p.1 #1 · Relevance of EF tele-zoom for MILC: Appraising older Canon glass for mirrorless uses
People used to sing the praises of the Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM lens. Is it still worth seeking out, for example, with Z-mount or RF-mount adapters?
Is the newer native glass really as good as people assume?
p.1 #2 · Relevance of EF tele-zoom for MILC: Appraising older Canon glass for mirrorless uses
I have the EF f/2.8 IS II lens, but of course the RF f/2.8 Z is really better than any previous Canon 70-200/2.8s. Whether you need it or not depends on the purpose. The larger differences are peripheral at the large apertures and with a TC. The RF with 1.4x is surprisingly good.
p.1 #3 · Relevance of EF tele-zoom for MILC: Appraising older Canon glass for mirrorless uses
I used that lens on the R5 via Canon's EF-R adapter and it worked exactly like it did on native DSLR. Probably one of my best adapted AF lens experiences. Whether or not it is "worth" it to you depends on lots of things no one but you can decide. I'm hesitant to recommend buying a lens specifically to adapt it when there are multiple first and third party options available in the native mount.
For Sony, I'd say definitely no, get a native lens.
For Nikon, it's a coin toss. The native Z-mount 70-180 is going to be about the same price. Adapting makes sense if you must have that extra 20mm. That's also assuming Z-mount adapters work with well that lens. I don't know.
For Canon adapting makes the most sense. The RF mount is still closed off and the only options are extremely expensive first party glass. If you really need f/2.8 for RF, adapting that EF Mark II lens make sense as it is ~1/2 the price of native glass. But I'd think seriously about the RF f/4 lens instead.
p.1 #4 · Relevance of EF tele-zoom for MILC: Appraising older Canon glass for mirrorless uses
Thanks.
Love your ideas, jeffbuzz. I actually did think about adapting to Sony Alpha, but it's not critical for me. What concerns me most is your hint (or question) about what can go wrong when adapting to Z-mount. Rockwell raves about it, but he pictures the f/4 version on that page. Sounds like adapting with EOS R5 could be a slam dunk.
And then there's the possibility of shooting film via EF-mount. (I once used Portra 800 with version I of the lens in question and got blown away by the colors.)
p.1 #5 · Relevance of EF tele-zoom for MILC: Appraising older Canon glass for mirrorless uses
I am not thrilled with EF adapted to Nikon or Sony, but YMMV depending on the specific combination.
I'd get new lenses at that point. But EF-RF works perfectly with some limitations on FPS in MS with the older lenses.
