I've had a pretty good case of gear acquisition syndrome over the years.
I currently shoot with an R5 and adapted EF lenses. I'm not entirely ready to jump into RF lenses unless I completely dump all of the EF as I don't want to juggle back and forth adapter/no adapter.
Lenses I currently have:
Canon EF 16-35mm f/4L IS USM
Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS III USM
Canon EF 85mm f/1.4L IS USM
Canon EF 100mm f/2.8L Macro IS USM
Sigma 35mm Art
Sigma 50mm Art
The 70-200mm gets used the most. The 100mm is used for product listing, macro, etc. I recently picked up the 85mm so I'm loving experimenting with it. I also picked the 35mm up and am finding I love it much more than I thought I would.
The 50mm is sorta in the middle. I love the lens, but don't reach for it as much anymore.
The 16-35mm has essentially never been used other than for "testing".
So...my consideration:
Sell: 16-35
Sell: 35mm
Maybe Sell: 50mm
Buy: Canon EF 35mm 1/4L II
I don't personally ever really go wider than 35mm and don't think me storing the 16-35mm "just in case" has paid off over the years. I could see consolidating that and the sigma to the Canon 35mm, but I'm still asking myself if the 35 and 50 are too close so maybe selling the three lenses is the way to go?
"Selling everything and going RF" is somewhat on the table, but what I'd really want/need in that scenario is the Canon RF 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS USM Z Lens, 1-2 fast primes, and ideally a macro. But I already have all that in EF so it'd be a tough sell.
If you don't shoot wider than 35.I would sell the 16-35. That said I own that lens and the 35 Art and will not part with either one. Since 50mm is not my favorite focal length it would go down the road. Besides my R bodies I also have a 5D classic so have a bunch of EF glass. Just my .02...
I use a mix of EF and RF lenses. Well, mostly RF now. However, no juggling back and forth between adapter/no adapter if you leave an adapter on each EF lens. I only have two EF lenses I use regularly and the adapters never come off.
LinuxHack3r wrote:
I've had a pretty good case of gear acquisition syndrome over the years.
I currently shoot with an R5 and adapted EF lenses. I'm not entirely ready to jump into RF lenses unless I completely dump all of the EF as I don't want to juggle back and forth adapter/no adapter.
Lenses I currently have:
Canon EF 16-35mm f/4L IS USM
Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS III USM
Canon EF 85mm f/1.4L IS USM
Canon EF 100mm f/2.8L Macro IS USM
Sigma 35mm Art
Sigma 50mm Art
The 70-200mm gets used the most. The 100mm is used for product listing, macro, etc. I recently picked up the 85mm so I'm loving experimenting with it. I also picked the 35mm up and am finding I love it much more than I thought I would.
The 50mm is sorta in the middle. I love the lens, but don't reach for it as much anymore.
The 16-35mm has essentially never been used other than for "testing".
So...my consideration:
Sell: 16-35
Sell: 35mm
Maybe Sell: 50mm
Buy: Canon EF 35mm 1/4L II
I don't personally ever really go wider than 35mm and don't think me storing the 16-35mm "just in case" has paid off over the years. I could see consolidating that and the sigma to the Canon 35mm, but I'm still asking myself if the 35 and 50 are too close so maybe selling the three lenses is the way to go?
"Selling everything and going RF" is somewhat on the table, but what I'd really want/need in that scenario is the Canon RF 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS USM Z Lens, 1-2 fast primes, and ideally a macro. But I already have all that in EF so it'd be a tough sell.
I honestly can’t grasp why you would consider swapping over. Your lens line up is magnificent !! 70-200 III. WOW!! 85/1.4Lis 😳…..
I mean those are canons absolute pinnacle of modern EF lens design.
The bodys will come and go, but good glass is good glass….. and in your case it’s exceptional glass. I would love both of those two lenses over anything in the RF line up.
Your R5 with adapter will deliver astounding images with your current lenses.
The bonus is should ever you decide to try a different system you may be able to adapt your current glass… with RF you are locked into canons R eco system FOREVER!!
Obviously it’s your choice, but no way would I I give those up. Madness… sorry 👍🏻
I'd hardly call that catastrophic. I still use my EF 16-35/4 IS, 24TSE II and 500/4 IS II, but mostly RF are better like 24-70/2.8, 24-105/4 70-200 (f/4 and f/2.8Z), 100-500. The EF-RF adapters are inexpensive so you can dedicate a few to individual lenses.
Looks like good sense to me. Personally I'd keep the 50 Art, but I really love shooting at 50mm.
Just throwing this out there: I recently ditched my RF 35 macro for the Tamron SP 35mm f/1.4. I also had been considering the EF 35L II but the Tamron was much cheaper and I tend to like Tamron's SP rendering. I love this lens! Built like a tank, focuses surprisingly fast and optically top tier. I have had a couple of comms errors however (same with my SP 85 f/1.8), but not an issue for me.
Your lenses all seem great. I guess, though, there’s a risk of the Sigmas not working with some future RF body that wouldn’t be there if they were Canon branded; that would be the only reason I would change anything if I were you.
LinuxHack3r wrote:
Sell: 35mm
Maybe Sell: 50mm
Buy: Canon EF 35mm 1/4L II
Make sure you really can source an EF 35mm f/1.4 II before selling the Sigma 35mm. I’ve been told by a retailer here that actually getting one can be hard, even though Canon Australia still list it. While many like the RF 35mm f/1.4 VCM, I’m among the many who – based purely on reports – think it stinks. If you end up thinking the same you could be faced with trying to find a used lens as good as the one you once owned. I don’t buy used, so I would end up dumping my entire Canon system over it.
35mm and 50mm are different lenses (think 42% rather than 15mm). It’s OK just not to like 50mm. I don’t get on with it either.
