Canon are still selling some of the L series EF lenses on their website, they are holding prices for new high, in many cases at the same level as they were before the RF mount was launched.
Five and 10 years ago people predicted the death of the camera industry from cell phones. I think it's a miracle we still have a vibrant pro camera industry. The last think I would do is begrudge their prices.
About 15 years ago, I had a friend who bought a car from a police auction. In the trunk of the car was a bag of camera gear. I bought a 17-35 2.8L for $400. It's still my favorite lens.
I use the R6 and 1Dx MKII for pro sports photography and all my EF lenses work flawlessly on the R6. In fact my 85/1.4 got a new lease of life as the 'eye AF' on the R6 is spot on with no BF/FF problems that I have on DSLRs. Honestly the EF lenses are excellent value for money now.
I did the same thing for Zeiss Classic primes. I bought the 35, 50, and 85 classics for a steal on ebay, and they were all in mint condition. The vintage Zeiss primes that film makers covet are still insanely expensive.
The humble non-L 20-35mm f/3.5-4.5 is worth a mention here too. Yes, the corners are a bit soft wide open, but not often in the plane of focus anway. It weighs under 350g and I picked one up, in the box, little used, for £75 delivered. An excellent walkabout lens which balances reasonably well on the less expensive mirrorless bodies as well as DSLRs. Great for hiking with, as no-one pixel peeps forground grassy corners when there's something interesting to focus on in the middle of the frame.
I do events, always with 2 bodies. In the past, it was two 6Ds (having identical controls is very important when the light gets low). Then I mixed in an RP and then an R. I got totally fed up with randomly wandering focus points and some other issues, sold them off and got another 6D. No more adapters! And now I can afford the lenses I need/want. A DSLR makes it very easy to screw up exposure in the heat of the moment, so not everything is better. But simpler menus, simpler controls and excellent IQ are a winning combo.
The 6D is a classic for sure. I tried an EOS R when I was thinking of moving to a mirrorless and returned it for the Sony A7III instead. EF L lenses are still holding higher prices where there is no RF equivalent, like the 1.4 35mm EF L prime. Sounds like you have a great set up and, unless you want the exposure view in the EVF then there is no reason to change what you have #thumbsup
I have a 6D and it's relieving to see people mention how much they like theirs, since I keep getting the urge to upgrade to mirrorless but I'm really happy with how my pics look so Im kinda torn. Really the only reason I want to upgrade is for higher quality videos
@@Shift18 The focusing is in a completely different league. Image quality would be the least of my concerns on any remotely modern DSLR. Heck I still own 3 Nikon DSLRs, 2xD600 (released in 2012) and D750 (released in 2014) and all of them are not too far behind in IQ from my R6 mark II. Slightly less detail but still plenty plenty sharp and still good at high ISO. But everything else has improved tremendously and it's a joy to work with the mirrorless bodies.
I agree Julien, I am definitely going to search for a few EF Lenses. Even if I switch to R Series (I Use a 5DMk3 AND A 6D) I will use adapters til Canon allows 3rd party RF Lenses!
My first DSLR was the 80D, but I sold it for a 6D mk II. New lenses are SO expensive, just as much as a new camera body sometimes. I love my DSLR, I learned on a DSLR in high school, and I will continue using it until I can no longer use it.
I still have my 5DIII and 5DII, I enjoy using them. I find I miss the sound and vibration from the mirror box with mirrorless cameras. I never expected that. Don’t sell your DSLR it will be cherished one day 👍😀
I put together a cheap used kit. Ef 17-40mm f/4L ($200), Ef 24-105mm f/4L ($250), and a Ef 100-300mm f/5.6L ($150). So a bit less than $650 all in with tax. I bought them all from KEH and was delighted with what they sent. Ebay isn't as good of a source because sellers don't offer warranties. KEH, MPB, and Used Photo Pro all offer warranties which gives me piece of mind that I won't end up with a costly paperweight.
Those are awesome deals you got there - congrats. At those prices there is no need to rely on eBay, KEH has a great reputation. The pricing of that 100-300 L lens is the best deal you have there. I used that lens to photograph sport (triathlon) when I was using my Canon EOS gear and it became one of my favorite L lenses. I certainly paid a lot more than $150 😂
To me one of the reasons to choose Canon over other brands is the ability to use EF lenses on modern state of the art mirrorless cameras like an R3, a huge range of DSLRs, and even film cameras. Yes the RF camera will need an adapter, but it will autofocus that EF lens from the late 80s as good or better than any of the canon cameras that came before it.
I chose Canon EF last year, not having had any gear in that system before. My main reasons: -> I want to also shoot 35mm film with best quality output possible, so EF just makes the most sense as I can use excellent, stabilized L lenses on the EOS1n and EOS1v with the whole setup being weather sealed too. There is nothing comparable for 35mm film. -> I went with a 5DsR for landscape and architecture work. 51MP, very silent shutter and mirror slap as the dampening is best in class. It's less loud than the original A7 and A7II. -> I got the 24mm L TS-E II and the 90mm TS-E; other than the latest Fuji GFX tilt-shift lenses, there is nothing comparable on the market for ANY system. -> I went on a shopping spree and also grabbed the 40mm f2.8, the 50mm f1.2 L, the 30mm f2 USM IS, the 24-70 f2.8 L II, the 24-100mm L IS, the 16-35mm f4 L IS, the 24-70 f4 L IS, the 105mm f2.8 L Macro as well as the Sigma 100-400 ( I think that is actually the better value proposition compared to the heavier and more expensive Canon 100-400 L II). The stabilized lenses really make it worth it and the performance of all of theses lenses on the 51MP 5DsR is on par with basically everything modern on the market right now in every practical sense. I got a full spectrum converted RP which takes all of the above lenses. EF mount is THE most versatile lens mount now. I can even mount all of these lenses to Z mount with the Fringer adapter. I expect this window of opportunity to grab EF lenses at a bargain not to last very long. There are tons of movie cameras still using EF lenses, adapting EF to RF is easy and such a no-brainer. I expect the prices to go up again once supply shrinks.
I've been buying up EF L lenses because I'm using a 90D currently and when I upgrade I'm going straight for a R5 Mark II which means I can adapt over the EF lenses pretty easily.
Thanks for the video a nice bit of wisdom, I am still very happy with my 11-year-old Mark III with the 24-70 L, the go to combination for family & friends photo events. Migrated to EOS-R and RF glass and dedicated them to recording video. Lately, taking a nostalgic journey with my 52 year old Pentax spotmatic a 21st birthday present from my wife to be in 1972 - happy days.
Thats a nice Pentax - I collect 35mm SLR's but I do not have that one. You should keep your 5DIII and the 24-70 you will always get great images from it. I still have mine and have no plans to sell it.
Robert's Camera are great people to work with! I have bought many things from them through the years, and they have always provided great products with great service! Five Stars!!!
Many lenses have first versions which look very old. Especially the zooms 16-35mm, 24--70mm and 24-105mm. I never had them in the hand, would you also recommend them or rather go for the second version?
Always (usually) better to go for the later versions of lenses but you will pay more for them, which depends then on your budget. Some of the examples I shared in this video were the later versions, some were not. Buying used lenses always has some risks, usually around the honesty of the seller with the description accuracy. Check for number of positive reviews of the seller and the returns policy. Hope this helps
I gave a thumbs up as soon as I heard you endorse Robert's Camera. Great company. Their storefront in Indy has a great stock and a really knowledgeable staff if you get a chance to visit them. Everything I've ordered from Used Photo Pro, their online used store, has arrived to me in eastern Kentucky in two days. If you're in the midwest US I highly recommend them. And their condition assessments have also always been spot on.
These are a great deal right now. A few months late onto the video but the point still stands. Especially for us amateurs, gerting the Mark I version is actually an even better deal because the quality was never bad. The new ones just got lighter and slightly better in the corners, generally. Another tip. Try to find obscure lenses no one knows about. Like the 17-35 F/2.8L. They are amazing. Smaller and lighter than the 16-35s, still really sharp, and can be had in mint condition for under $300.
I really like the image you created here. Which lens did you use and how was your light setup? Normally i hate flat lighting but you made it beautiful and it somehow speaks to me.
Thanks for the feedback. Key light with a gridded softbox, fill light is an Aputure Lantern. This was shot at 40mm which is tighter than I normally use, hope this helps!
@@ThisIsJulianC Thank you for the answer. Is the softbox normally sized or one of these big ones? I am invested into learning more about lighting, thats why i ask so many questions :)
It's an Aputure LightDome II and is positioned just out of shot, so very close. it is large so it diffuses the light well. No problem to ask questions its how we all learn :-)
No, it was the Sony G 40mm f2.5. I don’t usually use it and won’t likely use it again for UA-cam videos in that space. 40mm is too tight for the space that I have.
6:20 ... please dont tell me, you dont know about the aperture preview on CANON DSLRs? On your 5d²: just set your aperture and hold the mechanical button left of the bajonett right beyond the lense release. It will apply/engage the set aperture as long as pressed and you can change it on the fly with the index finger wheel. On your 5d³ should be a similar button.
i use the EF 24-70mm f2.8L and the EF 200mm F2.8L with my Canon R7. Great lenses, and I could never have afforded them before. i have just added the Sigma RF-S 18-50mm f2.8, which is very good and the size and weight of the R7's kit lens. What makes all of this practical is the R7's IBIS, since none of these lenses have stabilization built in.
Astrophotography, you mentioned it but I didn’t see much more. I’ve bought some of the old Pentax 6X7 lenses for use with cooled astrophotography cameras. The advantage to those 6x7 lenses is the large backfocus that allows room for an off axis guider setup and a filter wheel. Anyway those old lenses are excellent and available used for $100-200, a small fraction of their original cost. They’re absolutely great for wide angle astrophotography.
That’s a great deal. I have used the EF L 85mm for astro previously. These days I generally only do astrophotography when traveling, the 85mm EF-L doesn’t make the pack list due to its weight.
Watching this now I just bought the 24-70 mark ii and 85 1.4 $1500 for both I love them so far I am considering a used 5d iv for $900 on KEH or a used r6 ii which I’ve found on Facebook for $1500. Help what should I pick lol.
