Which EF lenses will you absolutely keep for the EOS R and its successors?

[YuengLinger]

Personally, my ef 35mm f/1.4L II is so good, and still very well balanced on the R, I will keep it. Also my ef 100mm f/2.8L IS Macro. Better than ever with the R's AF capabilities. Both of these are definite keepers for me.

I have no immediate plans to "upgrade" my ef 24-70mm f/2.8L II, but IS on the Rf version is tempting.

Undecided about my ef 135mm f/2 L. It already feels a little unsteady on a 5DIV, and with the adapter for the R, more so. If IS is introduced on a new Rf version, hmmm....

Others?

 

[Bundu]

Also my 35ii and 100 macro
400iii and 600ii
And my 14mm Sigma. Works like a charm on the R. Easy to use the nd filter on it. No huge filter holders!

 

[Del Paso]

EF 85 L, EF 28 IS, EF 100-400 IS, EF 24 TSE, Zeiss 21mm f2,8, Zeiss 50 f2, Leica R Apo Macro 100mm, R Apo Telyt 180 f 3,4, R 2,8 -60mm macro ,Leica M 35 asph f 1,4, M 50 mm f2, M 75mm f,1,4, M 90mm f4 macro.
PS: I mostly bought the EOS R for my Leica M & R lenses...nothing can beat the R 2,8/ 100 Apo macro.
PPS: I forgot to mention the fabulous-gorgeous-fantastic-wonderful EF 70-200 f4 IS II .

 

[bhf3737]

EF11-24L, 35mm F/1.4LII and EF100-400LII are definitely keepers.
Others, specially zooms (16-35L and 24-70L) will be replaced gradually with their equivalent RF version that have IS. I already got the RF70-200 during holidays.

 

[Mt Spokane Photography]

I've kept all of my EF lenses. That includes 100L, 100-400L II, 24-70mm L II, 70-200mmL II, 50mm macro, and a Tokina 17mm f/4 ef compatible. I've a few others laying around that get no use, so they may go. I also have many lenses of other brands and ef adaptors for them and they all work on my R.

So far, I have no R lenses I use both my 5D MK IV and my R side by side, but I'm beginning to favor the R.

 

[ethanz]

Yueng, you got the R? Apparently you seem to like it?

 

[jd7]

If I go to the RF system at some point, there's a good chance I'd keep my 135L as I still really like the images it produces, although we will have to see what RF 135s might become available and what they are like, I guess. And from a practical point of view, with RF lens prices the way they are now, I'd be keeping all my other EF lenses as well! I struggle to see the value in most of the RF lenses compared with what you can get in EF (especially once you take third party lenses into account), even if I was comfortable paying that much for lenses (which I'm not, given this is only a hobby for me). Well, a switch from my EF 24-70 f/4L IS to an RF 24-105 f/4L IS might happen, but that would probably be it.

 

[cayenne]

I don't see myself getting rid of any of my EF glass.
I think for me would be...what RF glass would you buy?

I never got around to getting the EF 50L 1.2....so, I'd likely get the 50 RF 1.2 as my first lens.
But i'm happy with my EF: 11-24, 24-70 II, 70-200 2.8 III, 24-104 (kit lens), 100L macro, Lomograph Brass Petzval 58mm Bokeh control, Lomography Brass Lomogon 32 Art lens, and other assorted EF lenses I picked up over the past few years.....I don't see myself getting rid of them.

Also, I've been contemplating getting one of the Blackmagic Design 6K "Pocket" cameras...which takes an EF mount...so, would be useful on that too.

After seeing the new Canon 1DX III....I"m holding out to see a higher end RF come up, maybe more the equivalent of the 5Dx line....I think my 5D3 will hold out a good number of years still.

cayenne

 

[dslrdummy]

Having just acquired the R and seeing no issue using my EF lenses, I don't imagine I will be letting go of any of them any time soon. Having lugged around a 1DXii for a couple of years, carrying the R with the adapted EF lenses is a breeze.
BTW, I just updated the firmware on my Tamron 35 f1.8 to make it compatible with the R and its true qualities are shining through. A great lens for the price.

 

[dslrdummy]

EF 85 L, EF 28 IS, EF 100-400 IS, EF 24 TSE, Zeiss 21mm f2,8, Zeiss 50 f2, Leica R Apo Macro 100mm, R Apo Telyt 180 f 3,4, R 2,8 -60mm macro ,Leica M 35 asph f 1,4, M 50 mm f2, M 75mm f,1,4, M 90mm f4 macro.
PS: I mostly bought the EOS R for my Leica M & R lenses...nothing can beat the R 2,8/ 100 Apo macro.

Which M adapter do you use? I may try it.

 

[Viggo]

Not one... except if I was to buy either the Zeiss
100 f2.0 mp and EF 200 f2.0 L again. Only two I would consider.

 

[navastronia]

I have an RP and shoot only with adapted EF glass (Samyang 14/2.8, Sigma 35/1.4, Canon 85/1.8, Canon 200/2.8 L II). I've ditched none of it, and won't, so long as I'm using that body; the way I see it, my RP isn't weather sealed and neither is any of my glass, so my body and lenses are equally limited in that respect.

But, once there's a 1DX-ish mirrorless body out, I'm going to look hard at getting that and upgrading to the expensive, awesome RF L primes, which beyond improving my image quality, will also mean that my whole system will be weather resistant, opening up different ways for me to shoot (as opposed to how I shoot now, which is quite cautiously, in inclement weather).

