Canon R6ii eith EF lenses

M

Mossberg

Suspended / Banned
Messages
200
Name
M
Edit My Images
Yes
I am considering a Canon R6ii as I have significant birthday coming up and may treat myself. However, I can't really afford to buy the RF lenses so I was after your thoughts on using it with EF ones.

Any advice and opinions welcome.

My thanks

Mick
 
I've done exactly that before I replaced my EF lenses. The canon adaptor is spot on, the Viltrox one I found to have some slip.

The control ring adaptor is appealing but in reality I never made use of it. If you're shooting Tv or Av I think it would be useful, but I tend to be M.
 
EF lenses work better on RF bodies than they ever did on EF bodies, honestly, my hit rate on my R6II is like 99% - it really is an amazing AF system, and in terms of AF performance I don't see any really difference between older EF lenses and newer RF lenses in terms of accuracy - obviously speed is very much lens dependent. Only thing you might notice is that on some lenses, the AF area is a bit smaller than you'd get on an RF lens - but other than that, no real difference.

You might want to google and check if there are any quirks if you’ve got any 3rd party lenses, but I’ve not had any problems with Sigma Art prime lenses.
 
Last edited:
I have seen a video that clearly states the RF glass in the Big White prime telephoto lenses is the same as the EF versions (I only have EF in in EF mount).
 
Mossberg said:
I am considering a Canon R6ii as I have significant birthday coming up and may treat myself. However, I can't really afford to buy the RF lenses so I was after your thoughts on using it with EF ones.

Any advice and opinions welcome.

My thanks

Mick
Click to expand...
R6ii here and I started using EF lenses on the adapter - in most cases they work as well in not better than they did on a 6Dii/90D.

The only lenses that I personally had any beef with: EF 100mm non-L macro (focus hunting) & one of my shooting buddies had a Sigma 150-600 where the in body image stabilisation made a lot of noise to no great effect.
 
Many thanks folks, your help really is appreciated.
I have seen another few discussions and they are saying very similar to the comments above.

Time to get working on my good lady to convince her I am worthy of the purchase
 
[QUOTE="Mossberg, post:

Time to get working on my good lady to convince her I am worthy of the purchase
[/QUOTE]
Good luck but sometimes it's easier to ask for forgiveness than permission!!!
 
Nothing to add, when I got the R6 I was planning to use only EF lenses, and they worked brilliantly

But over time the adaptor makes small and medium sized lenses feel bigger and heavier than they ought to be

So now the only EF glass I’m still using are already big and heavy, so the extra isn’t significant.
 
I have heard that for the sigma 150-600mm you need to update the firmware but then it works fine.
 
Mossberg, I've a R6ii now after using a 1Dx for ca. 10 years. Excellent tech advances (though downsizing bodies presents a challenge eg I frequently move dials & buttons unintentionally.)

Anyways, on lenses:

- Short stuff - my old EF travel kit was a 16-35/4 + 35/1.4ii + 135/2 and my motivation for going mirrorless was to save on weight.
So I got rid of the EF16-35 and bought 2 of the light, small, RF primes for a start - hoping to go from 3 heavy to 2 light lenses when travelling & carrying a backpack all day, and also hoping that I can live with the IQ compromise.

I'm still busy trying to convince myself that the IQ is good enough. The lenses I bought 16/2.8 and 50/1.8 obviously don't pack the same wow factor as the EF primes.. I would need better RF glass ie £4k to replace the 35 and 135. And I would not need to reduce backpack weight. If online reviews esp re the RF 35 VCM were more unanimous.. but they're not. So I struggle more than I used to in the EF days, to make that next purchase. I still have the 35 and 135 and am about to pull the adverts for selling it.

- Long stuff - Adapters will have to do.. unless I hit some jackpot.

Phil V said:
Nothing to add, when I got the R6 I was planning to use only EF lenses, and they worked brilliantly

But over time the adaptor makes small and medium sized lenses feel bigger and heavier than they ought to be

So now the only EF glass I’m still using are already big and heavy, so the extra isn’t significant.
Click to expand...
Phil V, yes true re adapters adding weight and bulk.. Which was your fav EF lens, and which RF have you replaced it with? And..?
 
boer13 said:
Mossberg, I've a R6ii now after using a 1Dx for ca. 10 years. Excellent tech advances (though downsizing bodies presents a challenge eg I frequently move dials & buttons unintentionally.)

