance related, like af speed, and such.
The problem comes when you want to use a Sigma EF lens, then the system sucks. My 120-300 f2.8 works sort of OK on my R6, but totally sucks on the R5. The 150-600 pulses quite a bit.
I shoot Canon ef L glass as well as Sigma Art on my R6 and don't see m'self buying any of the uber expensive RF glass. Being an old Canon film dinosaur I use the control ring adaptor which lets me put the aperture back where it belongs, on the lens. This frees up the other two for ss and ISO. Also, there's more, not long ago I found out adapting my vintage FD Legacy glass has lent them new life that adapting to ef dslr failed to do.
Last year I switched to the R6mk2 but still use the 5dmk3 and 7dmk2. So it is no option to totaly switch to RF-lenses. I have the Tamron SP-Series f2.8 G2 as 15-30mm, 24-70mm, 70-200mm and 150-600mm - all work perfect with the Meike EF-RF-Adapter.
I have no problems using my EF 24-70 and 70-200mm lenses on my R6mkII and actually prefer them when shooting CLOG3 video at ISO 800 because it is much easier to control exposure via the EF-RF VND adapter than using an ND on the end of the lens. Based on that experience would have preferred canon kept the EF mount for mirrorless body made all the lenses an inch longer and included a VND in all of them. That seems like a no-brainer if since all the mirrorless bodies are dual use with CLOG video. EF-S lenses work also. When mounting my EF-S 10-22mm lens the camera recognizes it and automatically switches into crop sensor mode. Overall results with the EF lens on the 24MP R6mkII are better than I get with them on my 15MP APS-C 50D body. The AF and AE is far more precise using live data off the sensor vs. readings off the ground glass of the viewfinder. The only RF lenses I’ve purchased so far are the 100-500mm, 800mm f/11 and 10-20mm f/4.
Everything you said is Spot on. i can also 1000% agree Canon should have stayed with the EF mount and altered the new lenses, But i suppose there isn't as much profit to be made unless a full re-vamp on the mount is made allowing the introduction of an entire new line of lenses.
I only recently added a mirrorless to my kit (R6 Mk II; I'll be getting an R5 Mk II within the next few weeks). All of my lenses had been EF or EF-S, save for an old Tokina, and I've had no issues at all using them on the R6.2 via the EF > RF adapter. The 24-105 in particular is a nice pairing. I do have the 100-500 and 200-800 RF lenses now, so the 24-105 is back on my 1DX Mk III.
I have a old 5D mark iii, I use Sigma 70-200mm and a Tamron SP 15-30mm. I really love these lenses. They are very sharp, and have beautiful colors and contrast. I recently bought R6 for video's. Still I use my 5D. I have no other choice than EF lenses. One problem I am facing is lack of support for the 3rd party lenses. My Tamron lens does not work in R6, I have no option to use it except manual focus without image stabilization. Local Tamron distributor also doesn't want to help as they are keen on selling new gear, not supporting 15 year old gear. But I really love my lenses. As a hobbyist, this is enough burden. I cannot sell my kidneys for once in every 3 months photoshoot of my son and wife.
i dont blame you there, lenses are not cheap. Not sure why the Tamron wouldn't work on your R6, it should. is there a firmware you you check or update on the lens?
I'm using Canon EF and EF-S lenses adapted onto an R8. Also a Sigma EF mount lens. Everything works fine except that the EF-S lenses force the camera into crop mode. That makes sense as far as sensor coverage goes but I would prefer to make the decision myself, whether to leave the vignette or crop away.
@JeffGresham Yes, but it's an arbitrary restriction. I have tried a Sigma EF-S format lens (Sigma 18-50 f2.8 DC DN) that, although a crop lens, doesn't engage crop mode on the R8. Its electronics don't tell the camera that it's a crop lens. It only vignettes at the widest end of its zoom range.
If your buying a canon camera now in 2024 then there is enough choice for me, from cheap RF lens for R10 and EF older lens and sigma for more than enough choice for me for my R5. Yes would be nice to add a Sony lens or two in future if canon ever decides to break there monopoly.