You got a great deal on the lenses for sure. The 5DIV is an outstanding camera but today I think I’d only buy it for nostalgia. If I was you I would get the R6II. The EF lenses will work well with it, and it will serve you well for a long time. You can use either EF or RF lenses with it, the 5IV will only work with the EF lenses. You would not go wrong with the 5DIV but I would get the R6II. Hope this helps, let me know what you decide
@@ThisIsJulianC I will most likely get the r6ii planning the meetup for tomorrow the guy who sold me the ef lenses had the canon native ef to rf autofocus adapter and sold it to me for an extra $100 I love the lenses so far I’ve been using them with a fringer autofocus adapter on my Fuji xt4
I just came across your video. Great topic and Thank You. Im also a EF Canon hobbyist doing Astrophotography and Sports. Have notice as the years go buy the EF L glass becoming very responsible. Even if you have a EOS R Camera the EF glass works incredibly. Thanks to no real 3rd party glass yet we dont have much joices To tell you the truth I find the RF glass in regards to AF to be about 5% to 10% better at the best . RF L glass is top of line for sure but you will pay a high price. I have been actually thinking of getting the EF 135mm f2 and the EF 400mm F5.6 somtime in the future. They would be totally compatible with my old 6D , 80D my kids 70D and my R6MARK2. I did find another parts of your video intriguing in regards to the Classic Qlick Bait " Why im switching to Sony" lol In my photography journey so far i have only used Canon 18 -24mp Cameras. I have been thinking of trying a used Sony like the A7R3 42mp. I was thinking how did you make out with Canon Glass on your Sony. Apart from Canon EF I also have Sigma EF glass. Im thinking A7R3 , MC11 adapter with my Sigma 14-24mm f2.8 and Sigma 35mm F1.4. My question is how would this combo work out with Sony? Regards Sean
I do not have any Sigma lenses today but I have used my Canon EF L lenses on A7III, A6600, A7C, A7CR and A7R4. Always using the Sigma MC11 adapter. They perform as well as any Sony GM equivalent IMO, with the exception of focus speed and accuracy. When following fast moving objects I have lost focus more easily with the EFL 70-300 adapted than with a Sony GM 100-400. This might be an unfair comparison but it was noticeable how many more on-target images I got with the Sony lens. That wouldn’t stop me using the Canons and would not cause me to sell them either. You will get great performance on the A7R3.
I have a question! I've been wanting to purchase the 70-200mm 2.8 and I've noticed most sellers on ebay for this specific lens state that there from Japan in the name title of the lens. Does that make a difference from the ones on the canon website?
There are lots of sellers offering Canon lenses and camera bodies direct from Japan. I have no experience of them, they generally seem to get good reviews however.
I live about an hour and a half from Roberts Camera and I've been there many times. I only know of 2 camera stores in Indiana, 1 in Lafayette, and Roberts in Indianapolis. Roberts is by FAR the biggest of the two. They have lots of gear, new and used, they have a very knowledgeable staff, and they are a seller you can trust. I have no affiliation with them other than being a satisfied customer. I'm just glad I don't live closer or I would be broke! I''m still using a 5D Mark II, Mark III, 6D, and 90D professionally, and since the price of a new Mark IV is coming down, I'll probably buy one this year. I shot weddings with a 10D and a 20D for several years, and I wouldn't hesitate to take them out of storage and use them today. The quality of the photograph comes from what's behind the camera, not what's inside of it. And yes, I've been stockpiling Canon L lenses over the past couple of years because they are so cheap! I just got a 17-35 f2.8 L this week for $300 USD including shipping and taxes. If you want the baddest lens ever, the 135 f2 is selling for $400-$500 on ebay. I've heard it called the "Lord Of The L Rings". I don't use this lens often, but when I do, holy cow!! Also, Canon makes a 1.4x and a 2x Extender, so you can extend the range of the longer focal lengths. I use the 1.4x on my 90D with the 70-200 a lot. So, essentially I am able to shoot with a range from 17mm to 448mm, mostly L lenses, and it's not terribly expensive to put together a kit like this. Granted, it's not cheap, but compared to new prices, you get AMAZING quality at a fraction of the cost. I just figured up the cost of what I have if bought my lenses new, and it's about $9,000. I may have about $2,000 in the lenses I've picked up on the used market. One more thing.....Canon also makes some non-L lenses that are just as good as the L series. (50mm f1.8, 85mm f1.8, 100mm f2, just to name a few), and they tend to be a bit cheaper because they are not L lenses. Sorry for the rambling. Thanks for posting!!
Those are some great prices! Last wedding I shot was with my 5DIII, awesome camera still. Glad to hear you are using it. I looked at the 5DIV a short while ago, still seemed overpriced so I didn’t buy it. I hope there isn’t a Robert Camera near me I would find it way too tempting.
I'm in such a dilemma! Two days ago I bought the R6ii and an RF 85mm f2 to go along with it. However, with Canon giving the green light for 3rd party lenses I don't know if should wait for Sigma (full frame lenses) or should I buy EF lenses and use an adaptor. What would you do?
Personally, although I have respect for Sigma and Tamron as 3rd party lens manufacturers, I generally stick with Sony (and previously Canon) OEM lenses. Even though EF L lenses are cheaper than RF today, they do hold their value better than 3rd party lenses. Canon EF lenses on a Canon adapter are seamlessly integrated on RF bodies. You are only giving up some weight/size and the admin of using an adapter. I’d go the EF route. Hope this helps
Thank you for the video. I shot Canon with EF L lenses, and still own a few, for many years and today shot with RF L versions and with Sony. The latest EF L are very good but unfortunately you highlight prices on older versions like the EF 16-35/2.8 L and not the latest version III, or the older 24-70/2.8 and not the version II, or not the version III 70-200/2.8 L. So all of these can be adapted to Nikon Z, Sony E and Canon RF I recommend looking for the latest and most up to date version of each lens. Take care.
When this video was produced wasn’t really focusing on the generation of each lens model. The point made is that the EF L lenses are great value right now. In my view even the Gen 1 versions of the lenses you list are excellent lenses and represent a solid buy at the prices listed. Paying more for the later versions might be a good strategy but not one for me. Thanks for your comment, greatly appreciate the addition to this discussion.
@@ThisIsJulianC Understand your thinking now. You should share that in the video. While I loved my Canon EF 50/1.2 L and EF 85/1.2L II and have thought about going back and rebuying them I ended up buying the EF 85/1.4L IS and it’s one of my favorites that I recommend because of its stabilization capabilities. Always looking at EF lenses as a great buy. The TS L lenses at 17mm, 24mm, and 90mm are also really unique and I recommend those.
I just got an adapter for Canon EF to Sony E(F). The 70-200 f/2.8 works just fine with a Sigma adapter. Paying an extra 2400€ for a GM is not justifiable! What I really want is the 180 mm macro.
The EF 70-200L IS version, the Mark II version is sharper than the first IS version, which actually is less sharp than the non-is version. The EF to R adapter is supposed to be quite good with no compromises.
i bought some of the specialized Canon EF lenses ("specialized" meaning not available in other mounts) at a fraction of what they used to be at good condition (if you know where to look other than that usual auction site) and they work great in mirrorless (i use mine on Nikon Z). like the 17/24/50/90/135 L tilt-shift lenses, 65 MP-E macro, the 8-15 fisheye zoom and the 11-24/4L zoom...the last one is of keen interest since RF just released causing the 11-24L EF used prices to drop (at least for while)
Awesome tips here. Julian how do you feel about the state of brand competitiveness these days? I am in canons ecosystem because I inherited a canon EOS 630. ignorance is bliss. now that that I have a canon RP and a few canon EF primes, of course, Sony and Fuji seem to be more exciting in terms of features and my camera photos seem so boring. With your perspective of being a canon shooter having moved to Sony, any thoughts?
Thanks for your comments. When I made the switch to Sony the consumer choice was Sony's A7III and Canon had just launched the original EOS R. I moved to the mirrorless Sony somewhat annoyed that Canon hadn't really come up with anything nearly as good as the Sony offering. I also had some dream of video and the A7III had 4K video so that was a pull too. I came from the EOS 5DIII which is a huge and heavy camera compared to the A7III. I liked the more compact size of the Sony full frame bodies compared to the Cann DSLR's. I looked at the Canon EOS R which still felt very large and heavy in my hands and had too many design flaws that annoyed me, I did try one but returned it and bought the A7III. That was 5 or 6 years ago now. Today, if I was in the same position, I would more likely stay with Canon and would have swapped my 5DIII for one of the latest Canon mirrorless bodies. I do not see Sony as being significantly better than Canon today, Canon have caught up. Now that I have already made the expensive switch and bought a lot of Sony GM lenses I have no desire to make another switch in the near future. Reason for saying all this.... I don't necessarily see Sony (or Fuji) as being so far ahead of Canon to warrant a move to their systems if you already have Canon lenses. The Canon mirrorless bodies today are better designed than the original R and very capable. If I was in your position I would get the EF/RF adapter (the Canon one, not a 3rd party one) and enjoy your Canon lenses and the RP. Long answer... hope it helps... let me know if there is anything else I can help with.
I just bought my first mirrorless camera, the EOS R7, and an EF-RF adapter. I will just use my EF lenses for the forseeable future. I am getting incredible bird shots with my EF 100-400 L lens. I cant imagine that I would get substantially better shots if I paid a sky high price for an RF 100-400.
If you have the Canon branded EF/RF adapter you are going to find it a seamless experience. All you really give up is some weight and maybe some dimensions compared to a native RF lens but thats all. There will be a lot of marketing out there about how good the RF L lenses are compared to the EF L lenses, but like you I would ignore it and have fun with the EF L lenses. Enjoy the R7 too thats an outstanding camera.
I still have a large collection of EF L glass. Looking for a more modern DSLR body. Have a 5D mark 0 that was my wife’s camera and I switched to Sony primarily for video but there is nothing wrong with the glass, time to start using it again.
I would still challenge the statement 'Canon EF L lenses going so cheap', at least in Europe. They indeed got cheaper, but I still cannot afford most of them (as pre-owned)...
Yes we in Europe are feckin broke! The EU is a wasteland. I use Sigma 1.4 40 and 28 which are superb and cheap, Voigtlander M mount adapted and Zeiss Milvus. On a full frame 47 meg 4 year old second hand camera. This kit will last me a decade I imagine or more.
