What Prime to add with R8 / 24-105?

[Zorg]

Hi

I'll be soon a proud owner of the EOS R8, I allready bought the 24-105 f/4 last month when it was on sale and secured the Canon adapter (with the ring).

What would be the next lens to go with the R8?

I am an hobbyist, using Canon since 20 years, but the R8 will be my first Full Frame, I like portrait, travel, street photography, architecture and landscape. I rarely shoot sport nor wild life.

During the past 20 years here the lenses worth noticing I acquired and used on my 7D:

EF 16-35 f/4 L IS USM (love it, eq. 25-56)
EF 70-200 f/4 L USM (rarely use it, eq. 112-320)
EF 40 f/2.8 STM (quite never used it, eq. 64)
EF 50 f/1.4 USM (love it, eq. 80)

EF-S 24 f/2.8 STM (quite never used it, eq. 38)
EF-S 60 f/2.8 USM Macro (love it, eq. 96)
EF-S 10-18 f/4.5-5.6 IS STM (usefull, eq. 16-29)

I "think" only the 16-35, 70-200, 50, & 60mm will be usefull, all the other will be useless or redundant on the R8.

I will see my usage with the 24-105, but I guess I will quite lack a good (and affordable) prime.

On paper ...
My 16-35 will become my new wide lens
My 50 will become my new nifty-fifty
My 60 will stay my macro / portrait lens

Quite not sure about my 70-200, I used it very occasionnaly on my 7D, and with the adapter it will become a monster ... I think it'd better stay with my 7D (which I passed to my son)

From what I described, what would be your recommandation?

After some though, I guess I will lack what I had with my EF 50 on my 7D : a good prime for portrait ... I guess to start the EF-S 60 will do the job.

Sure I would love to have the RF 85 f/1.2 L, but realisticaly, budget wise, my next purchase will be surely a non-L lens.

Thanks for your advice.

 

[VanDyck]

Enjoy your R8 when it arrives. Mine should be here some time today.
Keep in mind that I am a hobbyist who has never used prime lenses, only zooms: 16-35 F4, 24-105 F/4, and 100-400, all EF/L. I no longer have the EF 100-400 L.

I am an hobbyist, using Canon since 20 years, but the R8 will be my first Full Frame, I like portrait, travel, street photography, architecture and landscape. I rarely shoot sport nor wild life.

For the the subjects that you like to shoot, I think your 24-105 F/4 has them covered in one lens.
For ultra wild angle, the 16-35 is a fantastic lens, one that I intend to keep.

I will see my usage with the 24-105, but I guess I will quite lack a good (and affordable) prime.

On paper ...
My 16-35 will become my new wide lens
My 50 will become my new nifty-fifty
My 60 will stay my macro / portrait lens

Sure I would love to have the RF 85 f/1.2 L, but realisticaly, budget wise, my next purchase will be surely a non-L lens.

You mention the out-of-reach RF 85 F/1.2 L. Take a look at the budget friendly and light weight RF 85mm F/2 IS STM.

Canon RF 85mm F2 IS STM Review - DustinAbbott.net

Photographer Dustin Abbott shares a real world review of the Canon RF 85mm F2 Macro IS STM lens - is the RF85M the one to get?

dustinabbott.net

 

[Myles Baker]

Hi

I'll be soon a proud owner of the EOS R8, I allready bought the 24-105 f/4 last month when it was on sale and secured the Canon adapter (with the ring).

What would be the next lens to go with the R8?

I am an hobbyist, using Canon since 20 years, but the R8 will be my first Full Frame, I like portrait, travel, street photography, architecture and landscape. I rarely shoot sport nor wild life.

During the past 20 years here the lenses worth noticing I acquired and used on my 7D:

EF 16-35 f/4 L IS USM (love it, eq. 25-56)
EF 70-200 f/4 L USM (rarely use it, eq. 112-320)
EF 40 f/2.8 STM (quite never used it, eq. 64)
EF 50 f/1.4 USM (love it, eq. 80)

EF-S 24 f/2.8 STM (quite never used it, eq. 38)
EF-S 60 f/2.8 USM Macro (love it, eq. 96)
EF-S 10-18 f/4.5-5.6 IS STM (usefull, eq. 16-29)

I "think" only the 16-35, 70-200, 50, & 60mm will be usefull, all the other will be useless or redundant on the R8.

I will see my usage with the 24-105, but I guess I will quite lack a good (and affordable) prime.

On paper ...
My 16-35 will become my new wide lens
My 50 will become my new nifty-fifty
My 60 will stay my macro / portrait lens

Quite not sure about my 70-200, I used it very occasionnaly on my 7D, and with the adapter it will become a monster ... I think it'd better stay with my 7D (which I passed to my son)

From what I described, what would be your recommandation?

