FIVE Reasons Why I DON'T Own Any Canon RF Lenses (And WON'T For A Long Time)
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 15 ม.ค. 2024
- #canonrf #canonphotography #photographyforbeginners
COME JOIN ME! I'll be hosting a studio lighting workshop in Louisville, KY on January 28th, 2024. To get more information or to register, visit www.anthonytoglife.com
It's safe to say many of Canon's RF lenses are phenomenal! But, this comes at quite a cost. In this video, I touch on why I don't own any RF glass despite having used Canon mirrorless cameras for the past 4 years, and why this isn't likely to change anytime soon.
[ WORKSHOPS AND WEBINARS ]
To learn more about my workshops, webinars, and one-on-one coaching, please visit www.anthonytoglife.com
[ SOCIAL MEDIA ]
Personal IG: @anthonytoglife ( / anthonytoglife )
Business IG: @1twentyfivephoto ( / 1twentyfivephoto )
[ E-MAIL ]
AnthonyToglife@gmail.com
[ SUBSCRIBE For More Content ]
If you like my content, please support this channel by leaving a LIKE on my video and subscribing to see more content like this in the future.
[ GEAR USED TO MAKE THIS VIDEO ]
@CanonUSA EOS 7D
@CanonUSA EF-S 24mm f/2.8 STM
@kfconcept 1/4 Black Mist Filter
@TASCAMUSA DR-10L Portable Digital Recorder
@BOYA-mic Boyalink
[ OTHER VIDEOS YOU MAY ENJOY ]
I (Almost) NEVER Set My Camera To Manual
• I (Almost) NEVER Set M...
What's In My Camera Bag
• What's In My Camera Ba...
STOP USING ISO 100 WHEN USING FLASH
• STOP USING ISO 100 WHE...
Is CANON the KING of Color Science?
• Is CANON the KING of C...
[ f/16 Photography Podcast ]
►Anchor: anchor.fm/anthony-toglife
►Spotify: open.spotify.com/show/36g2HB5...
►Apple Podcasts: podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast...
►Google Podcasts: podcasts.google.com/feed/aHR0...
►Breaker: www.breaker.audio/f-slash-16-...
Fun Poll: Which camera do you think I used to film this video?
A) Canon R5
B) Canon T4i
C) Canon EOS R
D) Canon 5D Mark IV
E) Canon 7D
I'm going with the EOS R
Hi Anthony, not related to this poll, I recently watched you video on "the use (or over use) of the term Game Changing ".
In my humble opinion, these have been the truly "Game Changing" events in Photography history:
1. Advent of roll film over glass/metal plates
2. Introduction of interchangeable lens camera over the fixed lens
3. The Single Lens Reflex over the Range Finder
4. Advent of the Digital Sensor over roll film
5. Introduction of the Hybrid camera
Please let me know your feelings on my thoughts; I feel everything else has been an evolution within these events.
I remember you rigged EOS R and I'm going with that one :) Answer (C)
Let me go for the Canon T4i as I have no clue 😂
5d Mk iv
As a very new new Canon glass user, I can only speak on the FD lenses. These gems are great mounted on my Nikon.
That FD glass is something special! I’ve actually just started looking for some on eBay.
Good points
Thank you! 🙏🏾
Good video! 24 of my lenses are Canon or Sigma EF. Some RF lenses are must haves that do not exist in the EF mount. A must have lens and the greatest lens ever made in my opinion is the Canon RF 28-70 F2 lens. If you are going to own one lens in the RF lineup this will be it for its sharpness, soft skintones, and beautiful smooth boheh rendering. This lens is special, it brings a smile to my face every time I mount it on my camera. The lens focus is smooth, quick and silent. When focusing you can feel the lens elements moving so smoothly in your hand. One downside is the size for some but for me it's a plus. The lens replaces 4 primes so it is lighter than carrying for primes. No need to wait for the RF 35mm 1.4 if you have the RF 28-70. Plus I already have the EF 35mm 1.4 L II which I like a lot. I also own the RF 70-200 2.8 and I previously owned the EF 70-200mm 2.8 II. The RF version is way sharper than the EF version, handles flare better than the EF. Although I am not a fan of the lens extending I think the design makes sense for its compactness. The RF70-200mm is also a pound lighter which makes the upgrade worthwhile to me. You maybe missing out on some great RF lenses given your reasoning in this video. You should pick and choose the best RF not currently available in EF or Upgrade some the EF glass when and where it makes sense.