At the end of the day, glass is glass and I think the L Series have some of the best glass out there. As long as your still in the EOS ecosystem, which unless you're an intense professional, I see no reason to switch, it's a good time to be in the hobby! I am going to pick up a 1DX to replace my 1DS. I love that big body format and I think for my landscape photography, general hobby stuff, that would be a great buy and addition to my collection. I also dabble in film photography and I like that you can use L series lenses on a lot of canon film cameras such as my A1. I think L series is a great sweet spot for a hobbist
When I owned EOS EF cameras, I bought Sigmas etc if I could not afford the L series. Now, with RF, I buy EF L lenses. Cheaper than Sigmas and much better. I got a EF 100-400 F5.6 L is ii for under $1000 used. Now I have a super sharp zoom (rivalling any prime in fact) giving me 30 FPS on my R7. Getting a 500 F4 is L next week for about $ 1400, These are used lenses with wear marks but the glass is perfect and everything works. Why not? I love it. One day I will get the RF 100-300 2.8 and the RF 600 F4.... One day.
I AM IN THE SAME PREDICAMENT Your TALKING about. I will keep my 7 d mark ii and my 5d mark ii , 70 d canon cameras. and buy a 5 d mark iv. I have all canon lenses as well.
Defo keep your 5Dii - that is a future classic that helped start the UA-cam phenomena. I see the used price of 5Div bodies dipping below $1k now on eBay, some for $700... that is a lot of camera for less than $1k.
One excellent opportunity with the old EF L series lenses is that they work magnificently on the new Canon RF bodies. So you can upgrade to a modern mirrorless camera and still take advantage of these excellent older EF lenses.
RF glass imo is excellent but I cannot resist the bargains to be had in EF. 24/1.4 L II, TSE 24 L II, 100-400 L II, 200-400 1.4x L all within the last year or so and I might get the 16-35 and 24-70 2.8 zooms and the 35 & 85 1.4 primes. For me, eBay is my jam. Only RF I have is the 600/11 and it’s light and quick to zoom and having used most of the full frame bodies and the marvellous 100-300/2.8 I really think one can stick to EF L glass in most cases and just upgrade the mirrorless bodies. I think only now Canon are making more interesting lenses, such as the 24-105/2.8, 100-300/2.8 & the 28-70/2, now they might be worth while. Don’t get me wrong; most the RF range has IS now and focuses lightning quick but I don’t need that right now.
Traded up 3 times for 5drs cost less than 800.00 3 years ago. Used 16-35, 24-70, 70-200. all f4 is - cheep! Want the 100-400 ii but price is holding up at 1 k. Now looking at 5d iv for screen and focus.
Hi , New subscriber , of all the videos I've watched on UA-cam on mirrorless vs DSLR your videos are the most informational and I can relate to so thanks. I'm a DSLR user I own a Canon 7D and a 77D that I still use to this day . I'm not a pro it's just a hobby but I have recently gotten into videos. I shot a music video with a combination of a Sony A6100 and the 77d which I believe did an excellent job but I'd like to upgrade my system but not break the bank since I already have a lot of L Lenses . I noticed you mentioned the 5D mark IV how does that standup against the 90D I'm torn between the two camera bodys . Both are in my price range or would you suggest R6 body with canon adaptor so I can continue using my lenses. id like a decent video camera but an excellent photo taking machine . With the 5Dbeing the standard for years and 90D having all the technology , both having 30MPs need a serious assist.
All else being equal I would get a Canon mirrorless body and pair it with an RF/EF adapter from Canon. That is the highest cost option however. I have a 5DIII and still have a 5DII, i do not have a lot of experience with the 5DIV. The 5DIV is a terrific camera but I would be reluctant to recommend it today unless you find a really good deal. Camera technology has moved on a lot in the past few years and I think today I would look at a mirrorless option instead, with a good adapter. I have the Sony FE/Canon EF adapter from Sigma, it’s very good but sometimes the focusing let’s me down. I would not go for the 90D today, I know it’s only 4 years old but a crop sensor DSLR today feels like it has had its day. I can’t offer any reasoning other than it just feels like a compromised choice. I would defo go for a Canon body to go with your EF lenses. I would only go DSLR for cost saving and if so, then the 5DIV. As I said above I would not go for the 90D now. Hope this helps, appreciate the feedback in your comment too 👍
Make the switch to Mirrorless if you have the ability and keep the EF lenses. I use my EF lenses with an R3. I won’t buy an RF lens. Maybe they are even faster but the L lenses perform beyond anything the average photographer would need. But like in the video , I do have a 5D3 and if it ain’t moving super fast and I don’t need high FPS, there’s very little difference.
I'm confused with this video. There should be much more focus on the fact that these lenses can be adapted to work on current mirrorless and they work great so why box them into the same body of the time? I mean you did mention but briefly. I think it should have been the main focus.
With camera's getting much higher resolutions and newer coatings being developed, I would think that the older L lenses might not be good enough for adapting to newer bodies. I was looking up some info about the Canon EF 16-35mm L lenses and version I and II are pretty soft in the corners, which is fixed in the newer versions. Also many older L lenses are a little soft when shooting wide open, while most newer L lenses and even regular lenses are sharp even when shooting wide open. Not saying that older L lenses are bad, but I think it's normal that prices are going down. People move to the newer mount, so the market gets flooded with good EF glass and prices need to be competitive to make the sale.
I have a good set of EF lenses. Trying to upgrade my 50mm to a f/1.4. Purchased two - one from an auction site (not Ebay). at $110.. another from a huge online retailer.. at $190, both arrived with broken AF. Canon is still selling the lens at $400.00 new. None of them would IMO be a bargain in 2024. Not seeing this discount wave yet.
The Canon EF 50mm 1.4 is not a L series lens that sells at a much lower price point. Canon is still selling remaining inventory of new EF lenses and DSLR bodies and will continue to do so until stocks are sold out.
Take a look at the Sigma Art 50 1.4. I picked one up recently for $375 and it’s insanely sharp wide open, renders beautifully, and has a snappy fast and quiet focus. IMO there is no “better” fast EF prime 50.
@@alexsorokin1896 - Glad that you are happy with it. Sounds nice. is $375 a good price? - I think that the reason EF lens prices are not really going down- is because people just buy adapters and use them on their new cameras.
@@alexsorokin1896 - I heard that that was a good lens a while ago. It's probably, as you describe... still a great lens. I'm glad that you are happy with it. Good luck.
Not only are you seeing EF lenses sold cheap because of the exodus to mirrorless driving up supply, there's also the fact that EF lens prices were originally set during the pre-smartphone era, when point-and-shoot profits helped sustain the high end market. Now that the P&S subsidy is gone and pro equipment must be profitable in its own right, new prices of like-for-like had to double or triple versus EF prices. Normally the market would balk at a jump like that, but the shift to mirrorless provided the cover to do it. Hence RF lenses with prices 2x higher than EF prices *new*. So L lenses are a screaming value right now, and likely will be until the exodus runs itself out and the supply glut gets soaked up.
I recently bought a 5D Mark iii with a 24-105 kit lens, 50mm 1.2, 16-35 f2.8 mkii and the 70-200 mki with IS for under €2000. Pretty happy with that. Normaly your bank account wouldn’t be happy with those kinds of lenses 😂
L series glass is addictive and the opportunity for anyone to cost effectively pick one up and pop it on an R or 5D series body is something no one should pass up. My two RF lenses (RF 100-300 2.8 and RF 100-500 4.5-7.1) are in fact better than their EF counterparts which I also have and will keep. The 100-300 does not really have a counterpart but effectively is like blending my 300 2.8 and 70-200 2.8 into one lens ...AND... it is as sharp as the 300 prime. As a sports shooter it is nirvana. But it was 10,000 USD. As you pointed out, the EF 70-200 2.8 is well within reach of many. The EF 300 2.8 IS is a bit more but much less than original 7000 USD price tag. I still have and will keep all of my EF L glass including the EF 100-400 MII which I use on a 7D MII when kayaking. No, it is not as "good" as the 100-500 on the R7 but it is still extraordinary. Last week I shot a bald eagle backlit by sunlight as it landed in a tree above me. No chromatic aberration or purple fringing. That's L glass for you. Good advice
Very good point! I have had great success with the Canon 70-300L on my Sony full frame. I shot an air show with it a couple of years ago, the focus kept up very well. Used the Sigma adapter.
EF lenses (as well as EF bodies) are going for significantly less now on the used market as everyone and their dog is switching over to mirrorless. Hell, I was able to pick up a used Canon EF 28-300mm L for under 700 USD!
@@ThisIsJulianChey thanks for making this video btw! Been able to upgrade my kit significantly over the past few weeks based on the info in this video
It is a shame that Canon is killing the EF mount and not just updating it like Nikon has done for their F mount for 50+ years, oh well just means I get more gear for less later on.
I have EF lenses on an adapter because back then Sony didn't have good lenses and I keep using them because they're fine for most of my needs. I didn't fully switch to Sony mostly because I have more important things to spend my money on. Now I'm eying some EF cameras but I have to say that many of these old DSLR lenses are vintage today. For example that 85 1.2 is not very usable. It has aberration all over it. It's 100% a vintage look. The oldest lens that's justifiable for me at this point is probably Sigma 35mm 1.4 Art. It's not as sharp as mirrorles stuff, but it's sharp enough. Those older Canon lenses have nothing on new optics apart from build quality. Samyang makes 85mm 1.2 that's tack sharp wide open. They also make 135mm 1.8 that's just as good. Both autofocus and optical quality is better today than in the 1990 - 2010s, when EF lenses were designed. The bright, wide angle zooms that you showed are not that great either. 16-35 2.8 is unsharp, that's just the reality of glass made for 16-20 Mpx sensors and 35mm film (!). They fixed it fith the second generation, so that one is better but still not as good as a modest Tamron or Sigma today. That said there's a few lenses that are still worth a look. Their 180mm macro is better and quite usable on small apertures and sharp enough for portraits. EF 135mm f2 L is sharp wide open; 16-35 f4 IS L is also sharp for a zoom, same for 11-24 and their funky fisheye zoom. Their specialised stuff like telephoto primes, 100 and macro, tilt-shift architectural jars are all still used professionally. The late primes like 35 1.4 II are also decent.
I have not experienced CA on the 85mm f1.2 II but that might be because I generally use it for portraits. I agree on the DSLRs, they still perform well but I would hesitate to invest in more DSLR bodies at this stage. For nostalgia I am always on the lookout for a 5DIV though, my last DSLR was a 5DIII and still enjoy using it.
