My EF lenses and batteries carry over to the Canon RF system, so I'm going to switch over, once I find a body that suits my needs and has a good price. Apart from that, there's nothing driving me to switch at this time.
Upvote
0
Why did you switch to RF?
- Thread starter clearwaterphotog
- Start date
Maybe I am being silly but I have kept my EF system intact. And I added the RF system. There are overlaps of course but I do not trust the R series for birding 100%. I also got Nikon for that but I like my DSLRs and EF system to much to part with. Probably an economic mistake, except for the big whites (300II, 400DOII, 500II) which I use with adapter saving tens of thousands. I have sold some duplicate lenses (like EF 85 1.2 and EF 70-200 2.8 II) but I have kept other duplicates like superwide zooms and 24-70 2.8II. I have not sold my DSLRs but at least they are the latest models in their category (5D4, 5DsR, 90D).
Last edited:
Upvote
0
Upvote
0
Thanks to everyone thus far for sharing. I find it interesting that pretty much every responder was just upgrading from EF. I'm new to the forum so I'm not sure if this is due to this forum having very few past/current users of any other system, or what. I mean, I know this is CANON rumors, but does Canon not inspire people to switch to their system, or are we just not seeing those people in this thread that almost specifically calls out to them?
Last edited:
Upvote
0
Overall, I think very few people who use higher end gear actually switch systems (and most of the people on here use higher-end gear, and we are definitely not representative of the broader market). Once you're invested in a system, the cost of switching and the time to learn a new system are a challenge, in some cases even the basics of muscle memory – imaging switching to a different make of car where the positions of the gas and brake pedals were reversed, even the Brits aren't that foolish (with apologies to my English friends). Most of the switching probably happens at the entry level. Someone has a DSLR and the kit lens, and it's either old or it breaks and they want another one. They look around and buy what looks best (or cheapest) at the time. Most will buy the brand they already have.
Also, the directionality of switching is important. I've estimated based on historical market share data that somewhere around 70-80% of ILCs in use today are Canon. So there is a much smaller pool of people available to switch to Canon. From those same data, Canon's market share has remained pretty stable, Sony's has gone up in parallel with Nikon's going down, i.e. most of the switching happening in the past few years has been Nikon users switching to Sony. That suggests Canon users are generally pretty happy with Canon, which is probably why the responses here are from Canon EF users upgrading to Canon RF.
Another way to think of it is that given that large installed base, Canon needs to mainly appeal to Canon users, and Nikon/Sony need to keep their own users but also try to poach Canon users.
Upvote
0
I think Neuro is correct in that people already established in a system are unlikely to switch. And why should they? Today's cameras all do the same things, with minor exceptions, and lens lineups, dispite all the complaints, have all the basic lenses covered, either with new mount lenses or older lenses with adapters. And, unfortunately, those that are convinced to switch, are probably doing so due to clever marketing, propaganda, and the plethora of YouTube videos that "encourage" switching with the constant stream of "which camera is better" or "Brand A vs Brand B" videos. That Canon holds its own in market share is actually a testament to the fact they make good cameras and lenses, because they have been the internet's whipping boy for years now. When I bought a Canon 6D around 2014, I started visiting camera forums. I had been a guide on an artist website for almost a decade, but on that site there was no such thing as a "brand fanboy." There were no artists engaged in any sort of propaganda praising one brand and denigrating another. In other words, I was completely unaware of Sony trolls. So, after reading one comment after another telling me how Sony was way ahead of everyone else, and especially how Canon was way behind, I decided to get the latest Sony (at that time the A7 II). Luckily, I could afford to get it and not sell my Canon 6D, because the Sony was returned shortly after. I was really taken aback. How could such a highly praised camera be so awful! (I've owned cameras since 1979, so was not a newbie. I knew a good camera when I held one in my hands). Gradually, of course, I learned how widespread the Sony trolling, fake comments and reviews were. Not that it will matter at all in the larger scheme of things, but as someone who despises liars and propaganda, I will never buy a Sony camera again. Plus, in my mind, based on my experience and the many comments I see from Facebook users and others, I am convinced Sony makes the worst cameras by cutting corners and making them cheaper than Canon and Nikon. They do, to their credit, have excellent AF systems in their top models, and their sensors have always been top notch. But what made them successful, in my opinion, and has taken so much of Nikon's product share, is their marketing ability, and internet presence of the many YouTube influencers that promote them. Something Canon does not do well, and yet, still survive as the market leader.
Upvote
0
Like for most others here, switching to RF means to enhance my Canon world, not to abandon the EF.
I'm infected with GAS but I do not have deep pockets. So most of my EF lenses will have to serve me in an RF world
Now the reasons why I'm happy in the RF world have been/are changing frequently.
My initial thought was IBIS, adding stabilisation to the countless non stabilized lenses I have.
After using the R cameras for a while it become the weight benefits.
After a 4 week trip to China it is now the freedom the different 3rd party adapters offer.
I'm infected with GAS but I do not have deep pockets. So most of my EF lenses will have to serve me in an RF world
Now the reasons why I'm happy in the RF world have been/are changing frequently.
My initial thought was IBIS, adding stabilisation to the countless non stabilized lenses I have.
After using the R cameras for a while it become the weight benefits.
After a 4 week trip to China it is now the freedom the different 3rd party adapters offer.
Upvote
0
Having used EF DSLRs for about ten years, I decided that if I was to get a new body, I had to do it while my old gear still had adequate tradein value. Also the 800 f/11 was a tempting option to roughly replace my 500+2x extender with a huge weight saving (I would have preferred to keep the latter but I needed to trade in the big lens to afford a bew body). Over time my desire to carry lots of bulky kit has reduced so RF was the natural next step (no way was I going to move to a different manufacturer, as I didn't want the extra learning curve). I have no regrets.
