p.2 #1 · what did you guys do with your EF lenses ?
Personally
I wouldn’t sell any of it - unless there’s an issue with it??
The 5diii and the fast lenses can still deliver even today.
I’d just remove the batteries and put it all inside a plastic box with bags of silica gel. Periodically I’d charge the batteries and fire off a few shots.
I think it’s a superb kit to have lying around..you never know what the future holds.
👍🏻
p.2 #4 · what did you guys do with your EF lenses ?
The FF EF lens mount was introduced in 1987 and the FF RF lens mount in 2018 (31.5 years later). Maybe in 2050 there will be a new FF mount, but that's not to be concerned about now.
In any case the OP is interested in the L mount, so should just sell or donate the EF lenses since the ones mentioned are not so special.
p.2 #5 · what did you guys do with your EF lenses ?
Pixelpuffin wrote:
Personally
I wouldn’t sell any of it - unless there’s an issue with it??
The 5diii and the fast lenses can still deliver even today.
I’d just remove the batteries and put it all inside a plastic box with bags of silica gel. Periodically I’d charge the batteries and fire off a few shots.
I think it’s a superb kit to have lying around..you never know what the future holds.
👍🏻
Thank you and I did think about that - but I almost feel that whatever time I spend with the camera - I enjoy the Leica more than anything else . My kids are teenagers and do not like me taking pictures so at night I often find myself taking pictures of useless things around the house just to experience using Leica.
p.2 #6 · what did you guys do with your EF lenses ?
EB-1 wrote:
The FF EF lens mount was introduced in 1987 and the FF RF lens mount in 2018 (31.5 years later). Maybe in 2050 there will be a new FF mount, but that's not to be concerned about now.
In any case the OP is interested in the L mount, so should just sell or donate the EF lenses since the ones mentioned are not so special.
EBH
Just because they are not the latest does not mean they are trash!!
p.2 #7 · what did you guys do with your EF lenses ?
Pixelpuffin wrote:
….and given canons history nor is it RF either 😎👍🏻
C’mon. If you buy an RF lens today, you should be able to get enough photographic value out of it over the next 3, 3, or 4 decades before another new mount arrives. Canon (along with other companies) typically stick with a mount for decades.
p.2 #8 · what did you guys do with your EF lenses ?
While I dislike the size (lens plus adapter) I still enjoy a lot of my EF lenses. They are easy to adapt to R, or even E mount, plus you can use them with the filter R mount adapter, which allows you to use filters behind the lens, which I love. Diffusion filters for example, have a different look when used behind the lens.
I’m still using my EF 35 (I and ii), sigma 24/28/40/50/135, EF 70-200, plus a few other random ones, like the very old 20-35. I’d probably pick up the sigma 105 if I ever saw a screaming deal, and the sigma 40 is still my all time favorite canon lens, even if its size is a little over the top.
I’ll continue to buy EF glass when the price is right.
p.2 #11 · what did you guys do with your EF lenses ?
gdanmitchell wrote:
C’mon. If you buy an RF lens today, you should be able to get enough photographic value out of it over the next 3, 3, or 4 decades before another new mount arrives. Canon (along with other companies) typically stick with a mount for decades.
Err…
Hello??
EFm
Do I need to say anything more??
Thought not.
Jul 28, 2026 at 02:39 PM
Steve Spencer Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #12 · what did you guys do with your EF lenses ?
Pixelpuffin wrote:
Err…
Hello??
EFm
Do I need to say anything more??
Thought not.
Canon certainly had it growing pains moving into mirrorless, but just as it was pretty obvious to some of us that Canon EFm was not a real commitment to mirrorless by Canon, it seems even more obvious that RF is a full commitment to mirrorless and especially so at this point. I certainly understand why people who bought into EFm cameras and lenses feel burned, but at the same time I don't think it is reasonable to think that RF is the same in any way. RF is the mount of the future and I don't think it is reasonable to suggest that it won't be around for decades despite the example of EFm.
p.2 #14 · what did you guys do with your EF lenses ?
gdanmitchell wrote:
Do you imagine that you are enlightening me about something that I don’t know about?
Wel, golly gee, thank you ever so much…
I think I see an addition to the hide me list coming on…
I’m not attacking you…
But the whole RF “” Pedestal “” thing is getting ridiculous. Hell canon are having to use the in camera software to correct all the RF lenses misgivings.
The EF line is still superb especially the L’s
I agree the new body’s deliver like nothing ever before and that is obviously helped by the RF lens line up… but there’s also something now missing. Mirrorless shots gave that certain “ phone” look about them.
But like playing video games… it’s easy wins when playing with mirrorless. If I switch back to EF primes and use DSLR’s there’s definitely a certain look that’s been lost… some call it rendering?? I dunno.. I’m not the expert. But RF is great… but it’s lost something in my view.
I say all this and I’ve just picked up the 24/1.8 macro for my R100 because like I said … shooting mirrorless is like playing video games.. easy wins … it’s addictive.
p.2 #15 · what did you guys do with your EF lenses ?
Pixelpuffin wrote:
I’m not attacking you…
But the whole RF “” Pedestal “” thing is getting ridiculous. Hell canon are having to use the in camera software to correct all the RF lenses misgivings.