 

[maves]

I kept all of my EF glass to use on the R. The only RF lens I have is the 35mm 1.8, even then, I only bought it because the promotion in Australia where I got $500 cash back when I bought the R with an RF lens.

I shoot mainly architecture so have a bunch of wide angles (my lenses are listed in my signature), the drop-in CPL filter has been fantastic as I use CPL's daily. Shooting on the R with shift lenses is so much easier, you don't have to set your exposure manually unshifted before you shift, you can just tilt and shift in aperture priority and your exposures will be fine. Also Focus peaking and zoom for manual lenses is fantastic. I have a huge range of vintage Olympus and Leica R lenses that I can adapt too with ease.

I know some of you out there are holding on to the optical viewfinder, but I know that I will never go back!

*EDIT* I realised that I didn't actually answer the question.... Definitely keeping EF 24 & 17 TS lenses. I'm planning to ditch the Sigma Art for something lighter when they release a compact RF 50. I would love the RF 50 or 85 but can't justify the expense - I don't upgrade when new gear comes out, I upgrade when old gear wears out or is actually obsolete.

 

[Jethro]

I'm interested that everyone seems happy to keep using their 100mm macro lenses on the adaptor - I'm a bit conflicted about waiting for an RF native macro, or to go for an existing EF mount. It just strikes me as somehow counter-intuitive to be buying EF mounts for an EOS R. But, apart from the upcoming Laowa 100mm (due out in March) there aren't any RF macro long(er) lenses currently available.

 

[Frodo]

While my 24-105/4 is my most used lens (got it with the original 5D) and seems to be a sharp example, it would be the first to be replaced. It feels unbalanced and the weight shifted forwards especially on my light weight Sirui carbon tripod - the RF version would be a good hiking lens.

Improved focusing has given all my EF lenses a new burst of life.

 

[Del Paso]

Which M adapter do you use? I may try it.

I simply use the Novoflex M to EOS R adapter, but you could also buy the Metabones. Do NEVER buy a cheap adapter...
Caution: do NOT use an M lens below 35 mm if you don't want to see magenta fringing on the sides of the pictures. I couln't use (have tried to) my 28 asph. or my 21 mm Elmarit. Of course, I still can use them on my M 240.
As to tele lenses: ALL behave wonderfully on the EOS R, often with an incredible sharpness...
PS: whether the M lenses are "6 bit" or not doesn't matter on the EOS R.
PPS: ANY (6 bit) M lens can be used without fringing on the Leica SL.... ($$$$).
PPPS: All Leica R lenses work without issues on the EOS R

 

[Optics Patent]

As I just switched to Canon, my key EF “keepers” are actually new acquisitions.

11-24 is unmatched and part of the draw to Canon. Not sure how that can be improved in RF unless smaller and lighter.

400 IS III is embarrassingly better than I deserve but should serve for a long time. I’ll pay for the factory mount conversion when offered.

15mm full frame fisheye from a friend switching to Sony not important but unlikely to be replaced in RF.

 

[SteveC]

Haven't bought an R/RP/Rx yet, but I imagine I'll be keeping the 100-400 LII and maybe a couple of primes (the 85mm f/1.8 in particular). Since I don't actually own a full frame yet, a lot of my EF gear is actually EF-S (or Tamron equivalent) so those I'd be keeping for the M series. (I've long since decided not to buy any more EF-S stuff. It's either EF-M or EF-no-S, from here on out, until I get an R mount; and everything I get that's EF, is something I'll expect to keep for the R.)

Edit: Oh, and I have the non L 100mm macro, I'm definitely keeping it but it has a dedicated use on an APSC body. Still, I wouldn't hesitate to put it on an R series if I had reason to.

 

[YuengLinger]

I'm interested that everyone seems happy to keep using their 100mm macro lenses on the adaptor - I'm a bit conflicted about waiting for an RF native macro, or to go for an existing EF mount. It just strikes me as somehow counter-intuitive to be buying EF mounts for an EOS R. But, apart from the upcoming Laowa 100mm (due out in March) there aren't any RF macro long(er) lenses currently available.

I think in cases where the EF adapts especially well, almost seamlessly, it's worth the savings and being able to get something sooner. To me, end results count, and if ergonomics are good, it makes the decision easy.

I'm probably going to end up getting rid of my ef 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II sooner rather than later. I just can't use it on the R comfortably in vertical position/portrait orientation. The available grip won't help either as my thumb would be too far from the upper right corner of the display screen for touch-and-drag.

Only thing holding me back from selling it is, well, ok two things...First, it's a superb copy (and paid for!). But also, I wonder if better ergonomics on the next body might "correct" some of the front-heavy issue I'm having.

 

[Ozarker]

I dumped all my EF glass. Two I wish I still had? The EF 135mm f/2L and the EF 35mm f/1.4L II. However, I dumped them with full faith in a future RF 35 f/1.2L and RF 135mm f/1.8L. Whether or not my decision was bad or good remains to be seen. With all that in mind, I am extremely happy with the RF 28-70 and hope for an RF 70-135mm. I love the focus peaking for my old M42 manual lenses, but I have begun culling them down to Takumars only and only to 135mm and below. I will keep my 400mm Mamiya Tele Sekor.

Dream Stable? RF 28-70mm f/2L, RF 70-135mm f/2L, RF 35mm f/1.2L, RF 50mm f/1.2L, RF 85mm f/1.2L, RF 135mm f/1.8L. So three more lenses to buy. A 135mm or 70-135mm would be first in line.