I told myself that if it is more than $1499, I am out.Pricing of the 100 L is OK, expected it to be around $2000
Thanks Jeanluc,I also hate adapters, but using one on the EF version is much less of an issue since that lens is so small and light. It actually will be the one EF I will probably replace last for that reason. Try your EF one out first; if you like it you will save a lot of money. Just a thought.
I’m sure I’m answering my own question, because I can’t afford either super telephoto, but will the RF teleconverter work?
I bet it will be an EF that retains its value well. Like you, I only shoot macro occasionally so I’ll keep mine a while. I bet there are a lot of users who are like us in that they only use it occurs, so the cheaper EF may be more appealing for some. Or not lol...Thanks Jeanluc,
I actually had one before and have used it here and there. It was a crazy story: So when the R5 was announced, I traded my two EOS R with the EF 100mm f/2.8L Macro to Adorama with the hope of adding a little more to purchase the R5. I did that because I felt I had to let something go if I had to buy the R5, and since I only shoot Macro once in a while, it was the logical sacrifice. It took a while but I eventually got my R5. Then I discovered that I can focus stack with the R5. So I was mad at myself for trading in the Macro lens and was looking to find a good deal for another Macro. Unfortunately, the price had increased from $899 or so when I originally got it to $1299.
So when I came across a new one at the Navy Exchange for $1000, I jumped on it right as I was deploying. So I bought it in actually in January 2012, not November as I first thought and also ordered a third party tripod ring, but due to winter and being deployed, I never got to use it. I just did a test shot with my wristwatch to make sure it is working properly.
Now the RF version was announced, I did not anticipate the RF version will come out so soon. I was expecting the RF 35mm f/1.2 and RF 135mm f/1.8 first.
I initially thought I will not upgrade but the 1.4 magnification , the SA control plus the "modest price" convinced me that it is worth it. Hopefully I get to sell the EF for at least my purchase price.
Ok, this sounds like I am crying.....
There was also a tripod ring adapter for the EF version and it costs $174 at B&H, so $199 for the RF is not too far fetched for Canon's standard. I eventually bought an Hoage Knock off version for my EF Version because it has Acra Swiss plate built into it and a lot cheaper. Maybe Hoage will make one for the RF Version too.$199 for the Canon Tripod Mount Ring and Adapter for RF 100mm f/2.8L Macro IS USM Lens
Seems a little steep. Be great if they’d make one for the RF 600 and 800mm tbh.
No doubt, EOS 4 Life, many of us out here will come to this same conclusion. Currently, I can use my EF500 F4Lis on R series bodies using EF-RF control ring adapter. Of course, I can also use it on any of my EF mount DSLR bodies, giving me dual usage. If I opt for the new RF 600mm F4, I can only use it on R series bodies and with "NO" control ring capability. The omission of the control ring on these two new big whites came as a big surprise to me. That being said and after hearing that these two new lenses are really just EF iii versions with a built in adapter, if I were considering a purchase of either, not sure I wouldn't just pick up a pre-owned EF 400 or 600mm iii lens and use the control ring adapter.Anyone have an extra $13K they do not need?
I did not think so.
I guess it is f/11 for me.
This just has an integrated adaptor. Wouldn't be wasting money changing like for like.I told myself that if it is more than $1499, I am out.
I just bought the EF version in November last year and I have not even used it once because I am deployed. Guess I have to sell it now as I just pre-ordered the RF version from B&H. I just hate using adapters.