I dunno man... I bought a $3000 Sony 12-24 GM F2.8 last night... and just the preliminary stuff ive seen with it is mind blowing.... My camera gear was all 20 years old, I had one high end canon lens left, and I just decided I wanted to drop the cash for another 20 year set up
Modern lenses especially Canon RF L and Sony GM are going to compete very well even with older Canon EF L lenses like these. A lot of progress has been made with lens element designs, glass coatings and fast autofocus motors. Glad you like the 12-24 too 👍
The 85mm II I wouldn’t say is a good lens. The focus was awful and good luck trying to get a shot wide open! I had to always shoot at 2 or 2.5 to get decent shots (on a Canon 5D3). Possibly it would have worked better on my R5 which I have now. I now use the RF85mm 1.2 which is an incredible lens and probably the best lens I have ever owned. For EF mount the newer 1.4 version is way better than the older EF 85mm II 1.2. Skip the 85mm 1.2 it’s pretty bad. Although the 5D4 is good, if you can manage an R6, you get way more than you expect from the cost that is double. The focussing of mirrorless compared to DSLR is in another league. The benefits far outweigh the extra cost. If someone was on a really tight budget I would say get a 5D3, but if they can stretch to it and maybe delay a fancy lens so they could get the R6, definitely do that! DSLRs have had their day and will slow you down. If you are in a position to compare a DSLR to a mirrorless I’m very certain you won’t want the DSLR once you understand the advantages of a mirrorless camera.
I like my EF L 85mm f1.2 but fast focusing is not its thing for sure. It is a quirky lens with some character but it creates wonderful images. I frequently shoot it wide open though. The only practical reason to get a DSLR today is cost vs performance. A 5D3 or 5D4 is going to give a photographer an outstanding tool to work with. But if money is not a factor mirrorless would be the way to go.
@@ThisIsJulianC I rarely got properly in focus shots wide open with the EF85 1.2. Now you can get an R6 for around £1400 new or probably £1100 used. A 5D3 is around £400 used. Saving the pennies a bit longer gives you a much newer and better camera. My girlfriend got a 5D3 due to budget and I later convinced her to get a second backup camera which was the R6. Now she hates the 5D3 and wants to get rid of it as she loves the R6 so much for how much easier it is to use and the better results she gets. Money will always be the determining factor though.
Shooting the 85mm L II at f1.2 gives a razor thin depth of field, thin enough that you need to take great care to position a portrait subject... or shoot them at f2 (and still take care with DoF)
I’ll be honest with you, I resisted mirrorless for a long time. Then one day I picked up the EOS R on display in BestBuy, the eye tracking AF and exposure simulation sold me instantly. By the way, the EOS R has the 5D Mk4 sensor in it. I eventually made the break from EF to RF L lenses (which are lighter, smaller, faster focusing and sharper) and I haven’t looked back. I eventually bought an R5 for the higher megapixels and better user interface.
I defy anyone to tell the difference between photos taken on the high end DSLR cameras and pro lenses and the mirrorless versions. Mirrorless was a great way for camera manufacturers to screw a lot more money out of consumers.
Spot on….. Some of the best professional photographers I know are using Canon’s 70D crop apsc DSLR, and make some incredible images with it. And they have no intention of ‘upgrading’ However the marketing and the demand to drop EF lenses and pursue RF mount lenses to replace them has resulted in some great bargains for the EF L lenses.
Let's just say I never accidentally shot photos with my R5/R6 with a lens cap on. Never accidentally hit a dial and a whole series of photos had blown out highlights. Final, fully edited keepers? Sure. Probably indistinguishable. But has it helped me get more keepers/prevent my clumsy self from making stupid mistakes? Most likely. (As for EF vs RF lenses, I've kept most of my EF lenses because they're still great and no reason to get the RF counterpart.)
9:03 that was a joke right? in what world does that ever happen that someone hiring someone for wedding photography has the knowledge to even lose confidence because they see a camera with no wear and tear?
I would imagine checking with Canon, because many of the older L lenses they don't service any longer. Version I 24-70 2.8 is one of them. You don't want to drop 500$ on a potential paperweight🤪
Canon now screwed me for the second time (first when making FD lenses incompatible). I’ll keep my EF glass and 5D2. I may even pick up a few more used items for cheap. I will not switch to the new system. I’m not interested in new R lenses or any mirrorless nonsense. In the process of switching to Leica M and be done.
Thanks for sharing. I have some FD lenses but in those days I was on the OM system. I moved from Olympus to Canon in 1994 at which point Canon had already launched the EF mount. My FD lenses came with older Canon bodies I have collected over the past 20 years. If the Canon Mirrorless cameras had continued with the EF mount, I would not have considered moving to Sony a few years ago (2019) as I was already heavily invested in EF lenses. Because Canon moved to a new mount, I was able to look at all mirrorless mount systems at the same time and didn't feel so tied to Canon. I am sure I am not alone, I am sure Canon lost some customers / market share as a result. Envious of your Leica plans, I have no Leica gear currently.
Mark my words, don’t sell that 85 1.2, it’s going to be a future classic, if you look at the FE version of this lens, which was for film, they’re selling for astronomical money because of the 1.2 aperture, I believe most of this range of lenses will be worth a fair wack in the not too distant future.
"Legacy equipment"??? EVFs will never be as good as an optical viewfinder. A mirrorless camera isn't inherently better, just different - that is, unless a manufacturer deliberately refuses to update the features and/or sensors in their DSLR range.
Nikon and Canon have ceased the development of new DSLR models. The EF lenses (and DSLR bodies) continue to be as outstanding today as they were before the market for mirrorless cameras outgrew them. They will still be around for plenty of time yet no need to worry.
I recently bought an EF 50 mm f 1.2 L that has always been out of my price range and finally they're very affordable online. I bought one. I sent it to Canon service to give it to once-overs. It came back today and with a good clean bill of health so my money's well spent
Because most photographers and videographers are noobs who think that the newest lenes are making better content automatically :) I use 17 EF L lenses with my C70 and R6 mark II and I will probably never upgrade.
Ha yes!! One of my favorite local portrait photographers near me shoots with a Canon 70D and a bunch of Canon EF-S lenses and produces outstanding results! I dont think she has any plans to change her kit, she makes a good return on the portraits she produces too.
@ThisIsJulianC I'm 25 and just got into shooting film on a Canon A-1, so since I'm collecting FD lenses now, I got an RF-FD adapter to put them on my R5. What's cool is, just like the EF-RF adapters, going SLR to mirrorless, the adapter just has to be the length of a mirror box and doesn't need any glass in it, so you don't lose any light like you often times do with adapters. And, like, I got a 50mm f/1.4 prime for less than $100. The RF version of that lens is over $1,000. I've even done paid wedding gigs with them and gotten great results! The only real drawback is you have to be comfortable with manual focus.
That’s the point exactly. People are selling their EF lenses including L series lenses to ‘upgrade’ to RF. The RF lenses might be an improvement but for just about any amateur photographer the difference in performance does not warrant the drop in value they will get when they sell their EF lenses. Which is why it is still worth picking them up cheap.
@@ThisIsJulianC I'm in that market. I sold off my 5dm3 and bought an R8. Today ordered a refurbished RF15-30 F4.5-6.3 for $249 and am selling a mint EF17-40f4. Probably will only get 150 for EF17-40L series.I wanted a lighter walk around lens with image stabilization.
Depends on your point of reference. Compared to recent RF L lenses from Canon, the EF L versions are a lower cost option and in many cases just as capable. Glad you liked it 👍
Canon are still selling some of the L series EF lenses on their website, they are holding prices for new high, in many cases at the same level as they were before the RF mount was launched.
Five and 10 years ago people predicted the death of the camera industry from cell phones. I think it's a miracle we still have a vibrant pro camera industry. The last think I would do is begrudge their prices.
About 15 years ago, I had a friend who bought a car from a police auction. In the trunk of the car was a bag of camera gear. I bought a 17-35 2.8L for $400. It's still my favorite lens.
Lucky guy! My police auction car had baggies of crystal meth:(
@@Topidoit you’re the lucky one bro
Canon made an EF 20-35, 17-35, 16-35 mark 1,2,3 and an RF 15-35.
I use the R6 and 1Dx MKII for pro sports photography and all my EF lenses work flawlessly on the R6. In fact my 85/1.4 got a new lease of life as the 'eye AF' on the R6 is spot on with no BF/FF problems that I have on DSLRs. Honestly the EF lenses are excellent value for money now.
Are you using the Canon EF/RF adapter. Any downsides to using it?
@@ThisIsJulianC yes and no issues whatsoever.
Yeah the EF to RF adapters are great. I have a standard adapter and also a helical adapter (no AF, but lets you focus closer).
@@ThisIsJulianC none
So you think you are getting equal quality to the native RF lenses?
I did the same thing for Zeiss Classic primes. I bought the 35, 50, and 85 classics for a steal on ebay, and they were all in mint condition. The vintage Zeiss primes that film makers covet are still insanely expensive.
The humble non-L 20-35mm f/3.5-4.5 is worth a mention here too. Yes, the corners are a bit soft wide open, but not often in the plane of focus anway. It weighs under 350g and I picked one up, in the box, little used, for £75 delivered. An excellent walkabout lens which balances reasonably well on the less expensive mirrorless bodies as well as DSLRs. Great for hiking with, as no-one pixel peeps forground grassy corners when there's something interesting to focus on in the middle of the frame.
I no longer have it but I know that lens well it is a very capable lens.
I do events, always with 2 bodies. In the past, it was two 6Ds (having identical controls is very important when the light gets low). Then I mixed in an RP and then an R. I got totally fed up with randomly wandering focus points and some other issues, sold them off and got another 6D. No more adapters! And now I can afford the lenses I need/want. A DSLR makes it very easy to screw up exposure in the heat of the moment, so not everything is better. But simpler menus, simpler controls and excellent IQ are a winning combo.
The 6D is a classic for sure. I tried an EOS R when I was thinking of moving to a mirrorless and returned it for the Sony A7III instead. EF L lenses are still holding higher prices where there is no RF equivalent, like the 1.4 35mm EF L prime. Sounds like you have a great set up and, unless you want the exposure view in the EVF then there is no reason to change what you have #thumbsup
I have a 6D and it's relieving to see people mention how much they like theirs, since I keep getting the urge to upgrade to mirrorless but I'm really happy with how my pics look so Im kinda torn. Really the only reason I want to upgrade is for higher quality videos
@@Shift18 The focusing is in a completely different league. Image quality would be the least of my concerns on any remotely modern DSLR. Heck I still own 3 Nikon DSLRs, 2xD600 (released in 2012) and D750 (released in 2014) and all of them are not too far behind in IQ from my R6 mark II. Slightly less detail but still plenty plenty sharp and still good at high ISO.