Even though you don’t use the 16–35mm, it might be worth keeping. This is a focal range where some study and practice is needed to get good results, and maybe the subjects you currently shoot don’t lend themselves to the focal range. I do use this lens a lot, and have often thought of replacing it by an RF one, but every time I look at it I reach the same conclusion: the 14–35mm f/4 is at best just as good, and the 15–35mm f/2.8 somewhat inferior. (Of course it depends what aspects of image quality you are comparing.) So if you later find a need for the lens, you could end up spending more money to end up where you started or worse.
A thought: sell the 50mm and use the proceeds to fit adapters permanently to every lens you keep. No more fiddling.
Pixelpuffin wrote:
I honestly can’t grasp why you would consider swapping over. Your lens line up is magnificent !! 70-200 III. WOW!! 85/1.4Lis 😳…..
As great as those lenses are, the RF options are better still, if you can benefit from their improvements. The OP mentioned the RF 70-200/2.8 Z. Fabulous lens that does not feel like a lead bar extended by 1" by an adapter, causing it to feel very front heavy in use. The Z also has sublime zoom travel/feel in contrast to the too-high zoom resistance of every EF 70-200/2.8 IS v2 and v3 I have ever used. Plus, super fast AF, is very sharp across the entire range (yes, sharper than the EF) and is available in BLACK!
I had the EF 85/1.4L IS since release. Great upgrade over the EF 85/1.2L in virtually every way. And it adapted very well to RF with fast AF and maximum frame rates. With my copy on the R5II I noticed that IBIS and OIS apparently didn't get along perfectly and had many examples of images just soft enough due to what appeared to be some sort of image stabilization mis-sync, even at relatively high shutter speeds between 1/500 and 1/1000. I've been doing this long enough to know if it's poor technique or something else and this was just weird. The same scenes shot with the RF 135/1.8 did not show this problem. The RF 85 VCM trades away IS but is smaller, lighter, even faster focusing...
However, I agree with Jordan that switching over to RF will come at a significant premium.
Sep 25, 2026 at 11:48 PM
Steve Spencer Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
LinuxHack3r wrote:
I've had a pretty good case of gear acquisition syndrome over the years.
I currently shoot with an R5 and adapted EF lenses. I'm not entirely ready to jump into RF lenses unless I completely dump all of the EF as I don't want to juggle back and forth adapter/no adapter.
Lenses I currently have:
Canon EF 16-35mm f/4L IS USM
Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS III USM
Canon EF 85mm f/1.4L IS USM
Canon EF 100mm f/2.8L Macro IS USM
Sigma 35mm Art
Sigma 50mm Art
The 70-200mm gets used the most. The 100mm is used for product listing, macro, etc. I recently picked up the 85mm so I'm loving experimenting with it. I also picked the 35mm up and am finding I love it much more than I thought I would.
The 50mm is sorta in the middle. I love the lens, but don't reach for it as much anymore.
The 16-35mm has essentially never been used other than for "testing".
So...my consideration:
Sell: 16-35
Sell: 35mm
Maybe Sell: 50mm
Buy: Canon EF 35mm 1/4L II
I don't personally ever really go wider than 35mm and don't think me storing the 16-35mm "just in case" has paid off over the years. I could see consolidating that and the sigma to the Canon 35mm, but I'm still asking myself if the 35 and 50 are too close so maybe selling the three lenses is the way to go?
"Selling everything and going RF" is somewhat on the table, but what I'd really want/need in that scenario is the Canon RF 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS USM Z Lens, 1-2 fast primes, and ideally a macro. But I already have all that in EF so it'd be a tough sell.
it seems to me that you could begin putting your toe in the water of RF lenses by selling the EF 70-200 f/2.8 III, the 16-35 f/4 IS (that you don't use) and the Sigma 50 Art that you don't use. That would let should let you buy the RF 70-200 f/2.8 which is a smaller and nicer lens than the EF version with the only sacrifice being two lenses you don't use much. You could get the regular version if you like that is more compact or the Z version is you like the smoother zoom action. Since this is the lens you use the most this change will have maximum impact. If you enjoy this lens you can look at slowly upgrading your 35, 85, and your macro. A four lens kit with a 35, 86, macro and the 70-200 seems like it would cover what you shoot and you can gradually get there.
I might add I have and try much like the RF 85 f/2 IS Macro. It is only .5X magnification but if that is enough it might replace both your EF 85 f/1.4L and your 100 EF 100 f/2.8L Macro and if you sell those two you can easily get the RF 85 f/2 Macro and may even have enough left over to get or almost get the RF 35 f/1.4L VCM. Switching to all RF wouldn't cost a fortune if you sell all your EF lenses and could go with the three lens RF kit of the RF 70-200 f/2.8, 35 f/1.4 VCM and 85 f/2 IS Macro.
I agree with Jordan above. I don't think this is too many lenses whatsoever. Part of the purpose of an interchangable lens system is that you can buy a lens for individual needs/purposes. I am not seeing an excess at all with your collection. Oddly, I could argue for getting a more normal zoom in the middle as opposed to eliminating anything.
Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS III USM
Canon EF 85mm f/1.4L IS USM Canon RF 70-200mm f/2.8L Z
Canon EF 100mm f/2.8L Macro IS USM Canon RF 100mm f/2.8 L Macro IS USM Lens
Canon EF 16-35mm f/4L IS USM
Sigma 35mm Art
Sigma 50mm Art To be Determined
I haven't decided whether to look towards one of the 35mm or 50mm lenses, and whether or not to to go with the 1.2 or 1.4 versions. Big cost difference!
This helps me to consolidate my lenses, save some weight/space (especially on the zoom, and hopefully have quicker AF across the line.