After some though, I guess I will lack what I had with my EF 50 on my 7D : a good prime for portrait ... I guess to start the EF-S 60 will do the job.

Sure I would love to have the RF 85 f/1.2 L, but realisticaly, budget wise, my next purchase will be surely a non-L lens.

Thanks for your advice.

I would look at the RF85 f2. I have that and really like it. If you want a lightweight walk around then the RF35 f1.8 is a good option especially as it has IS which helps as the R8 (like the RP which I use it on) doesn't have IBIS & the RF 16 f2.8 which is really small & lightweight and surprisingly good image quality for what it is (your 16-35 will cover those ranges with probably better IQ than the RF16 f2.8 but bigger, & not as fast). The EFS lenses will crop heavily but you might want to hold on to the 10-18 for video.

 

[GaryM]

I would tell you To get the 24mm 1.8 or 35mm 1.8 as they both have IS and the R8 does not have IBIS. Either will give you very good low light performance and both have very good image quality and either will both expand and compliment your photography. I have the 24 and am extremely pleased with it. Good Luck with whatever direction you choose to go.

 

[koenkooi]

I'll be soon a proud owner of the EOS R8, I allready bought the 24-105 f/4 last month when it was on sale and secured the Canon adapter (with the ring).
[...]
My EF-S 60 will stay my macro / portrait lens

Keep in mind that the EF-S will make the R8 switch to crop mode, which leaves with only the central 9MP on the sensor. As others have mentioned, the RF85STM can do both macro (1:2, not proper 1:1) and portraits. It even has IS, but it will focus a lot slower than the EF-S60mm.

 

[JoeTheSnowPlowGuy]

I watched a bunch of reviews on the RF non-L primes. General consensus seems to be that while they’re not Ls, for the price they’re solid. The nifty fifty got me into primes, my next lens is probably the RF 85 2 Macro STM. What about finding an EF 85 1.4 with the adapter? I’m seeing those go for under $600 depending on specs. I don’t have a single piece of EF glass and I bought the adapter bc used EF lenses are priced well.

edited to add: I have both the 50 1.8 and 85 2.0 and for my money they’re fantastic.

 

[Zorg]

Hi

Thanks for your advices.

I think I will go for the RF 50mm f/1.8 STM, essentially for its jack-of-all-trade focal lenght, price and general lightweight.

I didn't expected to love so much my RF 24-105 f/4. A new lens needs to compete with him, and its only drawback is it size.

So the RF 50mm seems to be the right choice, for when I want to travel ultra light, and still be versatile.

RF 16 or 24 compete with my EF 16-35 L
RF 85 f/2 is quite interresting, but not as versatile, and may compete in near future with a RF 70-200 or RF 100 macro (next "big" purchase)

 

[Archibald]

I just noticed this thread. I have had the EF 50mm 1.8 for years. It never gets used, though. The focal length is covered in the zoom, and I practically never need 1.8. I'm not a fan of thin DOF. I don't need a fast lens for low light levels either, because modern sensors are great at high ISO.

I have the RF 100mm macro and love it. I use it for bugs. But you say you rarely shoot wildlife, so this would not be a priority for you. But you said "EF-S 60 f/2.8 USM Macro (love it, eq. 96)". So I don't know. The "eq 96" is deceptive, because the working distance of the 60mm is short, and stays short no matter what the sensor format is. Maybe you don't use it for bugs. If you do, it might spook bugs more than a longer lens.

 

[Zorg]

I just noticed this thread. I have had the EF 50mm 1.8 for years. It never gets used, though. The focal length is covered in the zoom, and I practically never need 1.8. I'm not a fan of thin DOF. I don't need a fast lens for low light levels either, because modern sensors are great at high ISO.

I have the RF 100mm macro and love it. I use it for bugs. But you say you rarely shoot wildlife, so this would not be a priority for you. But you said "EF-S 60 f/2.8 USM Macro (love it, eq. 96)". So I don't know. The "eq 96" is deceptive, because the working distance of the 60mm is short, and stays short no matter what the sensor format is. Maybe you don't use it for bugs. If you do, it might spook bugs more than a longer lens.

Hi

Yes, the EF-S 60mm Macro is "likely" as a 96mm, but for Macro it is still a 60mm for DOF.

That's why, some day, I will buy the RF 100mm f/2.8 L Macro.

But still, the 60mm compete against a potential 80mm f/2, it makes it less relevant (for me)

While the tiny 50mm focal is missing for me, it is only covered by my 24-105, since my EF 50mm f/1.4 broke (after 20 years)

Thanks