Should I upgrade EF to RF lens.

ecoleman

ecoleman

Suspended / Banned
Messages
6,992
Name
Elliott
Edit My Images
No
Earlier this year I bought the Canon R5 but as I already have quite a collection of EF lenses I opted for the adapter with the view of possibly upgrading each lens at some point in time.

The first lens I'm thinking of upgrading is the 24-105 F4 L. I have the first edition.

The new RF lens is £1149 and looking a used prices for my lens I should be able to get around £350 for it so an approx. cost to me of £800.

So my question is to anyone who has upgrade from this lens to the new RF version. Was it worth it? Did you see any significant improvement in image quality to justify £800 expense?
 
ecoleman said:
Earlier this year I bought the Canon R5 but as I already have quite a collection of EF lenses I opted for the adapter with the view of possibly upgrading each lens at some point in time.

The first lens I'm thinking of upgrading is the 24-105 F4 L. I have the first edition.

The new RF lens is £1149 and looking a used prices for my lens I should be able to get around £350 for it so an approx. cost to me of £800.

So my question is to anyone who has upgrade from this lens to the new RF version. Was it worth it? Did you see any significant improvement in image quality to justify £800 expense?
Click to expand...
The 24-105 EF is not a bad lens... but I wouldn't say it's a huge upgrade and worthy of it personally, unless you've got the $ desperately waiting to be spent. I speak from having both.

Thanks
 
I would upgrade mk1 to essentially anything else. I imagine you find corners aren't stellar. If you are not sure check out 50mm STM at f6.3. that will convince you really quick.
 
LongLensPhotography said:
I imagine you find corners aren't stellar.
Click to expand...
Actually, I've always been pretty happy with the results but I've never been much of a pixel peeper and never compared it to anything else.

I guess that's why I'm asking if I'm missing anything. i thought I'd make use of the Canon trial scheme but they don't seem to have any RF lenses on the site any more.
 
ecoleman said:
Actually, I've always been pretty happy with the results but I've never been much of a pixel peeper and never compared it to anything else.

I guess that's why I'm asking if I'm missing anything. i thought I'd make use of the Canon trial scheme but they don't seem to have any RF lenses on the site any more.
Click to expand...
If you are happy just invest money into some travel, etc. I'm just saying that 45MP camera requires insanely good glass, which does not necessarily need to be mega expensive, but will be if you need faster apertures or broader focal range. Any of Canons 70-200 are stellar by the way at 50MP.
 
LongLensPhotography said:
If you are happy just invest money into some travel, etc. I'm just saying that 45MP camera requires insanely good glass, which does not necessarily need to be mega expensive, but will be if you need faster apertures or broader focal range. Any of Canons 70-200 are stellar by the way at 50MP.
Click to expand...

Don't need anything fast. F4 is fine. I may hold out and see what Sigma comes out with (whenever that may be).
 
To me £800 is a huge amount to spend on a lens. I've never yet found a situation that's convinced me to spend that much.
I've known people who would happily spend £300 on a bottle of wine & drink it over one evening, in their situation I'd be more inclined to upgrade...
 
Petrochemist said:
To me £800 is a huge amount to spend on a lens.
Click to expand...
Most Canon new lenses now cost north of £2000 which is 100% increase over respective EF versions in some cases.... So I would take £800 lens very happily right now. In fact I am considering used EF 70-200 f/2.8 II just because it is made of metal, over £1000 cheaper than plastic inferior dust-pump version, compatible with pretty much everyting including Sonys and hopefully will hold value really well. The last bit is key. Certain lenses hold value or even appreciate, whereas say bodies or most cars depreciate really badly.
 
Petrochemist said:
To me £800 is a huge amount to spend on a lens. I've never yet found a situation that's convinced me to spend that much.
I've known people who would happily spend £300 on a bottle of wine & drink it over one evening, in their situation I'd be more inclined to upgrade...
Click to expand...
Photography is an expensive hobby but lenses do hold their value quite well. My 24-104 was bought new for around £800ish around 11 years ago and will still fetch around £350 on the second hand market today. So around £40/year.

What we do have to take into consideration is for how long EF lenses will hold their value since canon have moved over the RF mount. Will their value drop as more and more people move over the mirrorless or will they gain value as they become more scares and sought after by the DSLR die hards.
 
ecoleman said:
What we do have to take into consideration is for how long EF lenses will hold their value since canon have moved over the RF mount. Will their value drop as more and more people move over the mirrorless or will they gain value as they become more scares and sought after by the DSLR die hards.
Click to expand...
This very much concerns me too. I would like to think that the very best ones optically and mechanically will become a classic and retain values. That is if any servicing options, presumably by 3rd parties will somehow remain 10 years later. I know Canon will very much like to kill that off. You can still service old Leica and Zeiss glass. But now this also concerns electronic parts. Maybe China will make them all available like you can buy many internals already if they think there is market for it.
The likes of 24mm TSE II, 70-200, 85 f/1.4, big whites are essentially perfect and will work via adapter for many years to come. Anything with soft borders like 100-400 mk1 or anything with centering defect... well is better sold ASAP from that perspective.
 
LongLensPhotography said:
That is if any servicing options, presumably by 3rd parties will somehow remain 10 years later. I know Canon will very much like to kill that off.
Click to expand...
Canon will most likely kill them off the service. To be honest, unless you are very unlucky with electronics or dropped your equipment that require service experts, etc... I have never sent in anything for repair (touchwood).
 
robinsslee said:
Canon will most likely kill them off the service. To be honest, unless you are very unlucky with electronics or dropped your equipment that require service experts, etc... I have never sent in anything for repair (touchwood).
Click to expand...
I use my kit a lot. I am very careful with it. I had a failure of 70-200 f/4 IS for no obvious reason. The collar went bad. It was a cheap enough fix. Some heavier midrange zooms can also develop the same or lose centering. Perhaps these are failurres that could still be fixed. Worst case you can get the collar printed with some fancy CNC machine or 3d printer. But people are also getting IS unit failures (big whites) which would be the end of it, or to be more precise the dawn of the lens scrapyard repair era if there is appetite for it. Another one is USM drive. So I would prefer Non-IS lenses as a long term investment. You get IBIS now anyway. This in fact makes the latest TSEs the best case scenario, but only if RF versions don't come in 3x better at similar price. 135mm f/2 may be worth interest, as well as 400mm f/5.6 both not that expensive but mega sharp.
 
LongLensPhotography said:
I use my kit a lot. I am very careful with it. I had a failure of 70-200 f/4 IS for no obvious reason. The collar went bad. It was a cheap enough fix. Some heavier midrange zooms can also develop the same or lose centering. Perhaps these are failurres that could still be fixed. Worst case you can get the collar printed with some fancy CNC machine or 3d printer. But people are also getting IS unit failures (big whites) which would be the end of it, or to be more precise the dawn of the lens scrapyard repair era if there is appetite for it. Another one is USM drive. So I would prefer Non-IS lenses as a long term investment.
Click to expand...
Lucky me I have no concerns on them, but YMMV :)
 
I suspect £40 is near the average price of my lenses and at least 90% are more than 10 years old. Quite a different side to photography!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top