The RF glass is spectacular but I have yet to buy any because of the cost. My EF and EFs lenses work great with the RF adapter in my experience. EF glass is still great and there's still a huge amount of great glass out there new and used, often at a very good price. Also I've used Sigma and Tamron lenses adapted to RF no problem -
sounds like too many of these critics have a very fundamental misunderstanding about how the physics of lenses work regarding stuff like flange distances etc... I mean I have to use "BIG HEAVY" adaptors to use my vintage Nikon, C/Y, Pentax, etc SLR lenses on my R bodies as well because, you know, by very definition no mirror box on a mirrorless camera I purchased an RF body (R7) specifically to use my OLD EF lenses, and specifically my non IS EF 300 2.8 L lens.... this was, is, and continues to be my "dream lens" and using it on the R7 (and now procured R8) it's actually a better lens than it ever was on any of my old EOS EF film and digital bodies - on the R7 not only does it focus better (subject detection and tracking) but it also gets about 5 stops of stabilisation
yeah i can't afford to get all RF lenses so I stick to my EF lenses. but if i need go light i use the 28 2,8 and 50 1.8 RF and leave EF at home. my converter or RF to EF adapter lives on my 70-200 EF.
Canon EF lenses work reliably, but third party (in my case Sigma 150-600) can struggle with autofocus on my R6 in a way they never did on my 80D. I still get plenty of useable images, because 20fps, but it can get annoying sometimes.
Jeff always has a way of explaining things in a way that it easily understandable and from his point of view. His videos , the way he films, edits, and opinions are the reason I subscribe to his channel.
I get asked about ef lenses on RF mounts at least 6-7 times a week, maybe more. So the reason for this video is to help to possibly clear up any questions or concerns that someone may have that has not made the switch to RF but is considering it.
Many years after the introduction of R-series cameras, you are making a video about adapting EF glass. Seems like you're a bit hard up for topics if you need to make this video to fill up your feed. Try talking about something that hasn't been common knowledge for years.
@@EmmottNottingham actually i made the video based on the large amount of questions i have recieved asking about the topic. Thank you for the comment and opinion. It is valued even if your comment was to try and get a rise out of me.
Hey Nottingham… Many years after the introduction of the 35mm camera people are asking about the shutter, aperture and ASA. I In case you are confused this is sometimes referred to as the triangle. Have a nice day 😊
I use the adapter with ND filters it is awesome for video. The clear filter can even protect the CMOS while charging lens.
Good video topic and well presented. Thanks.
I bought my first Canon mirrorless (EOS R) in 2022 after decades of using various Canon film and Rebel DSLRs. Since I didn't want to sell a kidney to buy RF glass, I bought the Canon EF/RF adapter and found that it worked as if the EF glass was made for the R body. I've since added a Canon R6 II and bought another EF/RF mount because, again, I refuse to pay a ridiculous amount of money for Canon RF glass.
Frankly, since it's been over 6 years since Canon introduced the RF mount, I don't understand why they still haven't opened up their RF architecture to 3rd party lens manufacturers like Tamron (my favorite) and Sigma. I'm guessing greed, but that's now got me thinking about jumping ship to the Sony system, where I can get great 3rd party glass at 2/3s to 1/2 the price of Canon's RF glass.
Anyway, I have absolutely no issues with using EF glass on either of my RF bodies. I will continue to do so until Canon allows 3rd party manufacturers, or I switch to Sony, whichever comes first.
I really envy Sony shotters, i see so many cheap Sigma, Tamron, Samyang 85mm, 135mm lenses in my local 2nd hand marketplace, not for canon.
@@lobanrahmantonoy4130 Surely you have more ambition than to use inferior cheap glass. I'll take the premium lenses at premium prices and aspire to improve my work to be able to afford them.
FYI if you shoot with cameras made by cannons competitors, you only have to sell one kidney not both. Lol
In most cases yes. lol
I completely agree with your assessment. I have a full arsenal of top notch EF L series glass. I went to the R-5 the year it came out. ALL my EF glass works flawlessly on the R-5. A good portion of my photography is of the avian kind. Once I was completely confident that the EF and mirrorless body combo was a win, I purchased the RF 100-500 mm and used it extensively prior to selling my old reliable EF 100-400 L series ll I have no intention of upgrading to the R5-ll but will be very interested in the R-7 ll whenever it comes out. When the R-7 came out initially, I decided to experiment using it as a teleconverter on my 300MM f2.8 series ll telephoto in low light and was pleased with the results. If they improve the mechanical shutter and processor on this body it will be a good upgrade. Keep up the good work 👍
I had been heavily invested in a couple of Canon F-1 cameras with MF mother drives and a bunch of FD L lenses. When Canon made the Big Bang switch to the EF-mount, my FD equipment was obsolete. There was no worthwhile adapter for either FD lenses to EF cameras or vice versa. I was torqued at Canon for a decade, but eventually I had to admit that Canon's Big Bang directly from mechanical to fully electrical mount was the best idea. It was certainly better than Nikon's tortuous transition, during which you needed a scorecard to figure out which lenses worked with which bodies and how much would be automatic. In contrast...and because the EF mount is all-electrical...the switch from EF to RF has been practically painless. In fact, I've been using R-mount cameras for three years and still use my EF lenses, which operate as well or slightly better on the R cameras than they did on EF cameras. I do leave the adapters on the R cameras.
