If you go R/RF?

CanonFanBoy

EOS 5D MK IV
Jan 28, 2015
3,116
684
Irving, Texas
What would be your basic kit (lenses and body) if you switched to the Canon R/RF system? (Gear does not yet have to be available)
Me:
  1. Canon RP or R.
  2. RF 28-70mm f/2L
  3. RF 85mm f/1.2
  4. RF 135mm f/1.2L
I shoot fashion and portraits. I'm told I need a 35mm and a 50mm for that kind of work. I don't think I do. Have the 35mm covered in EF anyway.
 

Viggo

EOS 5D SR
Dec 13, 2010
3,879
434
It is the R + RF 50 L. If I had to choose from your list, the RF85 L (not DS).
 
Dec 6, 2016
252
139
Interesting if I replace the holy trinity with native lensesit would be those three pluse the ef 11-24 with drop in filter adapter.
 

Dantana

EOS 80D
Jan 29, 2013
193
26
Los Angeles, CA
www.flickr.com
If I was constraining this to lenses that have been announced:
  1. Cannon R (possibly the RP)
  2. RF 24-105 f/4L
  3. RF 70-200 f/2.8L
  4. RF 35 1.8
If I was to chooses from not announced, but lenses that will probably come out (or something close):
  1. Cannon R (possibly the RP)
  2. RF 24-70 f/4L
  3. RF 70-200 f/4L or 70-300 f/3.5-5.6
  4. The most compact of the wide f/4 L zooms (like the RF 16-40mm f/4L from the patent posting a few days ago)
  5. RF 35 1.8, or a similar compact prime
 

Mt Spokane Photography

I post too Much on Here!!
Mar 25, 2011
15,235
527
I have a R alongside my 5D MK IV. Its smaller and handy to have for casual shots, but my 5D MK IV is better. You already know which lenses you like to use, that will not change with mirrorless, just use EF until you are ready to entirely switch over.

As far as usage, the R is very similar to using liveview on the 5D MK IV, so I already knew how to use it. I put my 24-70 II on the R and my 70-200 II on the MK IV, so I don't need to change lenses.

For my use as a 2nd body, the RP would probably be fine.
 
Reactions: JPAZ
Mar 31, 2014
938
42
68
Center of my universe
If I go R? Unlikely, since I like my 5DIV, but if Canon introduced a RF 400 4.5 or 5.0 or a RF 500 5.0 or 5.6, I might. Unless Canon introduced an EF 400 5.0 or an EF 500 5.6.
 

Maximilian

The dark side - I've been there
Nov 7, 2013
2,419
230
Germany
What would be your basic kit (lenses and body) if you switched to the Canon R/RF system?
  1. RP (best RP successor with IBIS ;) ) first body and later just for travelling light
  2. 24-105/4 IS L
  3. 35 + 50 + 85 each f/1.8, IS if available (50, 85 like the already existing 35)
  4. 5D V equivalent (yes, V) as soon as it is available as my main body
  5. telezooms ump to 400 mm as soon as they offer advantage over EF+adapter
  6. someone who gives me his/her creditcard for all that ;)
 
Reactions: CanonFanBoy
Jan 31, 2016
36
18
Québec
For now, the RP is very pleasant to shoot with, but when the RX comes out, I might very well upgrade.

As for lenses, I've rapidly grown fond of the lens ring. Clever thing! The kit lens for the RP, the 24-105 f/4, would be perfect at f/2.8 or better, though. I'm new to 24-105, I enjoy the flexibility.

The EF 100mm f/2.8 macro is a good match with the RP, but I will have to push it a bit more to know for sure.

There seems to be something wrong with my 70-200 f/2.8: the af is constantly hunting like crazy. It doesn't act like that with my (very) old 1Dii.

So, to answer your question, my basic kit is
1- RP
2- RF 24-105 f/4
3- EF adapter
4- EF 100mm f/2.8 macro
5- EF 16-35 f/2.8

But my wished kit would be
1- RX
2- RF 24-105 f/1.2
3- RF 70-200 f/2
4- RF 100mm f/1.2 macro
5- RF 16-35 f/2
6- RF 50 f/1.2
 
Last edited:

jd7

EOS 7D MK II
Feb 3, 2013
701
80
If I went to the R system - which I don't have any immediate plan to do - I'd want the R rather than the RP, and I may (or may not) be tempted by the RF 24-105 f/4L IS in place of my current 24-70 f/4L IS. Otherwise, I'd just use my existing EF lenses and wait and see on other RF lenses when they are released. I'm pretty happy with my existing lenses, although I think about adding an UWA lens from time to time, and I keep saying I will sell one of my primes (I have more than I need, but I'm still deciding whether I'd rather part with the 50 or the 85).
 
