The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

Canon R5 with DSLR lenses + adaptor - any AF delay or drawback?

haring

Member
I am looking at the Canon R5 with my DSLR lenses + adapter. I may not want to sell all my EF lenses and buy the new RF ones. If you have the camera and you are using it with the adapter and EF lenses, is there any difference compared to the RF lenses... Any AF delay or drawback? I get it. Canon wants us to buy the new RF lens lineup but I am wondering whether I can use my old lenses?
 

jdphoto

Well-known member
You can use the EF lenses with adapter with great results from what I've read. The EF to RF adapters seems nicely designed and built. Actually, I use a Novoflex adapter and use the fully mechanical 1.2 L FD lenses which I love. I haven't used EF lenses, but own the RF 50mm 1.2. and the FD's compare nicely in terms of resolution and legendary Canon color, so EF's should be just as good. My understanding is that the RF's have better correction for CA, distortion and vignetting, but all easily corrected in editing. The FD lenses i've used are imo, just as sharp under certain lighting to the RF 50mm. Having IBIS in the new R5/R6 and IS in EF could be a deciding factor.
 

iiiNelson

Well-known member
I am looking at the Canon R5 with my DSLR lenses + adapter. I may not want to sell all my EF lenses and buy the new RF ones. If you have the camera and you are using it with the adapter and EF lenses, is there any difference compared to the RF lenses... Any AF delay or drawback? I get it. Canon wants us to buy the new RF lens lineup but I am wondering whether I can use my old lenses?
I have used a mix of RF and EF lenses at a few different local Canon events over the last couple of years. I will say that the EF lenses that they had present worked as well, if not better, on the mirrorless camera as they did on the DSLR. I personally feel that there are some RF lenses absolutely worth buying into like the 28-70/2, 50/1.2, and the 85/1.2 lenses. For telephoto I can’t see fully giving up the EF options right now (if you need larger apertures) personally as there’s a larger and more complete lineup with them.

One of the coolest things to me is the variable ND adapter. Which adds an extra dimension to the EF lenses making it a bit harder to dump the old for the new in some cases. I think the focusing speed of the 50/1.2 and 85/1.2 make it worth upgrading to the RF versions compared to the EF versions IMO. There just aren’t replacements yet for some lenses though. So I guess the decision will rest on your individual kit... from my limited experiences.
 

haring

Member
I have used a mix of RF and EF lenses at a few different local Canon events over the last couple of years. I will say that the EF lenses that they had present worked as well, if not better, on the mirrorless camera as they did on the DSLR. I personally feel that there are some RF lenses absolutely worth buying into like the 28-70/2, 50/1.2, and the 85/1.2 lenses. For telephoto I can’t see fully giving up the EF options right now (if you need larger apertures) personally as there’s a larger and more complete lineup with them.

One of the coolest things to me is the variable ND adapter. Which adds an extra dimension to the EF lenses making it a bit harder to dump the old for the new in some cases. I think the focusing speed of the 50/1.2 and 85/1.2 make it worth upgrading to the RF versions compared to the EF versions IMO. There just aren’t replacements yet for some lenses though. So I guess the decision will rest on your individual kit... from my limited experiences.
So do you think the focusing speed of the RF 50mm 1.2 and 85mm 1.2 is faster then the EF version of the same lenses on the same R5 body with a converter...?
 

Jorgen Udvang

Subscriber Member
A friend of mine is using the R with a mix of native and EF mount lenses and says there's not noticable difference. He doesn't shoot any action, but bought the EF mount Sigma 14mm f/1.8 rather than the RF mount 15-35mm as he felt so confident about the functionality. I'll probably see him this weekend and can do some tests and come back to it here.
 

Jorgen Udvang

Subscriber Member
So do you think the focusing speed of the RF 50mm 1.2 and 85mm 1.2 is faster then the EF version of the same lenses on the same R5 body with a converter...?
The 85mm f/1.2 RF focuses much faster than the corresponding EF mount, but that's mostly because the EF mount lens is an old, slow construction. It focuses slowly on EF mount DSLR cameras also.
 

iiiNelson

Well-known member
So do you think the focusing speed of the RF 50mm 1.2 and 85mm 1.2 is faster then the EF version of the same lenses on the same R5 body with a converter...?
From what I remember, yes. The rendering is different than the classic look of the EF lenses so you will have to decide on that as a bigger factor to “lose” IMO. Really there’s just a big gap in lens motor technology At this point.
 

haring

Member
A friend of mine is using the R with a mix of native and EF mount lenses and says there's not noticable difference. He doesn't shoot any action, but bought the EF mount Sigma 14mm f/1.8 rather than the RF mount 15-35mm as he felt so confident about the functionality. I'll probably see him this weekend and can do some tests and come back to it here.
That would be amazing!!!! I would be interested in action situation dim or low light....wedding situation with wedding party dancing. Would you be so nice to test them?
 

Jorgen Udvang

Subscriber Member
That would be amazing!!!! I would be interested in action situation dim or low light....wedding situation with wedding party dancing. Would you be so nice to test them?
Test went well. The Sigma 14mm f/1.8 focuses fine on the EOS R, more or less as fast as the RF mount Canon 70-200mm f/2.8. This was indoor at a restaurant and in rather bad light, where the large aperture probably gave the Sigma an advantage. Being and ultra wide angle lens probably also means smaller focus changes, so take this for what it is.

The last lens that was available was the Canon 28-70mm f/2. That lens is superior to any zoom lens and most prime lenses I have tried, also when it comes to focus speed. It's a big beast, and looks like some kind of double sized exhibition prototype, but the image quality is just WOW.

I think I said before I had tried the 28-70 that that lens might be enough reason to buy a Nikon R camera. I can now confirm that it is.
 

iiiNelson

Well-known member
Test went well. The Sigma 14mm f/1.8 focuses fine on the EOS R, more or less as fast as the RF mount Canon 70-200mm f/2.8. This was indoor at a restaurant and in rather bad light, where the large aperture probably gave the Sigma an advantage. Being and ultra wide angle lens probably also means smaller focus changes, so take this for what it is.

The last lens that was available was the Canon 28-70mm f/2. That lens is superior to any zoom lens and most prime lenses I have tried, also when it comes to focus speed. It's a big beast, and looks like some kind of double sized exhibition prototype, but the image quality is just WOW.

I think I said before I had tried the 28-70 that that lens might be enough reason to buy a Nikon R camera. I can now confirm that it is.
Lenses like the Canon RF 28-70/2 are the main reason it’s been an interesting system to me. I really like a lot of their lenses (though I’d argue that there are just as many good, if not better, lenses in L-Mount IMO). This particular lens is by far the most interesting RF lens IMO. Pretty much everything else they’ve released can be had (or a comparable alternative can be) on most any other system. During one of my conversations with the regional Sony rep it was one of the ideas I threw out for a high end line of non-traditional focal lengths that could be seen as “prime lens replacements.” Looks like Canon had a similar idea with this lens in particular. What I threw out was a 20-50/2, 55-110/2, and 135-200/2.5 or so to go alongside an “Alpha Pro” type camera that is a “no compromise” pro body for the pro photographer...

It was just a thought process. I agree the lenses were the reason the RF system was interesting. They now have two interesting bodies (IMO) that are seemingly worthy of the lenses.
 
Top