For me, the things that I love the most about the EF lenses I have kept are:
- The mechanical linking of the focus ring that works even without power.
- The large glass and relatively pleasant images even without digital aids turned on (older photos in my library especially).
- The general design language.
- Compatibility across EOS cameras.
- Robustness.
The EF lenses I didn't keep:
- Lack of compatibility with various EOS systems over time (Tamron, Signam, Irix — gah)
- Lack of compatibility with FF cameras — I wish early on someone would have told me to avoid EF-S and stick with EF only for the future.
- Redundancy as I moved into L equivalents. Nothing wrong, passed on to family.
I'm a tactile person, and I respond to the subtle feedback that goes along with the viewfinder effect. I do like not fighting digital systems — I didn't even like drive-by-wire vehicles until (some) manufacturers (smartly) started to build tactile feedback into the electronic chain, such that even tiny slips on icy or wet roads were represented in the steering column feedback. I like digital systems that supplement my human capability and then get the heck out of my way when I know better in the moment. The move to decouple mechanics from humans certainly allows for much improved digital operations (speed of AF tracking, obviously) but I think only select genres truly benefit. Some genres even suffer. Obviously a subjective point.
My current EF stable in order of appreciation and why at this time (but all are appreciated or they'd be gone):
- 50 L 1.2 - beautiful rendition of people or other subjects
- 24 L 1.4 II - beautiful rendition of people in a context, evening landscapes
- 100 L 2.8 IS macro - so, so many uses
- 24-70 L 4 IS macro - excellent general travel and life, emphasis on subjects
- 16-35 L 4 IS - excellent general travel and life, emphasis on environments and contexts
- 300 L 4 IS - excellent large animal, landscapes with specific elements as the subject
- 70-200 L 4 - animals past an arms reach running about, sometimes people
- 28-135 3.5-5.6 IS - if the weather's good, the mood is casual, and I can only bring one that still gets it done
- 20 2.8 - landscapes, timeless interiors with mood
- 40 2.8 - a wide 50, kept in the pocket when travelling. The focus by wire sucks, noticeable during use; but it's sharp and convenient.
EF Aids applied as needed and to taste: 1.4x ii extender, 2x ii extender, 25 ii extension tube
Others on EF: 500mm and 900mm mirror lenses adapted to EF. Once I figured out the exact temperature / environment needs of these lenses they became good performers for specific situations and clean up fine in post.
I'll probably keep those until they die, and then they'll hit an honorary art shelf like my Mac 512k.
My other gear is non-EF. They certainly achieve the goals I have in mind, but I don't think they have the same panache. I'm seldom inspired to talk about them, regardless of their price. They make images, but they lack a certain soul that the good EF lenses have. Of course, I'll keep adding as the need and other life priorities align.
But I'd really love to see Canon bring back qualities of the EF line or grant a vendor like IRIX or Sigma permission to do quality FF inspired by the best of the EF releases, beginning with mechanical linking and large optics. Something like a "Legacy Art Line."