You heard reason #1 and still think l may be missing out? I thoroughly tested 7 of my EF lenses with their direct RF variant, and 3 additional RF lenses stand alone, I feel very confident I’m not missing anything. 😉
Im still using tamron g2 lenses which are sharper on my rp from my 6d2
Cool video and you got great lenses!
Thank you Agnetha.
If you knew how the 28-70 has a lock on me, lol. Honestly, the quality of the adapter canon made it hard for me to jump initially. But I mainly had older model Tamron lenses with my EF, so the RF switch made sense for me to improve my image quality. Also with my travels, the more compact lenses are convenient for me.
I gotta keep it real, the older Tamron lenses were kinda trash, respectfully, lol. Sigma ART lenses were always amazing optically but inconsistent with AF (on DSLRs), Tamron lenses were pretty mediocre in both departments. Different story with their more modern lenses, they’ve really stepped it up, but I can definitely understand you wanting to upgrade.
There’s no doubt the 28-70 is, in some ways, a unicorn lens, and if I only shot with my mirrorless cams, I probably would have splurged on it by now. But I probably only use my mirrorless cams 40% of the time. My cinema rig is a DSLR, my TH-cam vids are filmed with a DSLR, my landscape photos are shot with a DSLR, and my portraits are shot 50/50, so considering that I have a 35, 50, and 85 f/1.4s, there’s no incentive to buy a $3K lens to use here and there, not to mention I moved away from shooting wide open all the time like 3 years ago, so that f/2 isn’t appealing to me as it is for many others.
I’m also, apparently, a minority in that I don’t like the trend of everything being made smaller. What I like most about using “big boy cameras” is the big size and weight. But again, I may be on an island with only a handful of other people 😂
anthony!seen you comment on TIMDD page havent seen your vids in months! catching up
Ayeeee! Happy to have ya here! I appreciate ya!
Hi Anthony from across the pond here in the UK, I really like this video especially the quality, long term use case, and your feeling that the EF lenses are better than the RF lenses.
You as an experienced, professional photographer that handles this equipment every day, is best placed to give comment. Thank you for spending your valuable time, to pass on these insightful thoughts.
Thank you Michael, I really appreciate. I definitely invested a LOT of time in testing all the lenses, and ultimately I think there's a lot of two things happening: 1) people are just making videos and saying whatever for the sake of getting clicks; 2) people see the results they want to see. There's probably very few people who have thoroughly tested the lenses the way I did, which is understandable, it was very "mad scientist" when I was doing it, lol.
@@AnthonyToglife I recently joined the R system (EOS R + 4 "affordable" RF lenses, incl. 24-105 f4L kit lens; 50 f1.8; 85 f2; 100-400 f5.6-8. Previously owing EOS 500D & 80D and still using). I based my purchases on reviews from various TH-camrs: incl. Dustin Abbott, Christopher Frost and Gordon Laing.
They also concluded that the RF lenses though better, were more an incremental improvement over the EF lenses, than a revolutionary change; exception being the introduction of the "Control ring" and the "3 adapters" (Control & Variable ND) for the RF lenses & mount; which added true functionality improvements to EF lenses.
Again thank you for spending the time and effort to produce this vital content.
I'm still shooting solely with EF lenses, although that light and short RF 70-200 f//2.8 keeps texting me at 2 am. It fits my Domke bag, which my EF 70-200 never would. But I don't use that lens often enough to replace it for that money.
I'll give Canon credit for the smooth transition they've offered from EF to RF. I had been shooting with the Canon FD system back in the 70s and 80s and had a _lot_ of money invested in it. Then Canon hit us with the Big Bang change to EF. There was no practical way to adapt EF lenses to FD bodies or vice versa. My entire FD system of several thousand 1970s dollars was instantly obsoleted...and I was pissed at Canon for years.
The only reason I stuck with Canon then was because Nikon took ten years to get their autofocus act together (Nikon tried to transition their F-mount more gracefully, but that was just a mess) and there was no other professional option. I had to admit that Canon's Big Bang going in one big step from mechanical to all-electrical was a smart but it sure was painful.