But everything else has improved tremendously and it's a joy to work with the mirrorless bodies.
I agree Julien, I am definitely going to search for a few EF Lenses. Even if I switch to R Series (I Use a 5DMk3 AND A 6D) I will use adapters til Canon allows 3rd party RF Lenses!
In real world use there is very little to compare between the EF and RF L series lenses, I think you are making a wise choice
My first DSLR was the 80D, but I sold it for a 6D mk II. New lenses are SO expensive, just as much as a new camera body sometimes. I love my DSLR, I learned on a DSLR in high school, and I will continue using it until I can no longer use it.
I still have my 5DIII and 5DII, I enjoy using them. I find I miss the sound and vibration from the mirror box with mirrorless cameras. I never expected that. Don’t sell your DSLR it will be cherished one day 👍😀
I put together a cheap used kit. Ef 17-40mm f/4L ($200), Ef 24-105mm f/4L ($250), and a Ef 100-300mm f/5.6L ($150). So a bit less than $650 all in with tax. I bought them all from KEH and was delighted with what they sent. Ebay isn't as good of a source because sellers don't offer warranties. KEH, MPB, and Used Photo Pro all offer warranties which gives me piece of mind that I won't end up with a costly paperweight.
Those are awesome deals you got there - congrats. At those prices there is no need to rely on eBay, KEH has a great reputation. The pricing of that 100-300 L lens is the best deal you have there. I used that lens to photograph sport (triathlon) when I was using my Canon EOS gear and it became one of my favorite L lenses. I certainly paid a lot more than $150 😂
To me one of the reasons to choose Canon over other brands is the ability to use EF lenses on modern state of the art mirrorless cameras like an R3, a huge range of DSLRs, and even film cameras. Yes the RF camera will need an adapter, but it will autofocus that EF lens from the late 80s as good or better than any of the canon cameras that came before it.
I chose Canon EF last year, not having had any gear in that system before.
My main reasons:
-> I want to also shoot 35mm film with best quality output possible, so EF just makes the most sense as I can use excellent, stabilized L lenses on the EOS1n and EOS1v with the whole setup being weather sealed too. There is nothing comparable for 35mm film.
-> I went with a 5DsR for landscape and architecture work. 51MP, very silent shutter and mirror slap as the dampening is best in class. It's less loud than the original A7 and A7II.
-> I got the 24mm L TS-E II and the 90mm TS-E; other than the latest Fuji GFX tilt-shift lenses, there is nothing comparable on the market for ANY system.
-> I went on a shopping spree and also grabbed the 40mm f2.8, the 50mm f1.2 L, the 30mm f2 USM IS, the 24-70 f2.8 L II, the 24-100mm L IS, the 16-35mm f4 L IS, the 24-70 f4 L IS, the 105mm f2.8 L Macro as well as the Sigma 100-400 ( I think that is actually the better value proposition compared to the heavier and more expensive Canon 100-400 L II). The stabilized lenses really make it worth it and the performance of all of theses lenses on the 51MP 5DsR is on par with basically everything modern on the market right now in every practical sense.
I got a full spectrum converted RP which takes all of the above lenses. EF mount is THE most versatile lens mount now. I can even mount all of these lenses to Z mount with the Fringer adapter.
I expect this window of opportunity to grab EF lenses at a bargain not to last very long. There are tons of movie cameras still using EF lenses, adapting EF to RF is easy and such a no-brainer. I expect the prices to go up again once supply shrinks.
Totally agree - it’s an open opportunity for a bargain right now but that won’t last forever.
I've been buying up EF L lenses because I'm using a 90D currently and when I upgrade I'm going straight for a R5 Mark II which means I can adapt over the EF lenses pretty easily.
With the Canon RF/EF adapter it will be a seamless transition when you move to the R5ii
@@ThisIsJulianC My thoughts exactly! I know the AF is generally not quite as good as their RF counterpart, but that's not a big deal to me.
Thanks for the video a nice bit of wisdom, I am still very happy with my 11-year-old Mark III with the 24-70 L, the go to combination for family & friends photo events. Migrated to EOS-R and RF glass and dedicated them to recording video. Lately, taking a nostalgic journey with my 52 year old Pentax spotmatic a 21st birthday present from my wife to be in 1972 - happy days.
Thats a nice Pentax - I collect 35mm SLR's but I do not have that one. You should keep your 5DIII and the 24-70 you will always get great images from it. I still have mine and have no plans to sell it.
My EF 135mm f/2L was less than $600 shipped. It's an amazing portrait lens paired with a GFX body and an EF -> GFX adaptor.
Nice set up #thumbsup
Robert's Camera are great people to work with! I have bought many things from them through the years, and they have always provided great products with great service! Five Stars!!!
Many lenses have first versions which look very old. Especially the zooms 16-35mm, 24--70mm and 24-105mm. I never had them in the hand, would you also recommend them or rather go for the second version?
Always (usually) better to go for the later versions of lenses but you will pay more for them, which depends then on your budget. Some of the examples I shared in this video were the later versions, some were not.
Buying used lenses always has some risks, usually around the honesty of the seller with the description accuracy. Check for number of positive reviews of the seller and the returns policy. Hope this helps
I gave a thumbs up as soon as I heard you endorse Robert's Camera. Great company. Their storefront in Indy has a great stock and a really knowledgeable staff if you get a chance to visit them. Everything I've ordered from Used Photo Pro, their online used store, has arrived to me in eastern Kentucky in two days. If you're in the midwest US I highly recommend them. And their condition assessments have also always been spot on.
Thanks!
These are a great deal right now. A few months late onto the video but the point still stands. Especially for us amateurs, gerting the Mark I version is actually an even better deal because the quality was never bad. The new ones just got lighter and slightly better in the corners, generally. Another tip. Try to find obscure lenses no one knows about. Like the 17-35 F/2.8L. They are amazing. Smaller and lighter than the 16-35s, still really sharp, and can be had in mint condition for under $300.
That point about the 17-35/2.8L is a great idea, I might take a look at that. Still use my Canon EF kit every so often.
Excellent points! Many thanks for your input and insights.
You are welcome - glad it was helpful #thumbsup
I really like the image you created here. Which lens did you use and how was your light setup? Normally i hate flat lighting but you made it beautiful and it somehow speaks to me.
Thanks for the feedback. Key light with a gridded softbox, fill light is an Aputure Lantern. This was shot at 40mm which is tighter than I normally use, hope this helps!
@@ThisIsJulianC Thank you for the answer. Is the softbox normally sized or one of these big ones? I am invested into learning more about lighting, thats why i ask so many questions :)
It's an Aputure LightDome II and is positioned just out of shot, so very close. it is large so it diffuses the light well. No problem to ask questions its how we all learn :-)
@@ThisIsJulianC One last question, is it the Zeiss Batis 40mm you are using? Its a pretty uncommon focal length
No, it was the Sony G 40mm f2.5. I don’t usually use it and won’t likely use it again for UA-cam videos in that space. 40mm is too tight for the space that I have.
6:20 ... please dont tell me, you dont know about the aperture preview on CANON DSLRs? On your 5d²: just set your aperture and hold the mechanical button left of the bajonett right beyond the lense release. It will apply/engage the set aperture as long as pressed and you can change it on the fly with the index finger wheel. On your 5d³ should be a similar button.
I think you are talking about the DoF preview button? That’s been on Canon cameras for many years, or are you thinking of something else?
i use the EF 24-70mm f2.8L and the EF 200mm F2.8L with my Canon R7. Great lenses, and I could never have afforded them before.
i have just added the Sigma RF-S 18-50mm f2.8, which is very good and the size and weight of the R7's kit lens.
What makes all of this practical is the R7's IBIS, since none of these lenses have stabilization built in.
Astrophotography, you mentioned it but I didn’t see much more. I’ve bought some of the old Pentax 6X7 lenses for use with cooled astrophotography cameras. The advantage to those 6x7 lenses is the large backfocus that allows room for an off axis guider setup and a filter wheel. Anyway those old lenses are excellent and available used for $100-200, a small fraction of their original cost. They’re absolutely great for wide angle astrophotography.
That’s a great deal. I have used the EF L 85mm for astro previously. These days I generally only do astrophotography when traveling, the 85mm EF-L doesn’t make the pack list due to its weight.
Watching this now I just bought the 24-70 mark ii and 85 1.4 $1500 for both I love them so far I am considering a used 5d iv for $900 on KEH or a used r6 ii which I’ve found on Facebook for $1500. Help what should I pick lol.
You got a great deal on the lenses for sure.
The 5DIV is an outstanding camera but today I think I’d only buy it for nostalgia. If I was you I would get the R6II. The EF lenses will work well with it, and it will serve you well for a long time. You can use either EF or RF lenses with it, the 5IV will only work with the EF lenses.
You would not go wrong with the 5DIV but I would get the R6II.
Hope this helps, let me know what you decide
@@ThisIsJulianC I will most likely get the r6ii planning the meetup for tomorrow the guy who sold me the ef lenses had the canon native ef to rf autofocus adapter and sold it to me for an extra $100 I love the lenses so far I’ve been using them with a fringer autofocus adapter on my Fuji xt4
I just came across your video. Great topic and Thank You. Im also a EF Canon hobbyist doing Astrophotography and Sports.
Have notice as the years go buy the EF L glass becoming very responsible. Even if you have a EOS R Camera the EF glass works incredibly. Thanks to no real 3rd party glass yet we dont have much joices
To tell you the truth I find the RF glass in regards to AF to be about 5% to 10% better at the best . RF L glass is top of line for sure but you will pay a high price.
I have been actually thinking of getting the EF 135mm f2 and the EF 400mm F5.6 somtime in the future. They would be totally compatible with my old 6D , 80D my kids 70D and my R6MARK2.
I did find another parts of your video intriguing in regards to the Classic Qlick Bait " Why im switching to Sony" lol
In my photography journey so far i have only used Canon 18 -24mp Cameras.
I have been thinking of trying a used Sony like the A7R3 42mp.
I was thinking how did you make out with Canon Glass on your Sony. Apart from Canon EF I also have Sigma EF glass.
Im thinking A7R3 , MC11 adapter with my Sigma 14-24mm f2.8 and Sigma 35mm F1.4.
My question is how would this combo work out with Sony?
