What Does Canon Rf Stand For

By | 08/11/2022

(Editor’s Notation: Ryan Hill is a product specialist at Lensrentals.)

Here’s a fun fact: Canon’s EF lens mount organisation is nigh exactly as sometime as I am. I was born in Dec of 1987, and Catechism launched its first EF mount camera, the EOS 650 film SLR, simply three months after. At the time, information technology was Catechism’south showtime new lens mount in nearly 20 years, and at present, 33 years later, it and I are still kick. One of us, though, is starting to lose some relevancy.

Canon introduced the RF lens mountain alongside the new EOS R full frame mirrorless camera system in 2018 and has since devoted most of its new development output to that format. The official word from Catechism is that design of new EF lenses has been paused indefinitely in favor of releasing more RF lenses, and those new RF lenses are coming in at an impressive clip. Canon’s get-go-party RF lineup currently stands at sixteen lenses, with many more than already announced.

That isn’t to say that Canon’s EF lens line is already dead, though. Despite constant rumors to the opposite, Canon is still officially manufacturing virtually of its existing EF line. Plus, given existing stock and the still-active used market place, even if Canon announced tomorrow information technology was immediately ceasing all EF lens production, it’d remain relatively easy to exist an EF-only lensman well into the future, even if you’re working on an RF torso with adapters.

So, while the transition to RF lenses may be inevitable, it certainly won’t be instant or inexpensive. About Catechism shooters will probably adopt a piecemeal approach: starting time upgrading their body and shooting with adapters, then upgrading their trusted EF lenses to their new RF equivalents as necessary. How, then practise you decide what to upgrade commencement? Which lenses are worth the investment?

To try to help answer those questions, hither’s a feature comparing betwixt a few of Catechism’s about popular EF lenses and their respective RF mount replacements.

Catechism EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II vs RF 24-70mm f/2.8L IS

Starting with the obvious, Canon’southward RF version of the 24-70 has five-axis optical prototype stabilization. That may not be an essential feature for anybody, just for hymeneals photographers, photojournalists, or anyone else for whom the 24-70 is an indispensable workhorse, it could be a huge plus. People who absolutely need a 24-70 are often shooting handheld with available light, and in that circumstance the ability to shoot at a slower shutter speed without having to prepare up a tripod could be the deviation between getting or missing the shot.

Optically the RF 24-70 seems to exist on par with the EF version, which is arguably the highest resolving mid-range zoom always made. Depending on focal length, the RF may fifty-fifty exist slightly sharper in the corners.

Photo of Canon EF 24-70mm lens

Bokeh appearance is also like, with both lenses displaying round bokeh thanks to their nine rounded aperture blades. Vignetting is a little more noticeable on the RF version than on the EF, only, in my experience, nothing that tin’t be compensated for in postal service. In short, if y’all’re happy with the optical functioning of the EF 24-70, y’all’ll probable be happy with the RF and vice versa.

Autofocus is another expanse in which the RF 24-seventy has a leg up over the EF version. The new Nano USM organization on the RF, though it sounds like marketing nonsense, actually does take a noticeable result on AF audio level and speed, peculiarly in continuous modes. Paired with a Canon EOS R5 photographic camera, I likewise found the RF lens to be markedly better at confront and centre tracking than the EF.

Photo of Canon RF 24-70 lens

Those improvements do come at a cost, though. Unlike the EF version, the RF 24-70 is entirely focus by wire, meaning the focus ring has no mechanical command over the lens. All focusing is done electronically.

While some might understandably consider this a downgrade, I’ve personally come to adopt it. Later on some practice with the lens and a little digging in the menus to punch in your preferred settings, the experience isn’t nearly as jarring as information technology can seem at first. And the flexibility allowed past a focus by wire system can be worth the learning curve.

The user tin adjust the rate of focus change on the RF lens, for case, or fifty-fifty temporarily engage manual focus during AF modes without flipping the switch on the lens body. The RF version also has about a seven-inch closer minimum focusing departure than the EF.