Yeeeeah, if Canon hadn’t made it to where EF glass works so well on RF bodies, with 100% certainty I would have jumped ship! I almost did so when Nikon brought out the D850, but I didn’t feel like going through the hassle of selling all my Canon gear.
Well, the 24-105 2.8 is an internal zoom.
That lens, by most accords, is the unicorn of RF lenses, except price, of course, lol.
@@AnthonyToglife Indeed it is and I love it! 😄
I'm a long term Nikon shooter who having shot and accumulated a lot of f mount glass, has migrated slowly towards Nikons new Z mount system. I'd suggest the transition I've made is analogously similar however to those potentially considering a move from EF to R mount in the Canon system. So was my move from f mount/DSLR worth it and is Z mount better? Well the answer is of course " it depends " but in absolute terms I'd say few would see any substantial difference in the quality of my work having moved to native Z mount glass. Given I own lot of very good f mount glass I'm happy to use it with an adapter on my Z mount bodies. I've not replaced all my f mount glass with Z mount versions simply because I couldnt afford to but I am gradually doing so. Is the native Z glass better.... absolutely yes. Its sharper, better corrected and faster auto focusing. How about build quality though? Thats a tough one, my f2.8 trinity f mount lenses were built fantastically ( mostly magnesium construction) and clearly built to take the riggers of professional work. The Z mount lenses however don't look as hardwearing but of course we have to unferstand that modern composites can often be tougher and robust. Of course only time will tell but Nikon make bold statements about their Z pro lenses and bodies being every bit as weather, dust and impact resistant as their previous pro DSLR's/Lenses so I guess there is nothing to worry about 😋. Ultimately I don't think if you replaced all your EF glass with native R mount glass that your clients would see any difference. Ultimately thats all that matters. Sure, us pixel peeping photographers could probably spot the difference ( or could we? ) but its not us who are paying your bills 🤪 I've no doubt there might be some shooting situations where using native R mount glass has the advantage. That slightly faster AF acquisition and tracking might be slight but it could be the difference between getting the shot or missing it in absolute terms. That minor percentage in sharpness could matter for some images. Overall though people took perfectly fantastic images for years using EF lenses and that hasn't changed. In fact many might argue that their adapted EF lenses perform better on their R mount bodies than they ever did on the DSLRs for which they were intended 🙂. For your use case it has to make business sense to make the change from EF to R glass first. Money no object I'm sure you'd replace every EF lens you have for the R mount alternative. This is the real world however, I'd love a Ferrari but you know what, my Honda Civic gets me where I need to be quite nicely thankyou 😉
"That slight faster AF acquisition and tracking might be slight but it could be the difference between getting the shot or missing it in absolute terms" ... the same argument could be made for me buying the R3, or even the R8 which shares its AF. There's always *something* that could make the difference between a good and great shot, but those moments are truly few and far, far between.
Something I didn't mention in the video (mainly because it's not a true driver behind why I don't own RF glass, but it is relevant) is that I still use many Canon DSLR's. So buying RF glass means I can only use them on two of my camera bodies, and I would say I probably use DSLR's 75%-80% of the time. My main cinema rig is a DSLR. So to buy RF glass at its price, with minimal improvements in AF and IQ just wouldn't make sense for me.
I'm not even sure I would buy RF if I needed to replace an EF lens, I would probably buy another EF. But I'm also at a place where I haven't felt the need to upgrade any of my gear. The kit I have is robust and solid, and there's no pain-points or areas where I feel held back. As long as that's the case, I likely won't buy a camera or lens anytime soon. :-)
Side note, the EF glass absolutely, without doubt, 100% performs better on R bodies than they ever did on the DSLR's. That was the thing that had me purchase my first Canon mirrorless.
@@AnthonyToglifeLikewise I still own all my F mount glass because I still use my DSLR's too so getting rid of it isn't an option for me either. In purely lens terms however, for sure my native Z 70 to 200 f2.8 lens beats my adapted F mount 70 to 200 F mount on my Z9 in every metric but of course my Z lens is totally useless when I want to shoot my D850 DSLR 😁
I am a Nikon user going through the same thing. I just dont see much difference in the quality of the output. I am 100% sure my clients cant tell the difference. It's just hard to justify the cost.
It's a lot of marketing and society pressure that is pushing people to buy gear that isn't really going to change much of anything they do. I refuse to fall victim to that, lol.