The EF line is still superb especially the L’s
I agree the new body’s deliver like nothing ever before and that is obviously helped by the RF lens line up… but there’s also something now missing. Mirrorless shots gave that certain “ phone” look about them.
But like playing video games… it’s easy wins when playing with mirrorless. If I switch back to EF primes and use DSLR’s there’s definitely a certain look that’s been lost… some call it rendering?? I dunno.. I’m not the expert. But RF is great… but it’s lost something in my view.
I say all this and I’ve just picked up the 24/1.8 macro for my R100 because like I said … shooting mirrorless is like playing video games.. easy wins … it’s addictive.
EF lenses had to cover the entire sensor, correct everything optically, and be f/5.6 at the slowest because they had to be compatible with every Canon camera made since 1987. RF lenses *can* use software corrections and slower apertures because this limitation has been removed. Plenty of RF lenses rely little to none on software corrections.
p.2 #16 · what did you guys do with your EF lenses ?
I kept my EF lenses for a long time, until preparations for a move were the occasion for a thorough "consolidation". I sold almost all my EF, EF-S and EF-M equipment with the exception of:
- EF 70-300 L (no RF equivalent)
- EF 100-400 Lii (just love it)
- EF 1.4/50 and EF 2.8/100 (rarely used, no point to buy RF)
p.2 #17 · what did you guys do with your EF lenses ?
Pixelpuffin wrote:
The EF line is still superb especially the L’s
The OP asked a specific question, and you can’t seriously be suggesting that the EF 50mm f/1.2 L on a 5D Mk III outperforms their Leica Q3 43 with its modern sensor, image stabilisation and well-regarded 43mm f/2 APO lens.
I shot with that EF lens for 14 years, and avoided using it wider than f/2.2. Of the 40 images in my archive from it at f/2 or wider, 4 are from testing when I first got it, and 32 from White Night Melbourne where I needed the speed because my camera was rubbish above ISO 1600, I had no image stabilisation available, and flash would not work. None of those images are among my favourites.
The EF 50mm f/1.2 had a particular look which was very fashionable for a while. Apochromatic it is not, with its tell-tale green fringing around out of focus highlights in the background. I used to play a game with myself guessing which advertising images on bus shelters were shot with it. It was quite the cult lens, and probably still is with some people, which was why I suggested the OP cash in sooner rather than later.
p.2 #18 · what did you guys do with your EF lenses ?
Pixelpuffin wrote:
I’m not attacking you…
But the whole RF “” Pedestal “” thing is getting ridiculous. Hell canon are having to use the in camera software to correct all the RF lenses misgivings.
The EF line is still superb especially the L’s
I agree the new body’s deliver like nothing ever before and that is obviously helped by the RF lens line up… but there’s also something now missing. Mirrorless shots gave that certain “ phone” look about them.
But like playing video games… it’s easy wins when playing with mirrorless. If I switch back to EF primes and use DSLR’s there’s definitely a certain look that’s been lost… some call it rendering?? I dunno.. I’m not the expert. But RF is great… but it’s lost something in my view.
I say all this and I’ve just picked up the 24/1.8 macro for my R100 because like I said … shooting mirrorless is like playing video games.. easy wins … it’s addictive.
I don't think that the software corrections are due to lens "misgivings" so much as it is part of a cost/benefit equation. You need to design a lens to correct for all kinds of issues, especially on wider lenses - which EF lenses, and especially more recent EF lenses do. (some of the older EF ultra-wide lenses kind of, well, sucked). But, to do so optically, you create a rather expensive concoction to correct all whereas if you correct for some and let software deal with, say, barrel distortion, you can better control other aspects of the lens's characteristics. And you can do it in a smaller package and with less expense.
And Canon isn't the only major brand doing this for modern lenses.
I kind of have mixed feelings about the trend myself. But I do like the results of my 14-35 f/4L RF lens, which uses a good deal of correction at the wide end. At least for landscape and environmental type photography.
p.2 #19 · what did you guys do with your EF lenses ?
Pixelpuffin wrote:
Personally
I wouldn’t sell any of it - unless there’s an issue with it??
The 5diii and the fast lenses can still deliver even today.
I’d just remove the batteries and put it all inside a plastic box with bags of silica gel. Periodically I’d charge the batteries and fire off a few shots.
I think it’s a superb kit to have lying around..you never know what the future holds.
👍🏻
Thank you for the kind words - the problem is that it is so heavy !!!
p.2 #20 · what did you guys do with your EF lenses ?
comotionfilms wrote:
While I dislike the size (lens plus adapter) I still enjoy a lot of my EF lenses. They are easy to adapt to R, or even E mount, plus you can use them with the filter R mount adapter, which allows you to use filters behind the lens, which I love. Diffusion filters for example, have a different look when used behind the lens.
I’m still using my EF 35 (I and ii), sigma 24/28/40/50/135, EF 70-200, plus a few other random ones, like the very old 20-35. I’d probably pick up the sigma 105 if I ever saw a screaming deal, and the sigma 40 is still my all time favorite canon lens, even if its size is a little over the top.
I’ll continue to buy EF glass when the price is right. ...Show more →
I saw pictures of the adaptor - and it seems to add considerable length - unless maybe it's just my perception ?