You can endeavor the Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L Ii out for yourself at Lensrentals here or the Canon RF 24-70mm f/2.8L IS here.

Canon EF seventy-200mm f/2.8L IS III vs RF seventy-200mm f/2.8L IS

Function of the reason Catechism introduced a new lens mount alongside their transition to mirrorless bodies was to allow more flexibility in lens design. The shorter flange focal distance on the RF mountain allows rear elements to be much closer to the sensor, thereby requiring fewer focusing elements in the lens, which tin can make for lighter, shorter lenses. Nowhere is that potential more than apparent than in the Canon RF 70-200 f/2.8L IS lens.

While it is possible to hand hold an EF 70-200 f/2.viii on a DSLR body like a Canon EOS 5D 4, information technology’s not the most comfortable experience. Even with the capable IS, shutter speeds are going to be express, especially at 200mm. Put that same lens on a Canon R5 with an inch-thick adapter and information technology’south virtually unusable without a tripod. In practice not just is it difficult to operate, it even feels like you could damage the mountain.

Photo of Canon EF 70-200 lens

Swapping to a native RF mountain seventy-200 on an R5 is a night and day difference. While the numbers might not audio all that impressive (about a pound lighter and about two inches shorter, non including the adapter), the bodily feel of shooting with the RF is far, far more than enjoyable.

Admittedly, the RF version does have a telescoping barrel, which is something a lot of photographers dislike and isn’t an issue with the EF version. It doesn’t extend far, though, and doesn’t affect the balance much, so I was never bothered by it during my fourth dimension with the lens. It is something to be aware of, though.

Photo of Canon RF 70-200mm lens

Like the 24-70s, the optical differences between the EF and RF 70-200 are minimal. In curt, the lxx-200 is better by nigh measurable metrics but not by so much that’ll be immediately noticeable under most circumstances. Corner sharpness is slightly better, specially at longer focal lengths, and autofocus is quite a bit faster.

The important point, though, is that Canon achieved these results in tandem with a much more manageable form factor. Betwixt the iii lenses covered hither, this is the one I’d recommend upgrading offset if you use a 70-200 with an adapter on an RF body.

You can endeavour the Catechism EF seventy-200mm f/two.8L IS Iii out for yourself at Lensrentals hither or the Canon RF 70-200mm f/two.8L IS here.

Canon EF 50mm f/i.2L vs RF 50mm f/one.2L

While the 50mm f/one.2 might not be part of every photographer’s kit, there’due south a sure subset of pros who would consider information technology a must, especially for portraits. If you’re i of those, you can rest easy knowing that the EF 50mm f/1.two probably isn’t the first lens in your kit that you lot’ll demand to rush out and upgrade.

Photo of Canon EF 50mm lens

Beginning with the similarities between the ii lenses, the bokeh, which is the master reason for shooting on a lens this fast, is gorgeous on both versions. Both versions are also USM lenses, meaning they both focus past wire. While that isn’t necessarily an reward, information technology’due south at least a commonality, one less thing to acquire if and when you practise make the switch.

The RF 50mm f/i.ii, in my experience, does have a few optical advantages. Corner bokeh fringing and chromatic aberration, which are noticeable on the EF version, are much less prevalent. The RF version is too slightly sharper broad open, simply not significantly, and still less sharp than the slightly slower EF Sigma 50mm f/one.4.

Photo of Canon RF 50mm

In short, the differences are there if you’re looking for them, only they’re not every bit immediately noticeable as the differences betwixt the RF and EF versions of the 24-lxx or lxx-200. If I were a photographer with an RF trunk and these three EF lenses in my bag, the 50mm f/1.ii would exist the one I upgraded last.

You can try the Canon EF 50mm f/1.2L out for yourself at Lensrentals hither or the Canon RF 50mm f/1.2L here.

Source: https://www.digitalphotopro.com/gear/lenses/canon-rf-vs-ef-lenses-are-mirrorless-camera-lenses-better-than-dslr-versions/