Agreed. I think the transition is pretty painless. the EF line of lenses work amazing on RF cameras
I’m using the Meike adapter with the variable ND filters with my R6 MKII. It works fine with my mirrorless camera. I like my organs where the manufacturer placed them so no RF (L) glass yet. I have no complaints and I leave my adapter on the camera. I own a couple of RF STM lenses.
Thanks for the insight
@@lb7144 very welcome. Thanks for watching
My opinion of the additional length is that it shifts the center of gravity forward a little bit and makes it slightly uncomfortable to hold. It depends on your config but mine is quite bad with a long and heavy lens like 70-200 II on a lightweight body like the R8.
I only use EF on my R7. Zero issues.
@@bryantwalley same. Love the results i get
Having a load of FD glass on my old Canon cameras, I was bummed when they went autofocus with the EF mount, and it took me ages to bite the bullet and finally purchase an EOS 3. Now I have a truck load of EF glass, and Canon have done it again, a different mount on their new system. The only saving grace this time is that I can still use my EF lenses by utilising an adapter, and I have had no problems in doing so.
I’m using a whole lot of Sigma ART EF glass on a Red V-Raptor with the adaptor and all mechanics and controls work perfectly.
The reason why you need an adapter is not because Canon decided so, its optics. The RF mount has less flange distance and EF lenses, designed for DSLR would not be able to focus on the sensor. Then there is the electronics: RF has a modern protocol for camera to talk to lens and if you want to use an EF lens, you need a translator.
I was a newspaper photographer and had 2 Canon F1 with FD lenses back in the day and a bunch of lenses. Then I got a Canon camera with EF mount so I could use the FD lenses on it with an adapter. Now I Purchased a new Canon EOS RP with RF mount so I got another adapter for EF lenses would fit the new Canon camera. I have a Canon 500mm mirror lens with FD mount and guess what I use both adapters with the 500mm and it works!!! Now all my FD lenses fit the new camera.
@@craigsmith1948 yep i also use various vintage lenses and they work great using both adapters.
you can get (and I own) a FD to RF adaptor - allows you to get that less than perfect retrofocus lens element in the FD to EF adaptor out of the equation
@marksecker really im gonna have to find me one of those
Urth make the one I own - it's about 1/3 the price of the basic EF to RF adaptor as there's no electrical connections - my guess Viltrox and similar brands would be the same low price
R-mount cameras are the adapters we always wanted for FD lenses.
From my XP... Shot back in the day with the R6 and EF 24-75mm F2.8... Every now and then this combo stopped working with the original canon adapter. Had to switch the body on and off. Later I've been running older EF glas on Sony bodies. Worked great with the mc11 for photo. AF actually more predictable. Just my 2c.
I prefer EF lenses on my R7. The only issue I have found is I seem to have some occasional glitches in cold damp weather. When this happens, I simply re-seat the lens and adapter.
I use 3 EF to RF adapters: the standard one from Canon, a Meike adapter with filter slot (great for my bulbous wide angle or catadioptic lenses which have no filter thread), and my Metabones Ultra SpeedBooster (how did I ever live without this?). There Metabones adapter is a phenomenal I use it on all my EF lenses to gain 1 f-stop of light, negate the most of the crop factor of the R7's crop sensor, and to very slightly improve the perceived IQ of a lens.
Examples:
My old kit 70-300mm is brighter and has noticeably better image quality, and shoots like a 77-330mm f4.5 instead of a 120-480mm f5.6.
My old "Sigzilla" 300-800mm f5.6 shoots like a 330-880mm f4.5.
My 85mm f1.4 shoots like a 93mm f1.0 instead of like a 136mm f1.4
My 6.5mm f3.5 shoots like a 7mm f2.5 instead of a 10mm f3.5.
The SpeedBooster can also be used with my macro and Tilt-Shift lenses.
very nice setup
I still buy ef glass for my rp and r6 love it . But there's a few rf lens I want like 28 70 2.8
@@chuckeaddy7011 its great glass
Good and interesting content as always, Jeff. I have the Canon adapter for my R-7 . I only have one RF Len that I bought with the camera. So I have been using my amazing great ( and expensive) EF- lens. I simply cannot afford to buy / replace my EF lenses. My question has always been……. The new RF lenses are designed for the mirrorless cameras and even have more contacts in the lenses/ camera for……… more data transfer……? Are we leaving something ‘on the table’ by not taking advantage of every bit of new technology that the new cameras /lenses have to offer?