Regards Sean
I do not have any Sigma lenses today but I have used my Canon EF L lenses on A7III, A6600, A7C, A7CR and A7R4. Always using the Sigma MC11 adapter. They perform as well as any Sony GM equivalent IMO, with the exception of focus speed and accuracy. When following fast moving objects I have lost focus more easily with the EFL 70-300 adapted than with a Sony GM 100-400. This might be an unfair comparison but it was noticeable how many more on-target images I got with the Sony lens. That wouldn’t stop me using the Canons and would not cause me to sell them either. You will get great performance on the A7R3.
I have a question! I've been wanting to purchase the 70-200mm 2.8 and I've noticed most sellers on ebay for this specific lens state that there from Japan in the name title of the lens. Does that make a difference from the ones on the canon website?
There are lots of sellers offering Canon lenses and camera bodies direct from Japan. I have no experience of them, they generally seem to get good reviews however.
I live about an hour and a half from Roberts Camera and I've been there many times. I only know of 2 camera stores in Indiana, 1 in Lafayette, and Roberts in Indianapolis. Roberts is by FAR the biggest of the two. They have lots of gear, new and used, they have a very knowledgeable staff, and they are a seller you can trust. I have no affiliation with them other than being a satisfied customer. I'm just glad I don't live closer or I would be broke!
I''m still using a 5D Mark II, Mark III, 6D, and 90D professionally, and since the price of a new Mark IV is coming down, I'll probably buy one this year. I shot weddings with a 10D and a 20D for several years, and I wouldn't hesitate to take them out of storage and use them today. The quality of the photograph comes from what's behind the camera, not what's inside of it.
And yes, I've been stockpiling Canon L lenses over the past couple of years because they are so cheap! I just got a 17-35 f2.8 L this week for $300 USD including shipping and taxes. If you want the baddest lens ever, the 135 f2 is selling for $400-$500 on ebay. I've heard it called the "Lord Of The L Rings". I don't use this lens often, but when I do, holy cow!!
Also, Canon makes a 1.4x and a 2x Extender, so you can extend the range of the longer focal lengths. I use the 1.4x on my 90D with the 70-200 a lot. So, essentially I am able to shoot with a range from 17mm to 448mm, mostly L lenses, and it's not terribly expensive to put together a kit like this. Granted, it's not cheap, but compared to new prices, you get AMAZING quality at a fraction of the cost. I just figured up the cost of what I have if bought my lenses new, and it's about $9,000. I may have about $2,000 in the lenses I've picked up on the used market.
One more thing.....Canon also makes some non-L lenses that are just as good as the L series. (50mm f1.8, 85mm f1.8, 100mm f2, just to name a few), and they tend to be a bit cheaper because they are not L lenses.
Sorry for the rambling.
Thanks for posting!!
Those are some great prices! Last wedding I shot was with my 5DIII, awesome camera still. Glad to hear you are using it. I looked at the 5DIV a short while ago, still seemed overpriced so I didn’t buy it. I hope there isn’t a Robert Camera near me I would find it way too tempting.
Love my Canon R5 and have a few great RF lenses, but most of my lenses are EF L lenses with an adapter. Works great
I'm in such a dilemma! Two days ago I bought the R6ii and an RF 85mm f2 to go along with it. However, with Canon giving the green light for 3rd party lenses I don't know if should wait for Sigma (full frame lenses) or should I buy EF lenses and use an adaptor. What would you do?
Personally, although I have respect for Sigma and Tamron as 3rd party lens manufacturers, I generally stick with Sony (and previously Canon) OEM lenses. Even though EF L lenses are cheaper than RF today, they do hold their value better than 3rd party lenses. Canon EF lenses on a Canon adapter are seamlessly integrated on RF bodies. You are only giving up some weight/size and the admin of using an adapter. I’d go the EF route. Hope this helps
Canon't wont allow third party for full frame, only aps-c lenses
Thank you for the video. I shot Canon with EF L lenses, and still own a few, for many years and today shot with RF L versions and with Sony. The latest EF L are very good but unfortunately you highlight prices on older versions like the EF 16-35/2.8 L and not the latest version III, or the older 24-70/2.8 and not the version II, or not the version III 70-200/2.8 L. So all of these can be adapted to Nikon Z, Sony E and Canon RF I recommend looking for the latest and most up to date version of each lens. Take care.
When this video was produced wasn’t really focusing on the generation of each lens model. The point made is that the EF L lenses are great value right now. In my view even the Gen 1 versions of the lenses you list are excellent lenses and represent a solid buy at the prices listed. Paying more for the later versions might be a good strategy but not one for me. Thanks for your comment, greatly appreciate the addition to this discussion.
@@ThisIsJulianC Understand your thinking now. You should share that in the video. While I loved my Canon EF 50/1.2 L and EF 85/1.2L II and have thought about going back and rebuying them I ended up buying the EF 85/1.4L IS and it’s one of my favorites that I recommend because of its stabilization capabilities. Always looking at EF lenses as a great buy. The TS L lenses at 17mm, 24mm, and 90mm are also really unique and I recommend those.
A little-known gem is the Canon EF 28-80mm f2.8-4 L mini-magic drainpipe, with leaded glass.
I’ll look out for that one
@@ThisIsJulianC See Ken Rockwell's review.
I just got an adapter for Canon EF to Sony E(F).
The 70-200 f/2.8 works just fine with a Sigma adapter. Paying an extra 2400€ for a GM is not justifiable!
What I really want is the 180 mm macro.
That’s great! When I use my EF L lenses on my Sony A7RIV I use the Sigma adapter, I find it works really well.
The EF 70-200L IS version, the Mark II version is sharper than the first IS version, which actually is less sharp than the non-is version. The EF to R adapter is supposed to be quite good with no compromises.
i bought some of the specialized Canon EF lenses ("specialized" meaning not available in other mounts) at a fraction of what they used to be at good condition (if you know where to look other than that usual auction site) and they work great in mirrorless (i use mine on Nikon Z). like the 17/24/50/90/135 L tilt-shift lenses, 65 MP-E macro, the 8-15 fisheye zoom and the 11-24/4L zoom...the last one is of keen interest since RF just released causing the 11-24L EF used prices to drop (at least for while)
I still have my EF 35mm L series which is still relevant as there is no RF L series equivalent... yet
Where should we look?
@@TK-mj9rd the best place to look is in b&s posts in photography forums...or reddit. although you will definitely need skills to sniff out the scams.
Awesome tips here. Julian how do you feel about the state of brand competitiveness these days? I am in canons ecosystem because I inherited a canon EOS 630. ignorance is bliss. now that that I have a canon RP and a few canon EF primes, of course, Sony and Fuji seem to be more exciting in terms of features and my camera photos seem so boring. With your perspective of being a canon shooter having moved to Sony, any thoughts?
Thanks for your comments. When I made the switch to Sony the consumer choice was Sony's A7III and Canon had just launched the original EOS R. I moved to the mirrorless Sony somewhat annoyed that Canon hadn't really come up with anything nearly as good as the Sony offering. I also had some dream of video and the A7III had 4K video so that was a pull too.
I came from the EOS 5DIII which is a huge and heavy camera compared to the A7III. I liked the more compact size of the Sony full frame bodies compared to the Cann DSLR's. I looked at the Canon EOS R which still felt very large and heavy in my hands and had too many design flaws that annoyed me, I did try one but returned it and bought the A7III.
That was 5 or 6 years ago now. Today, if I was in the same position, I would more likely stay with Canon and would have swapped my 5DIII for one of the latest Canon mirrorless bodies. I do not see Sony as being significantly better than Canon today, Canon have caught up. Now that I have already made the expensive switch and bought a lot of Sony GM lenses I have no desire to make another switch in the near future.
Reason for saying all this.... I don't necessarily see Sony (or Fuji) as being so far ahead of Canon to warrant a move to their systems if you already have Canon lenses. The Canon mirrorless bodies today are better designed than the original R and very capable. If I was in your position I would get the EF/RF adapter (the Canon one, not a 3rd party one) and enjoy your Canon lenses and the RP.
Long answer... hope it helps... let me know if there is anything else I can help with.
I just bought my first mirrorless camera, the EOS R7, and an EF-RF adapter. I will just use my EF lenses for the forseeable future. I am getting incredible bird shots with my EF 100-400 L lens. I cant imagine that I would get substantially better shots if I paid a sky high price for an RF 100-400.
If you have the Canon branded EF/RF adapter you are going to find it a seamless experience. All you really give up is some weight and maybe some dimensions compared to a native RF lens but thats all. There will be a lot of marketing out there about how good the RF L lenses are compared to the EF L lenses, but like you I would ignore it and have fun with the EF L lenses. Enjoy the R7 too thats an outstanding camera.
@ThisIsJulianC Yes I have the genuine Canon adapter and it works flawlessly.
I still have a large collection of EF L glass. Looking for a more modern DSLR body. Have a 5D mark 0 that was my wife’s camera and I switched to Sony primarily for video but there is nothing wrong with the glass, time to start using it again.
Yes for sure - don’t let it get dusty!
Where are they selling cheap? I stopped in a nearby camera store and an EF zoom lens cost as much as a new RF lense.
The examples shown in this video were all at eBay.com
I would still challenge the statement 'Canon EF L lenses going so cheap', at least in Europe. They indeed got cheaper, but I still cannot afford most of them (as pre-owned)...
Fair point… it is all relative.
Yes we in Europe are feckin broke! The EU is a wasteland. I use Sigma 1.4 40 and 28 which are superb and cheap, Voigtlander M mount adapted and Zeiss Milvus. On a full frame 47 meg 4 year old second hand camera. This kit will last me a decade I imagine or more.
At the end of the day, glass is glass and I think the L Series have some of the best glass out there. As long as your still in the EOS ecosystem, which unless you're an intense professional, I see no reason to switch, it's a good time to be in the hobby! I am going to pick up a 1DX to replace my 1DS. I love that big body format and I think for my landscape photography, general hobby stuff, that would be a great buy and addition to my collection. I also dabble in film photography and I like that you can use L series lenses on a lot of canon film cameras such as my A1. I think L series is a great sweet spot for a hobbist
When I owned EOS EF cameras, I bought Sigmas etc if I could not afford the L series. Now, with RF, I buy EF L lenses. Cheaper than Sigmas and much better. I got a EF 100-400 F5.6 L is ii for under $1000 used. Now I have a super sharp zoom (rivalling any prime in fact) giving me 30 FPS on my R7. Getting a 500 F4 is L next week for about $ 1400, These are used lenses with wear marks but the glass is perfect and everything works. Why not? I love it. One day I will get the RF 100-300 2.8 and the RF 600 F4.... One day.
