Will EF lenses be as good as RF lenses with Canon's adaptor for the new mirrorless bodies?

I have quite a few EF lenses which I am still holding on to (despite now shooting more with the Sony system). I am wondering if it is prudent to hold on to these lenses if it turns out that the EF lenses are not going to be able to fully achieve the potential of the sensor in RF bodies.

Does anyone know for a fact that the EF lenses will be able to perform as well and do as well as RF lenses on the RF bodies? Deeply appreciate any factual inputs! Thanks!

following

I have been asking. In fact begging for comparisons from the you tube testers......I think they are afraid to post side by side comparisons

From what I can see- the RF lens on the EOS R show sharper, more contrast images

From what I can see- the 1Dx3 has a better sensor than the 1Dx2 and the images on that sensor show sharper, better contrast, better colors that when captured on the 1Dx2 sensor. Look at Robamys posts on the 1Dx3 thread

no one knows for sure because we dont have an updated sensor to put RF lens on and start making comparisons

But I have seen a 24-105 adapted and RF comparison on the EOS R...the RF looks a ton better....but thats not saying much because the 24-105V2 update was not all that in my opinion

Asperson I believe has made a 50L vs 50R comparison...Might be wrong...but I have seen that as well....RF 50 Looked better

umphotography wrote in post #19036758
following

I have been asking. In fact begging for comparisons from the you tube testers......I think they are afraid to post side by side comparisons

From what I can see- the RF lens on the EOS R show sharper, more contrast images

From what I can see- the 1Dx3 has a better sensor than the 1Dx2 and the images on that sensor show sharper, better contrast, better colors that when captured on the 1Dx2 sensor. Look at Robamys posts on the 1Dx3 thread

no one knows for sure because we dont have an updated sensor to put RF lens on and start making comparisons

But I have seen a 24-105 adapted and RF comparison on the EOS R...the RF looks a ton better....but thats not saying much because the 24-105V2 update was not all that in my opinion

Asperson I believe has made a 50L vs 50R comparison...Might be wrong...but I have seen that as well....RF 50 Looked better

I am guessing here but I suspect that the Canon plan for R is to create a sensor and lens system to outmatch Sony Alpha systems. That would at least explain in part why the resolving power of the new R lenses are so good. Probably capable of resolving sensors up to 100mp.

For general shooting I have already settled on using my Sony system. But I continue to use my Canon EF400mm f4DO mk2 and 100-400mm mk2 for my birding and wildlife with the 7D2. If there isnt a good replacement of the 7D2, I may well sell off everything I have from Canon and move completely to Sony. But if Canon released a speed beast that makes full use of the superteles - I would probably remain and possibly slowly upgrade to R lenses when I see the need for it.

I do not delude myself that EF L series lenses will match up to the R lenses (especially for the other Non Super Teles). I just want to know that the images are not going to be like a 5Dmk4 using a kit lens.

the replacement for the 5d4 will be 40-45 mp. if you are using current L lenses you're not going to see any difference unless you perform extreme rectal exam

umphotography wrote in post #19036758
following

I have been asking. In fact begging for comparisons from the you tube testers......I think they are afraid to post side by side comparisons

From what I can see- the RF lens on the EOS R show sharper, more contrast images

From what I can see- the 1Dx3 has a better sensor than the 1Dx2 and the images on that sensor show sharper, better contrast, better colors that when captured on the 1Dx2 sensor. Look at Robamys posts on the 1Dx3 thread

no one knows for sure because we dont have an updated sensor to put RF lens on and start making comparisons

But I have seen a 24-105 adapted and RF comparison on the EOS R...the RF looks a ton better....but thats not saying much because the 24-105V2 update was not all that in my opinion

Asperson I believe has made a 50L vs 50R comparison...Might be wrong...but I have seen that as well....RF 50 Looked better

I don't think comparing 50s tells us anything. I think you need to compare two lenses -- 24-70Ls EF and RF -- that are indisputably excellent.

Canonised wrote in post #19036580
I have quite a few EF lenses which I am still holding on to (despite now shooting more with the Sony system). I am wondering if it is prudent to hold on to these lenses if it turns out that the EF lenses are not going to be able to fully achieve the potential of the sensor in RF bodies.

Does anyone know for a fact that the EF lenses will be able to perform as well and do as well as RF lenses on the RF bodies? Deeply appreciate any factual inputs! Thanks!

We have yet to see side-by-side analyses of the EF vs. RF of the same lens FL range, on bodies with similar Megapixel count (to make all things 'equal')
One would think that the EF lens on the RF body would perform fully (per its design characteristics ) on BOTH the EF and the RF body, but that if there were any advantage in the RF sensor it would do a 'better job' in recording what the lens delivers.