I do think by not using the RF mount to it's full potential we are leaving something on the table, however EF glass still provides Amazing quality, i think the main thing we are missing out on, is performance related, like af speed, and such.
The problem comes when you want to use a Sigma EF lens, then the system sucks. My 120-300 f2.8 works sort of OK on my R6, but totally sucks on the R5. The 150-600 pulses quite a bit.
I shoot Canon ef L glass as well as Sigma Art on my R6 and don't see m'self buying any of the uber expensive RF glass. Being an old Canon film dinosaur I use the control ring adaptor which lets me put the aperture back where it belongs, on the lens. This frees up the other two for ss and ISO. Also, there's more, not long ago I found out adapting my vintage FD Legacy glass has lent them new life that adapting to ef dslr failed to do.
Last year I switched to the R6mk2 but still use the 5dmk3 and 7dmk2. So it is no option to totaly switch to RF-lenses. I have the Tamron SP-Series f2.8 G2 as 15-30mm, 24-70mm, 70-200mm and 150-600mm - all work perfect with the Meike EF-RF-Adapter.
great set of lenses, absolutely no reason to invest in RF lenses at this point
I have no problems using my EF 24-70 and 70-200mm lenses on my R6mkII and actually prefer them when shooting CLOG3 video at ISO 800 because it is much easier to control exposure via the EF-RF VND adapter than using an ND on the end of the lens. Based on that experience would have preferred canon kept the EF mount for mirrorless body made all the lenses an inch longer and included a VND in all of them. That seems like a no-brainer if since all the mirrorless bodies are dual use with CLOG video.
EF-S lenses work also. When mounting my EF-S 10-22mm lens the camera recognizes it and automatically switches into crop sensor mode.
Overall results with the EF lens on the 24MP R6mkII are better than I get with them on my 15MP APS-C 50D body. The AF and AE is far more precise using live data off the sensor vs. readings off the ground glass of the viewfinder.
The only RF lenses I’ve purchased so far are the 100-500mm, 800mm f/11 and 10-20mm f/4.
Everything you said is Spot on. i can also 1000% agree Canon should have stayed with the EF mount and altered the new lenses, But i suppose there isn't as much profit to be made unless a full re-vamp on the mount is made allowing the introduction of an entire new line of lenses.
I only recently added a mirrorless to my kit (R6 Mk II; I'll be getting an R5 Mk II within the next few weeks). All of my lenses had been EF or EF-S, save for an old Tokina, and I've had no issues at all using them on the R6.2 via the EF > RF adapter. The 24-105 in particular is a nice pairing. I do have the 100-500 and 200-800 RF lenses now, so the 24-105 is back on my 1DX Mk III.
@@adude394 love that 24-105
@@JeffGresham 100% agreed. A really nice, versatile lens for most situations.
@adude394 i need to get one. I borrowed one from a friend and fell in love with it.
@@JeffGresham IMHO, you can do beautifully with the EF version. There's no need to spend $2k+ for the RF version, when the EF works so well!
I have a old 5D mark iii, I use Sigma 70-200mm and a Tamron SP 15-30mm. I really love these lenses. They are very sharp, and have beautiful colors and contrast. I recently bought R6 for video's. Still I use my 5D. I have no other choice than EF lenses. One problem I am facing is lack of support for the 3rd party lenses. My Tamron lens does not work in R6, I have no option to use it except manual focus without image stabilization. Local Tamron distributor also doesn't want to help as they are keen on selling new gear, not supporting 15 year old gear. But I really love my lenses. As a hobbyist, this is enough burden. I cannot sell my kidneys for once in every 3 months photoshoot of my son and wife.
i dont blame you there, lenses are not cheap. Not sure why the Tamron wouldn't work on your R6, it should. is there a firmware you you check or update on the lens?
I'm using Canon EF and EF-S lenses adapted onto an R8. Also a Sigma EF mount lens. Everything works fine except that the EF-S lenses force the camera into crop mode. That makes sense as far as sensor coverage goes but I would prefer to make the decision myself, whether to leave the vignette or crop away.
@@ronjenkins4257 thats to be expected.
@JeffGresham Yes, but it's an arbitrary restriction. I have tried a Sigma EF-S format lens (Sigma 18-50 f2.8 DC DN) that, although a crop lens, doesn't engage crop mode on the R8. Its electronics don't tell the camera that it's a crop lens. It only vignettes at the widest end of its zoom range.
Dang, this was totally relevant 6 years ago.