Sounds like you have a dream list of lenses, thats terrific!
We'll be able to afford RF L glass when RFX or whatever they call the next thing comes out lol
Thanks.
You're welcome
You can adaptnthe lenses in r Canon , works good Not Like the mc11 Adapter
👍
I AM IN THE SAME PREDICAMENT Your TALKING about. I will keep my 7 d mark ii and my 5d mark ii , 70 d canon cameras. and buy a 5 d mark iv. I have all canon lenses as well.
Defo keep your 5Dii - that is a future classic that helped start the UA-cam phenomena. I see the used price of 5Div bodies dipping below $1k now on eBay, some for $700... that is a lot of camera for less than $1k.
One excellent opportunity with the old EF L series lenses is that they work magnificently on the new Canon RF bodies. So you can upgrade to a modern mirrorless camera and still take advantage of these excellent older EF lenses.
Agree. Canon’s EF/RF adapter makes it a seamless process.
i recently bought a 70-200 L f2.8 IS for 550£ like new and i am using it on the R5 mkII
RF glass imo is excellent but I cannot resist the bargains to be had in EF. 24/1.4 L II, TSE 24 L II, 100-400 L II, 200-400 1.4x L all within the last year or so and I might get the 16-35 and 24-70 2.8 zooms and the 35 & 85 1.4 primes. For me, eBay is my jam. Only RF I have is the 600/11 and it’s light and quick to zoom and having used most of the full frame bodies and the marvellous 100-300/2.8 I really think one can stick to EF L glass in most cases and just upgrade the mirrorless bodies. I think only now Canon are making more interesting lenses, such as the 24-105/2.8, 100-300/2.8 & the 28-70/2, now they might be worth while. Don’t get me wrong; most the RF range has IS now and focuses lightning quick but I don’t need that right now.
Agree - the RF lens range is shaping up very well, but the EF L bargains are still worthwhile.
Traded up 3 times for 5drs cost less than 800.00 3 years ago. Used 16-35, 24-70, 70-200. all f4 is - cheep!
Want the 100-400 ii but price is holding up at 1 k.
Now looking at 5d iv for screen and focus.
Hi , New subscriber , of all the videos I've watched on UA-cam on mirrorless vs DSLR your videos are the most informational and I can relate to so thanks. I'm a DSLR user I own a Canon 7D and a 77D that I still use to this day . I'm not a pro it's just a hobby but I have recently gotten into videos. I shot a music video with a combination of a Sony A6100 and the 77d which I believe did an excellent job but I'd like to upgrade my system but not break the bank since I already have a lot of L Lenses . I noticed you mentioned the 5D mark IV how does that standup against the 90D I'm torn between the two camera bodys . Both are in my price range or would you suggest R6 body with canon adaptor so I can continue using my lenses. id like a decent video camera but an excellent photo taking machine . With the 5Dbeing the standard for years and 90D having all the technology , both having 30MPs need a serious assist.
All else being equal I would get a Canon mirrorless body and pair it with an RF/EF adapter from Canon. That is the highest cost option however.
I have a 5DIII and still have a 5DII, i do not have a lot of experience with the 5DIV. The 5DIV is a terrific camera but I would be reluctant to recommend it today unless you find a really good deal. Camera technology has moved on a lot in the past few years and I think today I would look at a mirrorless option instead, with a good adapter. I have the Sony FE/Canon EF adapter from Sigma, it’s very good but sometimes the focusing let’s me down.
I would not go for the 90D today, I know it’s only 4 years old but a crop sensor DSLR today feels like it has had its day. I can’t offer any reasoning other than it just feels like a compromised choice.
I would defo go for a Canon body to go with your EF lenses. I would only go DSLR for cost saving and if so, then the 5DIV. As I said above I would not go for the 90D now. Hope this helps, appreciate the feedback in your comment too 👍
Make the switch to Mirrorless if you have the ability and keep the EF lenses. I use my EF lenses with an R3. I won’t buy an RF lens. Maybe they are even faster but the L lenses perform beyond anything the average photographer would need. But like in the video , I do have a 5D3 and if it ain’t moving super fast and I don’t need high FPS, there’s very little difference.
I'm confused with this video. There should be much more focus on the fact that these lenses can be adapted to work on current mirrorless and they work great so why box them into the same body of the time? I mean you did mention but briefly. I think it should have been the main focus.
That wasn’t the purpose of this video, it’s a good subject for another one.
With camera's getting much higher resolutions and newer coatings being developed, I would think that the older L lenses might not be good enough for adapting to newer bodies. I was looking up some info about the Canon EF 16-35mm L lenses and version I and II are pretty soft in the corners, which is fixed in the newer versions. Also many older L lenses are a little soft when shooting wide open, while most newer L lenses and even regular lenses are sharp even when shooting wide open.
Not saying that older L lenses are bad, but I think it's normal that prices are going down. People move to the newer mount, so the market gets flooded with good EF glass and prices need to be competitive to make the sale.
That’s the main reason the prices are attractive - people are selling them to ‘upgrade’ to the RF mount.
I have a good set of EF lenses. Trying to upgrade my 50mm to a f/1.4. Purchased two - one from an auction site (not Ebay). at $110.. another from a huge online retailer.. at $190, both arrived with broken AF. Canon is still selling the lens at $400.00 new. None of them would IMO be a bargain in 2024. Not seeing this discount wave yet.
The Canon EF 50mm 1.4 is not a L series lens that sells at a much lower price point. Canon is still selling remaining inventory of new EF lenses and DSLR bodies and will continue to do so until stocks are sold out.
Take a look at the Sigma Art 50 1.4.
I picked one up recently for $375 and it’s insanely sharp wide open, renders beautifully, and has a snappy fast and quiet focus.
IMO there is no “better” fast EF prime 50.
@@alexsorokin1896 - Glad that you are happy with it. Sounds nice. is $375 a good price?
- I think that the reason EF lens prices are not really going down- is because people just buy adapters and use them on their new cameras.
@@alexsorokin1896 - I heard that that was a good lens a while ago. It's probably, as you describe... still a great lens. I'm glad that you are happy with it. Good luck.
Such good advice. You don't need new gear to get amazing results.
Not only are you seeing EF lenses sold cheap because of the exodus to mirrorless driving up supply, there's also the fact that EF lens prices were originally set during the pre-smartphone era, when point-and-shoot profits helped sustain the high end market.
Now that the P&S subsidy is gone and pro equipment must be profitable in its own right, new prices of like-for-like had to double or triple versus EF prices. Normally the market would balk at a jump like that, but the shift to mirrorless provided the cover to do it. Hence RF lenses with prices 2x higher than EF prices *new*.
So L lenses are a screaming value right now, and likely will be until the exodus runs itself out and the supply glut gets soaked up.
That’s a great point about the pricing prior to the mirrorless era.
Great input, thanks for sharing!
Glad it was helpful!
damn this USA prices are very good. Bigger market effect, in EU we still have a bubble
I recently bought a 5D Mark iii with a 24-105 kit lens, 50mm 1.2, 16-35 f2.8 mkii and the 70-200 mki with IS for under €2000. Pretty happy with that. Normaly your bank account wouldn’t be happy with those kinds of lenses 😂
That is a fantastic example of what we are seeing, nice purchase!
L series glass is addictive and the opportunity for anyone to cost effectively pick one up and pop it on an R or 5D series body is something no one should pass up. My two RF lenses (RF 100-300 2.8 and RF 100-500 4.5-7.1) are in fact better than their EF counterparts which I also have and will keep. The 100-300 does not really have a counterpart but effectively is like blending my 300 2.8 and 70-200 2.8 into one lens ...AND... it is as sharp as the 300 prime. As a sports shooter it is nirvana. But it was 10,000 USD. As you pointed out, the EF 70-200 2.8 is well within reach of many. The EF 300 2.8 IS is a bit more but much less than original 7000 USD price tag. I still have and will keep all of my EF L glass including the EF 100-400 MII which I use on a 7D MII when kayaking. No, it is not as "good" as the 100-500 on the R7 but it is still extraordinary. Last week I shot a bald eagle backlit by sunlight as it landed in a tree above me. No chromatic aberration or purple fringing. That's L glass for you. Good advice
Wise words 👍 - AND - great to hear you are making good use of a 7Dii 👍👍👍👍
I bougth in mint conditions EF 300/4 IS - 500$, and EF 16-35/4 IS - 500$. Excelent lenses for my Canon R5.
I wonder what's the difference in image quality between rf 100 500 and ef 300f4/300 F2.8
The nice thing is that you can use the Canon EF lenses on Sony cameras with an adapter and have autofocus that works very well! 😉
Very good point! I have had great success with the Canon 70-300L on my Sony full frame. I shot an air show with it a couple of years ago, the focus kept up very well. Used the Sigma adapter.
EF lenses (as well as EF bodies) are going for significantly less now on the used market as everyone and their dog is switching over to mirrorless. Hell, I was able to pick up a used Canon EF 28-300mm L for under 700 USD!
That’s a terrific deal well done! 👍 👍
The audacity to call Nikon small
Ha! Congratulations - 9 months and you are only the second viewer to spot the Nikon gag
great video.
Glad it helped 👍
Shout out to the 50mm 1.4 canon. Many a shoot served and still sharp as ever
Yup - still an awesome lens for sure
@@ThisIsJulianChey thanks for making this video btw! Been able to upgrade my kit significantly over the past few weeks based on the info in this video
It is a shame that Canon is killing the EF mount and not just updating it like Nikon has done for their F mount for 50+ years, oh well just means I get more gear for less later on.
I was disappointed when Canon made the move but I understand why they did it.
Still can't find a 500 or 600 at a price i can afford 2nd hd
Canon’s 600mm is a very specialized and expensive lens in RF so the EF mount will hold its value.
@@ThisIsJulianC still lookin for an affordable ef
Good news for Blackmagic camera owners
Very true 👍
I have EF lenses on an adapter because back then Sony didn't have good lenses and I keep using them because they're fine for most of my needs. I didn't fully switch to Sony mostly because I have more important things to spend my money on. Now I'm eying some EF cameras but I have to say that many of these old DSLR lenses are vintage today. For example that 85 1.2 is not very usable. It has aberration all over it. It's 100% a vintage look. The oldest lens that's justifiable for me at this point is probably Sigma 35mm 1.4 Art. It's not as sharp as mirrorles stuff, but it's sharp enough.