Anyways, on lenses:

- Short stuff - my old EF travel kit was a 16-35/4 + 35/1.4ii + 135/2 and my motivation for going mirrorless was to save on weight.
So I got rid of the EF16-35 and bought 2 of the light, small, RF primes for a start - hoping to go from 3 heavy to 2 light lenses when travelling & carrying a backpack all day, and also hoping that I can live with the IQ compromise.

I'm still busy trying to convince myself that the IQ is good enough. The lenses I bought 16/2.8 and 50/1.8 obviously don't pack the same wow factor as the EF primes.. I would need better RF glass ie £4k to replace the 35 and 135. And I would not need to reduce backpack weight. If online reviews esp re the RF 35 VCM were more unanimous.. but they're not. So I struggle more than I used to in the EF days, to make that next purchase. I still have the 35 and 135 and am about to pull the adverts for selling it.

- Long stuff - Adapters will have to do.. unless I hit some jackpot.


Phil V, yes true re adapters adding weight and bulk.. Which was your fav EF lens, and which RF have you replaced it with? And..?
Click to expand...
My fave EF lens hasn’t been replaced; the 135 f2, is the fave, but I couldn’t justify the cost of the RF version.

The first RF lens I bought was the 50mm, next ‘choice’ was the 85mm.
I decided to treat myself to the 24-70 out of my pension lump sum, and the 16mm came with that as it was cheap grey market.
So my ‘favourite’ rf lens is the 24-70 but I never owned the EF version.
And I don’t mind the adaptor on the longer tele’s, cos I’m already committed to weight and bulk.
 
I used to use EF lenses no problem with the R6ii no problem, the basic canon adapter I used was great, never had any issues, although over time I did update to a few RF lenses, only upgraded over time because I lost faith with my EF24-70, repaired twice, and my 70-200, i found a great deal on a used equivalent. but i still keep an adaptor in my kit bag for EF lenses.
 
Phil V said:
My fave EF lens hasn’t been replaced; the 135 f2, is the fave, but I couldn’t justify the cost of the RF version.

The first RF lens I bought was the 50mm, next ‘choice’ was the 85mm.
I decided to treat myself to the 24-70 out of my pension lump sum, and the 16mm came with that as it was cheap grey market.
So my ‘favourite’ rf lens is the 24-70 but I never owned the EF version.
And I don’t mind the adaptor on the longer tele’s, cos I’m already committed to weight and bulk.
Click to expand...
the RF 135 1.8 was my first foray into RF and it is really good. Sad to see the EF version go.
 
TimHughes said:
the RF 135 1.8 was my first foray into RF and it is really good. Sad to see the EF version go.
Click to expand...
Tim, objectively, would you have been worse off by keeping the EF? I've had such great service & joy from both the EF 35ii and 135 over the years that its hard to imagine being happier with the RF's. (I think I know the final answer re the 35, but on the fence re 135.)
 
boer13 said:
Tim, objectively, would you have been worse off by keeping the EF? I've had such great service & joy from both the EF 35ii and 135 over the years that its hard to imagine being happier with the RF's. (I think I know the final answer re the 35, but on the fence re 135.)
Click to expand...
Jaco, both are great options. The RF has stabilization which for some uses is a big bonus, and in other respects is a bit better. I shoot mostly with primes and so far have only moved to two RF mount the 135 and the 85 1.2. For 50mm I tried the 1.2 but decided to keep the sigma 1.4. I love the EF 35M2 too.
 
TimHughes said:
For 50mm I tried the 1.2 but decided to keep the sigma 1.4
Click to expand...
did you find that lacking in any significant way?

re 35mm you should try Tamron 35mm f/1.4 or Sigma 28 and 40mm. Other than some E mount exclusives it is unlikely there is anything better out there.
 
LongLensPhotography said:
did you find that lacking in any significant way?
Click to expand...
no, the RF 50 1.2 is extremely good. you may remember I had the test shoot day with a colleague last year and we tried our combined EF and RF kit including her RF 50 1.2. When I compared the results RF 50 1.2 vs Sigma 50 1.4 I decided to keep the Sigma.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top