@@evrythingis1 still relevant just because you know about it doesnt mean everyone does
If your buying a canon camera now in 2024 then there is enough choice for me, from cheap RF lens for R10 and EF older lens and sigma for more than enough choice for me for my R5. Yes would be nice to add a Sony lens or two in future if canon ever decides to break there monopoly.
I only have EF lenses, they all work great on the R7
Same. well except my sigma 120-400mm but every other lens is EF Lens is flawless.
The RF glass is spectacular but I have yet to buy any because of the cost. My EF and EFs lenses work great with the RF adapter in my experience. EF glass is still great and there's still a huge amount of great glass out there new and used, often at a very good price. Also I've used Sigma and Tamron lenses adapted to RF no problem -
@@Sutterjack absolutely there are some great lenses used and affordable. Lol @tampon lenses. I though i was the only one that calls them that.
@@JeffGresham Whoops I will correct!! TAMRON makes some good lenses
@Sutterjack lol
@@Sutterjack lol
sounds like too many of these critics have a very fundamental misunderstanding about how the physics of lenses work regarding stuff like flange distances etc... I mean I have to use "BIG HEAVY" adaptors to use my vintage Nikon, C/Y, Pentax, etc SLR lenses on my R bodies as well because, you know, by very definition no mirror box on a mirrorless camera
I purchased an RF body (R7) specifically to use my OLD EF lenses, and specifically my non IS EF 300 2.8 L lens.... this was, is, and continues to be my "dream lens" and using it on the R7 (and now procured R8) it's actually a better lens than it ever was on any of my old EOS EF film and digital bodies - on the R7 not only does it focus better (subject detection and tracking) but it also gets about 5 stops of stabilisation
@@marksecker exactly
I Love My EF Lens
yeah i can't afford to get all RF lenses so I stick to my EF lenses. but if i need go light i use the 28 2,8 and 50 1.8 RF and leave EF at home. my converter or RF to EF adapter lives on my 70-200 EF.
My 28-70 2.8 feels life a lifesaver sometimes, especially when i want to limit weight and gear.
Yes I’m using EF lens on my R6 MK II I like it the image quality to me is still good. The
Adapter do slow me down just a little bit
How does the Adapter slow you down? I'm just curious, because i'm always open to learning. What adapter do you use also?
@ canon adapter EF
@johnjr47 how does it slow you down
@ taking it off and putting on adapter I do have a RF lens too when I’m changing in between them
@ do you notice a big difference between the quality of the EF lenses compared to the RF lenses
Canon EF lenses work reliably, but third party (in my case Sigma 150-600) can struggle with autofocus on my R6 in a way they never did on my 80D. I still get plenty of useable images, because 20fps, but it can get annoying sometimes.
have you updated the firmware on the 150-600mm? My next video actually goes into that lens specifically paired with the Canon R7
@ I have indeed. I keep all my bodies and lenses up to date. I’ll look out for the vid, thanks.
@@sagetheowlfatfeathery2083 the video is out now
Umm its 2024. You're not being a cry baby about every little thing. So out of touch... Great video my friend.
thank you
I want the EF 35 MK II 1.2
i love a good 35mm
Canon adapter on r5. No problems at all.
Same, They work like they were made for each other.
Not sure why a video on this....its common knowledge that EF lenses with adapter can work just fine on RF bodies....Cheers
Jeff always has a way of explaining things in a way that it easily understandable and from his point of view. His videos , the way he films, edits, and opinions are the reason I subscribe to his channel.
I get asked about ef lenses on RF mounts at least 6-7 times a week, maybe more. So the reason for this video is to help to possibly clear up any questions or concerns that someone may have that has not made the switch to RF but is considering it.
thank you my friend.
I use ef glass on an r8 with canon’s control ring adapter. To me the auto focus seems faster than it did on my ef mount camera.
Many years after the introduction of R-series cameras, you are making a video about adapting EF glass. Seems like you're a bit hard up for topics if you need to make this video to fill up your feed. Try talking about something that hasn't been common knowledge for years.
@@EmmottNottingham actually i made the video based on the large amount of questions i have recieved asking about the topic. Thank you for the comment and opinion. It is valued even if your comment was to try and get a rise out of me.
Hey Nottingham… Many years after the introduction of the 35mm camera people are asking about the shutter, aperture and ASA. I In case you are confused this is sometimes referred to as the triangle. Have a nice day 😊
My EF lenses work fine on my trusty 5D Mk II. Don't wanna rush into things...😂🤣
How about some comments on Canon adapter vs other brands?
@doylesouders1228 nothing to really comment. They all work identical.