As a hobbyist I don’t have any L glass, well I do have 24-105 f4. Everything is Tamron so you know what I am waiting for. I may buy 50mm rf… maybe.
To be honest, the main reason I have as much L glass as I have is because I wanted fast glass in my earlier days, and the fastest glass in Canon's lineup was L-series, so that's what I bought. It honestly doesn't mean much to me these days, and I probably only shoot lenses wide open half the time (outside of when I'm shooting indoors and need all the light I can get).
Thank you. I see that you are really creator. Not market - ing ;) only one lens what interest me at rf is 50 1.2 and that is all in rf lenses.
Thank you very much, I appreciate it! At one point the 28-70 had really peeked my interest, but when I read about how bad it was with focus breathing, it deterred me. I do a lot of video these days so any lens with heavy focus breathing isn’t something I want to invest in, especially at $3K.
Nice video. IMO There’s only one positive thing about the RF glass and that’s the image sharpness across the frame as compared to the older EF L lenses. But that wouldn’t be enough for me to want to pay those new RF prices.
So, I very much so looked at this when I was shooting the focus charts; I did find that to be the case most of the time, but in half the cases it was minimal enough that it would be tough to notice without the comparison image and the other half is was generally noticeable. Of those that it was noticeable, it was older EF lenses like my 135 f/2.
As you said though, not a single one was a big enough difference to justify buying the RF variant. And IMHO, I am very much against the super sharp lenses; I think it makes the image too digital and clinical. There’s a reason in cinematography they use lenses that have character and lack sharpness. I usually de-sharpen most of my images when I use my R5 because they’re just too sharp for my liking.
@@AnthonyToglife "...I usually de-sharpen most of my images when I use my R5 because they’re just too sharp for my liking..." wow thats crazy
When I got my first digital camera after shooting film, at first I said "its like looking through the eyes of a cyborg, like how they see the world in digital sharpness" but i got used to it. now mirrorless is even sharper
Excellent points, especially about quality impressions. The texture of the plastic is very prone to scratches. Also, cheap RF lenses lack weather sealing, which is a big no-no for me. Personally, I feel jealous of Sony GM lenses due to their compactness. Some of the RF lenses are still unnecessarily big.
It's always interesting to me the folks who prefer/want smaller, more compact lenses and cameras. I've always been the opposite, I like my cameras big and heavy and the same with my lenses, lol.
Now, that being said, there have been situations where I wished I had a small Fuji camera and lens because I just didn't feel like toting around a big and heavy setup. But those moments are few and far in between.
I've seen your work (which is absolutely stunning, by the way), so I can completely understand your need for weather sealing! It's always just been a bonus for me because I'm rarely shooting in inclement weather where it matters.
@@AnthonyToglife If my photography revolved around portraiture or studio work, I would not mind the size and weight. When you hike for the entire day, that half a kilo makes a big difference. I found the Sony system to be between Fuji and Canon in size but still keep a full frame.
I really wish Canon would open up the lens mount. RF lenses are great but just way too expensive for what your getting. Come on Canon, get your S^&*T together before people like me that have shot canon for 15 years finally move to Sony. Also i only have EF mount lenses for my Canon mirrorless cameras.
Yeah, I feel the same. I’m sure they have their reasons and I’m not here to speak on them one way or another, but I’m sure there’s other customers like me who aren’t going to buy native RF solely because it’s the only thing available.
Of course many people have bought native and maybe some of them would have bought third party if it were available, so I understand Canon’s logic. But I imagine there are also two sizable groups out there: those who chose a different camera system to buy into (one who has third party support) and those who are leaving Canon and going elsewhere. Is it really worth having those two groups for the sake of trying to boost native RF sales?!
I ve shot on a number of RF lenses including the 28-70( good for photo - video wasn't impressed) The sigma art 24-70 2.8 is preferred over both thr rf 24-70 and 28-70 especially when considering price. I do have the RF 85 1.2 and being hybrid will eventually get the 24-105 2.8. Outside side of that my Sigma Art 24, 28(spectacular )35, 40(a God for photo and video) 70macro, 105, 135, and 70-200 sport 2.8 will keep me going. Also able to use the ND filter with EF. Life saver
That 28-70 has atrocious focus breathing. At this point I have absolutely no desire to upgrade to RF, time will tell when that changes.
Wurd!
🙏🏾💪🏾
Sixth reason is third party lens being banned.