Those older Canon lenses have nothing on new optics apart from build quality. Samyang makes 85mm 1.2 that's tack sharp wide open. They also make 135mm 1.8 that's just as good. Both autofocus and optical quality is better today than in the 1990 - 2010s, when EF lenses were designed. The bright, wide angle zooms that you showed are not that great either. 16-35 2.8 is unsharp, that's just the reality of glass made for 16-20 Mpx sensors and 35mm film (!). They fixed it fith the second generation, so that one is better but still not as good as a modest Tamron or Sigma today. That said there's a few lenses that are still worth a look. Their 180mm macro is better and quite usable on small apertures and sharp enough for portraits. EF 135mm f2 L is sharp wide open; 16-35 f4 IS L is also sharp for a zoom, same for 11-24 and their funky fisheye zoom. Their specialised stuff like telephoto primes, 100 and macro, tilt-shift architectural jars are all still used professionally. The late primes like 35 1.4 II are also decent.
I have not experienced CA on the 85mm f1.2 II but that might be because I generally use it for portraits. I agree on the DSLRs, they still perform well but I would hesitate to invest in more DSLR bodies at this stage. For nostalgia I am always on the lookout for a 5DIV though, my last DSLR was a 5DIII and still enjoy using it.
Very interesting topic thankyou .the cost is just too much eh
I dunno man... I bought a $3000 Sony 12-24 GM F2.8 last night... and just the preliminary stuff ive seen with it is mind blowing.... My camera gear was all 20 years old, I had one high end canon lens left, and I just decided I wanted to drop the cash for another 20 year set up
Modern lenses especially Canon RF L and Sony GM are going to compete very well even with older Canon EF L lenses like these. A lot of progress has been made with lens element designs, glass coatings and fast autofocus motors. Glad you like the 12-24 too 👍
Well said.
Nikon, smaller system?
Ha! Its been nearly TEN months and this is the first comment that has picked up on the Nikon gag. Congrats :-)
Let them keep selling them down and I’ll buy them all lol. Nikon D lenses too although some of those have bounced!
If people were smart they would buy adapters and keep ef lenses.
Agree - sensible approach right now
The 85mm II I wouldn’t say is a good lens. The focus was awful and good luck trying to get a shot wide open! I had to always shoot at 2 or 2.5 to get decent shots (on a Canon 5D3). Possibly it would have worked better on my R5 which I have now.
I now use the RF85mm 1.2 which is an incredible lens and probably the best lens I have ever owned.
For EF mount the newer 1.4 version is way better than the older EF 85mm II 1.2. Skip the 85mm 1.2 it’s pretty bad.
Although the 5D4 is good, if you can manage an R6, you get way more than you expect from the cost that is double.
The focussing of mirrorless compared to DSLR is in another league. The benefits far outweigh the extra cost. If someone was on a really tight budget I would say get a 5D3, but if they can stretch to it and maybe delay a fancy lens so they could get the R6, definitely do that!
DSLRs have had their day and will slow you down. If you are in a position to compare a DSLR to a mirrorless I’m very certain you won’t want the DSLR once you understand the advantages of a mirrorless camera.
I like my EF L 85mm f1.2 but fast focusing is not its thing for sure. It is a quirky lens with some character but it creates wonderful images. I frequently shoot it wide open though.
The only practical reason to get a DSLR today is cost vs performance. A 5D3 or 5D4 is going to give a photographer an outstanding tool to work with. But if money is not a factor mirrorless would be the way to go.
@@ThisIsJulianC I rarely got properly in focus shots wide open with the EF85 1.2.
Now you can get an R6 for around £1400 new or probably £1100 used. A 5D3 is around £400 used. Saving the pennies a bit longer gives you a much newer and better camera.
My girlfriend got a 5D3 due to budget and I later convinced her to get a second backup camera which was the R6. Now she hates the 5D3 and wants to get rid of it as she loves the R6 so much for how much easier it is to use and the better results she gets.
Money will always be the determining factor though.
Shooting the 85mm L II at f1.2 gives a razor thin depth of field, thin enough that you need to take great care to position a portrait subject... or shoot them at f2 (and still take care with DoF)
I’ll be honest with you, I resisted mirrorless for a long time. Then one day I picked up the EOS R on display in BestBuy, the eye tracking AF and exposure simulation sold me instantly. By the way, the EOS R has the 5D Mk4 sensor in it. I eventually made the break from EF to RF L lenses (which are lighter, smaller, faster focusing and sharper) and I haven’t looked back. I eventually bought an R5 for the higher megapixels and better user interface.
👍
I defy anyone to tell the difference between photos taken on the high end DSLR cameras and pro lenses and the mirrorless versions.
Mirrorless was a great way for camera manufacturers to screw a lot more money out of consumers.
Spot on….. Some of the best professional photographers I know are using Canon’s 70D crop apsc DSLR, and make some incredible images with it. And they have no intention of ‘upgrading’
However the marketing and the demand to drop EF lenses and pursue RF mount lenses to replace them has resulted in some great bargains for the EF L lenses.
Let's just say I never accidentally shot photos with my R5/R6 with a lens cap on. Never accidentally hit a dial and a whole series of photos had blown out highlights. Final, fully edited keepers? Sure. Probably indistinguishable.
But has it helped me get more keepers/prevent my clumsy self from making stupid mistakes? Most likely.
(As for EF vs RF lenses, I've kept most of my EF lenses because they're still great and no reason to get the RF counterpart.)
Spot on.
only got 50 1.2L. not really impressed. my sony a7r iv likes the 35 f2 is and 85 1.8
9:03 that was a joke right? in what world does that ever happen that someone hiring someone for wedding photography has the knowledge to even lose confidence because they see a camera with no wear and tear?
Wedding photographers have seen it all…
I would imagine checking with Canon, because many of the older L lenses they don't service any longer. Version I 24-70 2.8 is one of them. You don't want to drop 500$ on a potential paperweight🤪
I would imagine they have stopped servicing their own older lenses. That wouldn’t stop me buying and using them however.
I haven't seen L lens's cheep. I still see them way much money.
because regular folks don’t like big cameras like they used to
That's a whole discussion right there - agree with you.
Canon now screwed me for the second time (first when making FD lenses incompatible). I’ll keep my EF glass and 5D2. I may even pick up a few more used items for cheap. I will not switch to the new system. I’m not interested in new R lenses or any mirrorless nonsense. In the process of switching to Leica M and be done.
Thanks for sharing. I have some FD lenses but in those days I was on the OM system. I moved from Olympus to Canon in 1994 at which point Canon had already launched the EF mount. My FD lenses came with older Canon bodies I have collected over the past 20 years.
If the Canon Mirrorless cameras had continued with the EF mount, I would not have considered moving to Sony a few years ago (2019) as I was already heavily invested in EF lenses. Because Canon moved to a new mount, I was able to look at all mirrorless mount systems at the same time and didn't feel so tied to Canon. I am sure I am not alone, I am sure Canon lost some customers / market share as a result.
Envious of your Leica plans, I have no Leica gear currently.
Mark my words, don’t sell that 85 1.2, it’s going to be a future classic, if you look at the FE version of this lens, which was for film, they’re selling for astronomical money because of the 1.2 aperture, I believe most of this range of lenses will be worth a fair wack in the not too distant future.
Yup…. Definitely keeping that one 👍
"Legacy equipment"???
EVFs will never be as good as an optical viewfinder. A mirrorless camera isn't inherently better, just different - that is, unless a manufacturer deliberately refuses to update the features and/or sensors in their DSLR range.
Nikon and Canon have ceased the development of new DSLR models. The EF lenses (and DSLR bodies) continue to be as outstanding today as they were before the market for mirrorless cameras outgrew them. They will still be around for plenty of time yet no need to worry.
Because everyone is switching to RF lenses and mirror less cameras
I recently bought an EF 50 mm f 1.2 L that has always been out of my price range and finally they're very affordable online. I bought one. I sent it to Canon service to give it to once-overs. It came back today and with a good clean bill of health so my money's well spent
Because most photographers and videographers are noobs who think that the newest lenes are making better content automatically :) I use 17 EF L lenses with my C70 and R6 mark II and I will probably never upgrade.
Ha yes!! One of my favorite local portrait photographers near me shoots with a Canon 70D and a bunch of Canon EF-S lenses and produces outstanding results! I dont think she has any plans to change her kit, she makes a good return on the portraits she produces too.
*hint* they are not.
Canon FD is the way to go!
Wow that takes me back! I have a few FD lenses… but not many 🤪
@ThisIsJulianC I'm 25 and just got into shooting film on a Canon A-1, so since I'm collecting FD lenses now, I got an RF-FD adapter to put them on my R5. What's cool is, just like the EF-RF adapters, going SLR to mirrorless, the adapter just has to be the length of a mirror box and doesn't need any glass in it, so you don't lose any light like you often times do with adapters. And, like, I got a 50mm f/1.4 prime for less than $100. The RF version of that lens is over $1,000. I've even done paid wedding gigs with them and gotten great results! The only real drawback is you have to be comfortable with manual focus.
Actually you never left Canon Just added Sony to the mix
Ha - Yes! :-)
EF and EFs lenses are going fast because smart people went for canon mirrorless and their new RF and RFs better optical designs.
That’s the point exactly. People are selling their EF lenses including L series lenses to ‘upgrade’ to RF. The RF lenses might be an improvement but for just about any amateur photographer the difference in performance does not warrant the drop in value they will get when they sell their EF lenses. Which is why it is still worth picking them up cheap.
@@ThisIsJulianC I'm in that market. I sold off my 5dm3 and bought an R8. Today ordered a refurbished RF15-30 F4.5-6.3 for $249 and am selling a mint EF17-40f4. Probably will only get 150 for EF17-40L series.I wanted a lighter walk around lens with image stabilization.
Shhhh. Don't tell everyone.
🤣🤣
600 euros for the 16 35 💀
💀
❤
nee kon
L stands for low dispersion glass.
According to Canon L stands for Luxury.
The prices of dslr lenses still very expensive. Sure you can buy use one cheap dut is not common. Sorry bad video.
Depends on your point of reference. Compared to recent RF L lenses from Canon, the EF L versions are a lower cost option and in many cases just as capable. Glad you liked it 👍