On this comparability video of Canon RF vs EF Lenses on the Canon Mirrorless System by BorrowLenses, Tom seems at Canon’s new RF lenses and the way they carry out when in comparison with their older EF counterparts.

The lenses he makes use of for the comparability are:

All checks have been executed with the Canon EOS R Mirrorless system and used the converter for the EF DSLR lenses.

Comparisons

Firstly, Tom discusses “flange distinction.” Flange distinction is the measurement of the area between the sensor airplane and the lens mount.

Within the case of mirrorless, the rear factor of the lens is even nearer to the sensor. This implies eliminating a retro focal factor group. This implies much less excessive picture correction, fewer lens components and sometimes a sharper picture.

For the comparability, Tom seems at autofocus, sharpness, shade rendition, weight and value.

Canon RF 50mm 1.2 L

  • The lens is heavier, weighing simply over 2 kilos, with 15 components in 9 teams with a 10-bladed aperture.
  • The RF has a minimal focusing distance of 40cm.
  • It has a razor-sharp focus when vast open.
  • Extra distinction than the EF 50mm

Canon EF 50mm 1.2 L

  • Is sort of half the load of the RF equal, with Eight components in 6 teams and an 8-bladed aperture.
  • The EF has a minimal focusing distance of 45cm.
  • Focus isn’t razor-sharp till round f/4.

Winner

On simply the specs, the RF 50mm has the leg up.

The autofocus on each lenses is snappy and correct.

The RF, whereas a heavier lens, is vastly superior by way of picture high quality.

Nevertheless, the place the RF 50mm f1.2 lens falls quick is in its value. It’s an costly lens, particularly in comparison with the worth of the EF 50mm F1.2 (even pared with the adapter).

Canon RF 24-105mm f4 L

  • Weighs 2 kilos, has 18 components in 14 teams and a 9-bladed aperture.
  • Picture stabilization
  • Minimal focusing distance of 45cm

Canon EF 24-105mm f4 L

  • Barely heavier than the RF equal, and has 17 components in 12 teams, with a 10-bladed aperture.
  • Picture stabilization
  • Minimal focusing distance of 45cm

Winner

Each lenses are related in value (just a few hundred {dollars} distinction).

Whereas the RF 24-105 is sharper than the EF, the disparity shouldn’t be as extreme as within the case of the 50mm lenses.

On the subject of distinction, the RF barely outperforms the EF.

When it comes to autofocus, each lenses carry out very properly, nevertheless, the RF focusing motor is whisper-quiet.

Whereas each lenses are pretty evenly-matched, Tom declares the RF the winner attributable to its nice photographs, quiet autofocus, and weight.

The one draw back to the EF lens that Tom factors out is that the complete package deal, when mounted to the EOS R utilizing an adapter, turns into heavier and “unwieldy,” which can not go well with individuals capturing for lengthy hours or mountain climbing with the setup.

Conclusion

When you already personal EF lenses, it’s possible you’ll as properly adapt them as they nonetheless work extremely properly on the Canon mirrorless programs. Nevertheless, the RF lens line-up is considerably higher.

 

Do you assume this can be a honest comparability? Or ought to they’ve examined the EF lenses on a dSLR vs the RF lenses on the mirrorless?

Or maybe, like me, you’re simply to understand how properly your L-series EF glass will work with an adapter on the Canon EOS R or EOS RP? Share your ideas within the feedback under!

 

You might also like:

 

!function (f, b, e, v, n, t, s) {
if (f.fbq) return
n = f.fbq = function () {
n.callMethod ?
n.callMethod.apply(n, arguments) : n.queue.push(arguments)
}
if (!f._fbq) f._fbq = n
n.push = n
n.loaded = !0
n.version = ‘2.0’
n.queue = []
t = b.createElement(e)
t.async = !0
t.src = v
s = b.getElementsByTagName(e)[0]
s.parentNode.insertBefore(t, s)
}(window,
document, ‘script’, ‘https://connect.facebook.net/en_US/fbevents.js’)

fbq(‘init’, ‘1420262834888800’)
fbq(‘track’, ‘PageView’)

Shop Amazon