Last edited:

kaihp

I'm not new here
Mar 19, 2012
847
4
I will switch to the R-system when Canon have a replacement for the 1DX and my EF bodies (1DX, 5D3) are either significantly outclassed in AF and IQ or they are dead or duying.
 
Feb 27, 2019
49
15
For now, the RP is very pleasant to shoot with, but when the RX comes out, I might very well upgrade.

So, to answer your question, my basic kit is
1- RP
2- RF 24-105 f/4
3- EF adapter
4- EF 100mm f/2.8 macro
5- EF 16-35 f/2.8
Works for me, but with the addition of the 70-200 f/2.8

Wish the 24-105 were faster, but... ya know. And my 300/4 and extender 1.4 are for my use, not gigs, so not really part of the basics. The 100 f/2 is a great lens, but although larger, slower, not as nice bokeh, I'll pick the either 100 f/2.8 macro.
 
Feb 27, 2019
49
15
I've got the II version, and it works perfectly. Someplace here is a thread about a filter issue I had with the 300 f/4 non-IS (and later the IS version). Still haven't figured that one out, but the culprit was the protective filter. Used another filter, and no filter, and it works just fine. Examining the "bad" filter shows no issue, but... as a further test.... I rotated the filter a bit, and found it causes backfocus, or front focus, depending on the very small change in angular rotation. And, the 300 f/4 (either of them) work perfectly on my 5D3 with no "correction" needed. Weird. Only saying all this because, it was a lesson learned for me, and you might try removing the filter if you're lens is sporting one.
 

StoicalEtcher

EOS 80D
Jan 3, 2018
112
19
Yorkshire
I've got the II version, and it works perfectly. Someplace here is a thread about a filter issue I had with the 300 f/4 non-IS (and later the IS version). Still haven't figured that one out, but the culprit was the protective filter. Used another filter, and no filter, and it works just fine. Examining the "bad" filter shows no issue, but... as a further test.... I rotated the filter a bit, and found it causes backfocus, or front focus, depending on the very small change in angular rotation. And, the 300 f/4 (either of them) work perfectly on my 5D3 with no "correction" needed. Weird. Only saying all this because, it was a lesson learned for me, and you might try removing the filter if you're lens is sporting one.
Boudreaux&Thibodeaux, I recall your comments elsewhere about the filter issue. Out of interest, what brand (and type) of filter was it?
Thanks.
Stoical
 
Feb 27, 2019
49
15
The filter was a Hoya HMC Sky-1B. Thought I said that in the previous posts.

I don't think the "type" of filter is a determining factor in this case. I think what is going on is some sort of micro striations in the glass, unable to be seen with the eye, but which throw the dual pixel focus off. I'm thinking more about that, due to being able to rotate the filter only 5 or 10 degrees and go from back focus to front focus. There was one position that was actually "good focus". And its also weird the bad filter works well on the 24-105 f/4. It could be that it happens to line up right, but I'm thinking that's a pretty slim chance, so its more like things are not effected at those focal lengths or with that designs way of presenting rays to the sensor. At this point, its above my pay grade to figure out.
 

StoicalEtcher

EOS 80D
Jan 3, 2018
112
19
Yorkshire
The filter was a Hoya HMC Sky-1B. Thought I said that in the previous posts.

I don't think the "type" of filter is a determining factor in this case. I think what is going on is some sort of micro striations in the glass, unable to be seen with the eye, but which throw the dual pixel focus off. I'm thinking more about that, due to being able to rotate the filter only 5 or 10 degrees and go from back focus to front focus. There was one position that was actually "good focus". And its also weird the bad filter works well on the 24-105 f/4. It could be that it happens to line up right, but I'm thinking that's a pretty slim chance, so its more like things are not effected at those focal lengths or with that designs way of presenting rays to the sensor. At this point, its above my pay grade to figure out.
Thanks (y)- and sorry, you may have previously named and shamed, but I did't recall and the thought just occurred to me as I read you latest post on this thread. I would guess you were probably right about something in the glass, which is why I was intrigued about whose (brand) it was.
Cheers.
 
Feb 27, 2019
49
15
Thanks (y)- and sorry, you may have previously named and shamed, but I did't recall...
Either did I.... and I almost went back and looked! No worries! That particular Hoya filter was purchased with the 300mm f/4.0 USM non-IS, when I bought the lens from B&H back in ..... a long time ago... 1994 or 1995, so its about 25 years old. Was never an issue on the EOS-5 or EOS-3 film bodies. Never an issue on the Rebel's I got started with in digital, and then 5D2, 7D, 5D3.... all worked great. I gave the 5D2 and that lens to a friend, so they could get started in the "full frame" experience. If they ever get a mirrorless (doubtful), I'll warn 'em! :giggle:
 
Reactions: StoicalEtcher