Upvote
0
I still have a good number of high end EF lenses. Some are (NIB). I have been unloading them slowly to people willing to pay the premium. I'm not too concerned they won't command a good and fair price when the time comes to fully liquidate. Some of them got acquired during the pandemic. I have room for them. I have retired all of my DSLR and EF lenses. I'm not going to "give them away" to KEH. Some would call this foolish, but I'll get the money in the end. I always do. Well cared for or new gear is easy to sell. I'm happy to take a loss, but not a gouge.
MILC and RF are superior. Thats not to say DSLRs and EF are bad. I've shot with them happily for years and have 40 yrs with the Canon brand. I don't care about Nikon or Sony. I never will. Ater making the jump to mirrorless, I used many of my EF lenses with my new body. They worked great. Was there a compelling reason to buy new RF lenses, yes and no. All of my Canon glass worked well with a control ring, but I had some 3rd party Sigma lenses as well. Still photography, they worked 90% as well as native glass, but with so much time logged, I could see they weren't quite as fast to acquire focus or track as accurately as they had done with DSLR's. It was not something hard to live with, (at all) but noticeable. Video mode on my R5 C was a different story. This prompted the move to RF and OEM glass across the board. Today, I have zero issues. Speed, performance, tracking, everything is there. Canon engineers a shooting system. It just works. Will I buy another Canon body, yes without question.
I'm not asking anyone to agree with me. Buy the gear you want, what you can afford and what works for you. I have what I enjoy using and makes me happy.
MILC and RF are superior. Thats not to say DSLRs and EF are bad. I've shot with them happily for years and have 40 yrs with the Canon brand. I don't care about Nikon or Sony. I never will. Ater making the jump to mirrorless, I used many of my EF lenses with my new body. They worked great. Was there a compelling reason to buy new RF lenses, yes and no. All of my Canon glass worked well with a control ring, but I had some 3rd party Sigma lenses as well. Still photography, they worked 90% as well as native glass, but with so much time logged, I could see they weren't quite as fast to acquire focus or track as accurately as they had done with DSLR's. It was not something hard to live with, (at all) but noticeable. Video mode on my R5 C was a different story. This prompted the move to RF and OEM glass across the board. Today, I have zero issues. Speed, performance, tracking, everything is there. Canon engineers a shooting system. It just works. Will I buy another Canon body, yes without question.
I'm not asking anyone to agree with me. Buy the gear you want, what you can afford and what works for you. I have what I enjoy using and makes me happy.
Upvote
0
I bought an RF body because I wanted to replace my aging 7D (the original, not the II!) and having used the EOS-M system since 2013 I didn't want something with an OVF. Being able to use the MP-E 65mm with a viewfinder was the biggest selling point. After having rented an R and saw how much better the eye-AF was compared the M50, it suddenly became interesting as a family camera as well.
That, combined with a nice severance package from the previous workplace, made it a no-brainer to get an RP+adapter instead of something like an 6DII.
That, combined with a nice severance package from the previous workplace, made it a no-brainer to get an RP+adapter instead of something like an 6DII.
Upvote
0
I came over from the Nikon side of the aisle after having previously used a Nikon D3200 as my primary camera. It was very good workhorse despite its shortcomings in a few areas. I was in the market for something newer around the November 2022 time frame, particularly in the mirrorless arena.
My primary focus was wildlife photography, though I did do some structural panoramic shots ( bridges are a favorite ), transportation, and Motorsports. I narrowed it down to a few options namely either the Nikon Z6ii or Canon R7, I could have also opted for the Z9 but native mirrorless glass is rather important.
I'm quite happy I went with the Canon R7 and the 100-500 L series lens. It's proven to be quite a stellar combination.
My primary focus was wildlife photography, though I did do some structural panoramic shots ( bridges are a favorite ), transportation, and Motorsports. I narrowed it down to a few options namely either the Nikon Z6ii or Canon R7, I could have also opted for the Z9 but native mirrorless glass is rather important.
I'm quite happy I went with the Canon R7 and the 100-500 L series lens. It's proven to be quite a stellar combination.
Upvote
0
I switched to the RF system once Canon released the R6/R5 and I knew they would have excellent focus tracking on par with their competitors. I sold off all of my DSLRs and EF glass knowing that if I waited several years it would be worth even less. Glad I made the transition to mirrorless and would never go back to a DSLR.
Upvote
0
In 99.99% (or so) of the situations I've tried, I agree.
But while shooting at an evening airshow with aircrafts spewing out flares, the R3 got totally confused and hunted all over. I switched to the 1Dx and it locked on the target perfectly.
I guess the MLC AF algorithms are just not designed for such situations, whereas the phase af module picks up the right signal.
Upvote
0
@neuroanatomist,Good to know that the countermeasures are effective against target acquisition and lock by the R3.
"Missile lock" is what initially made my credit card come out after I held an R5. I went home and was like "Top Gun", ya I want one of those.
You guys are the best BTW
Upvote
0
Not having to micro-adjust lenses, eye focus - and in-body stabilization. Three major improvements. Nothing really compares - the rest is just nice-to-have. Still pains me that there's no 300mm f/2.8. Want to try out the 100-300mm f/2.8 which eludes me so far. But I'm skeptical on its performance for the price. Looking very much forward to the R5II as I hope it gets rid of the rolling shutter.
Upvote
0