One hopes that an RF lens has theoretical 'better performance' (whatever that means: contrast or detail resolution or acutance or freedom from chromatic distorion, and freedom from geometric distortions) than the EF lens... Canon certainly has premium priced the RF lens as if there is a real advantage!

Wilt wrote in post #19036896
We have yet to see side-by-side analyses of the EF vs. RF of the same lens FL range, on bodies with similar Megapixel count (to make all things 'equal')
One would think that the EF lens on the RF body would perform fully (per its design characteristics ) on BOTH the EF and the RF body, but that if there were any advantage in the RF sensor it would do a 'better job' in recording what the lens delivers.

One hopes that an RF lens has theoretical 'better performance' (whatever that means: contrast or detail resolution or acutance or freedom from chromatic distorion, and freedom from geometric distortions) than the EF lens... Canon certainly has premium priced the RF lens as if there is a real advantage!

can you give an example of an RF lens selling for a premium over ef? and not 28-70 f2 obviously

ed rader wrote in post #19036934
can you give an example of an RF lens selling for a premium over ef? and not 28-70 f2 obviously

Documented on 3/10/2020 here on POTN...
https://photography-on-the.net …showthread.php?​p=19024336

comparing current ef prices to rf prices is misleading.

ed rader wrote in post #19036877
the replacement for the 5d4 will be 40-45 mp. if you are using current L lenses you're not going to see any difference unless you perform extreme rectal exam

LMAO

ed rader wrote in post #19037049
comparing current ef prices to rf prices is misleading.

Ed,

The RF lenses will have to have much bigger price drops than EF lenses have had after release if they are not to remain more significantly more expensive.
The RF 24-105 is the oddball, a little lighter than it's EF counterpart and only marginally more expensive.
We all know an EF 50 1.2 exists and that now there is an RF 50 1.2. I don't think they are equivalents though.
Sigma has a 50 1.4 EX lens, a very good lens. It's about the size of the Canon 50 1.2. Then they released the 50 1.4 Art. Much bigger. Much heavier. Technically extremely good. The same was done with the previous very good Sigma 1.4 EX.
The RF 50 1.2 shares the larger size, weight and technical excellence of the Sigma Art. Same for both RF 85 1.2 lenses and one of those has no EF option.
It would be easy to believe Canon has decided to use the same design criteria that Sigma used for the Art series.
The RF 70-200, from the little reading I have done seems about optically equal to the EF 70-200 2.8.
Extending design is new from Canon for this class of lens and it has had a huge weight reduction.

So for the existing RF lenses, the most common answer would be EF lenses won't perform as well as RF versions as RF versions are just better lenses, assuming test chart performance is what you want. If you like the EF 11-24, that would be a case of EF performing better as there is no RF lens covering that focal range.

Canonised wrote in post #19036580
I have quite a few EF lenses which I am still holding on to (despite now shooting more with the Sony system). I am wondering if it is prudent to hold on to these lenses if it turns out that the EF lenses are not going to be able to fully achieve the potential of the sensor in RF bodies.

Does anyone know for a fact that the EF lenses will be able to perform as well and do as well as RF lenses on the RF bodies? Deeply appreciate any factual inputs! Thanks!

Canon claims its RF lenses perform superior to EF lenses in one way or another on RF cameras (for instance because of faster communication between lens and camera, RF lenses can present a smoother EVF image during continuous shutter operation than EF lenses), so the answer to that question would be, "No."

But you're asking the wrong question.

If you plan to hold on to your EF lenses anyway, it doesn't matter whether they would perform as well as RF lenses, it only matters if they will perform as well on RF cameras as they do on EF cameras (or Sony cameras). The answer to that question is, "Yes."

Personally

I like the idea of having a mirrorless and a DSLR combo

As long as canon continues to allow mirrorless to be adapted to EF glass Im calling it all good

I can see myself using a mirrorless with fast primes on one body and zooms on the other for weddings

Its back to lots of questions that still need to be answered with the R5

Is the AF going to be as good as the 5D4 and will it hit in the dark ?.....Big questions to be answered....I dont care how good the Rf glass is...AF capabilities is way way way more important

Wilt wrote in post #19037198
Ed,

Canon EF 50mm f/1.2L from B&H is $1299

Canon RF 50mm f/1.2L from B&H is $2299

Canon EF 50mm f/1.2L Canon USA MSRP is $1299

Canon RF 50mm f/1.2L Canon USA MSRP is $2299

Speaks for itself

what did the 50L sell for upon release?

now do the 24-70L EF vs RF. I know I paid $2400 for my ef upon release.