The BEST Lenses for Canon's RF Mount! 

100-500 for just $2? I know they say Canon glass is expensive, but this seems like a great deal!

The RF100-400 is phenomenal for the money. From close focus to long end zoom, its weight and size too. Really versatile lens. Its pretty much lived on my camera for a past year

I find it really impressive that Nikon went from being lambasted for not having a huge lens lineup to winning a whole category against Canon in its own lens list in just a few years. It really is incredible how far they've come; though I would like to see them match Canon with an ultrawide prime under 20mm; and that 28-70 f/2 really is something special.

Using RF50mm F1.2 and RF 135mm F1.8 as my main combos. Amazing lenses!!

Dude, so glad you didn't just got all-L in this video! The 85mm f2 macro is a lens I cannot get enough of!

I run the 14-35mm F4 L, the 24-105mm F4 L and the 70-200mm F4 L om an R5 body, it makes for a small lite kit, great for travel and stunning sharpness, thanks Canon 😀

Jordan should film the next video entirely on a 35mm just to show Chris it's the best focal length

As someone who owns an R5, R6 II, and R7...I have yet to own a single piece of RF glass. Adapting EF is still perfect for my professional needs. Though Canon would tempt me if they ever release a compact & good performing 50 f/1.4

I love the playful nature of your informative and positive videos that support our community. Very entertaining and watchable.

The "no 3rd party policy" is keeping me from buying into the Canon RF system. I shot Canon FD for many years, then EF film and DSLR. It was great! There were so many choices in Canon lenses alone, and the third-party lenses gave so many options. Now, at the point of going mirrorless I'm looking seriously at Sony (Nikon has its own issues), or Fuji.

Having tried aftermarket lenses I prefer OEM. Buy nice or buy twice. So happy that Gear Patrol is keeping DPReview alive.

Great video. Very nice overview of the gear that is available now for the RF mount and very well made picks. Keep on the good work.

Tell'em Chris!!! Thanks for the Video and your assessment of the Canon RF lineup. We really need more media putting pressure on Canon for their (in parts) lacking lens-system.

The RF 35 is a fantastic little lens! Sharp wide open, beautiful bokeh & rendering and on top of that it has IS and focuses extremely close.

Hi Chris! I would like to see Canon produce a RF 200-600, 180-600, or 150-600 for wildlife photography. Something affordable in the high $1000 or $2000 range. This in order to compete with Sony and Nikon. If Canon does not move on this in the foreseeable future, I am going to switch to Sony or Nikon. Thanks for allowing my input!

I'm running the R7 with Canon speed booster, EF 16-35 F4, 24-105 F4 ii, and 100-400 F4.5-5.6 ii and 35mm F2 IS. That gives me fast glass and dual-IS across the board, and I can opt for the 1.6x crop when I want it. It's nice - my GAS is quite happy with this arrangement. Oh, and a 60mm EF-S handles macro.

For anyone thinking about getting the 35mm 1.8, it's fantastic even wide open and stopped down just a bit performs just as well as the L series stuff. It's wildly underrated for its price and size.

I can’t wait for the rest of this series with all the other brands. I love you guys.

That was another great video guys. I really love those affordable primes from Canon 16,35,50,85.

Your videos are very educational. They're teaching me a lot!

I have had my EOS-R for the past almost four years and have not bought an RF lens yet. The EF-RF control ring adapter puts the control ring where I prefer it closer to the camera which I use for EVC or ISO, a joy when getting the exposure just right. I have bought the EF 100-400/4.5-5.6IIL IS which is fantastic on my R or on my 90D, just shot an evening graduation from the bleachers with this on my R. I use the EF 24-70/4L IS on my R most of the time, while using an older very sharp Tamron 17-50/2.8 XrDi on my 90D for similar results. And then there is the now discontinued Tamron 35-150/2.8-4 VC which I use for outdoor portraits which is very good on my 90D or on my R. The 35-150 was bought for my 70D and was great on it, tack sharp like the 70-200s but with a more useful focal range. I will probably add the EF 16-35/4 L IS to my collection. These lenses work even better on my R due to their EVF on sensor focusing giving me sharper results more of the time. I will probably upgrade my 90D to the EOS-R7 later.

As a Canon R5/R7 user, most of lenses are EF Sigma Arts... and I like them. It helps that I can use them on my 5D3 as well.

The 100mm macro is quite nice. I need a large prime but I’m waiting hoping, as you said, Canon comes out with a new RF prime. Gossip said that Canon will start to allow 3rd party lenses. I’d buy the new Sigma 14mm f/1.4 art lens in a heart beat if it would fit. The 800mm f/11 I really like and I’m using it more than I expected. It is limited as you said but in Texas sunshine, it really gets up close to small finch size birds and it is super light so an R5 body and that lens is very comfortable to casually stroll around with. Right now, the 100-500mm is a must have.

Hiya and thanks for the choices. I am thinking of getting an RF soon. Waving from The Bahamas 🇧🇸

Great review! Thanks so much!

Great episode as always.

Thanks! Just bought a Canon R8 body and a couple of your recommended lenses.

I love my RF 85mm f/2 Macro. I subbed to the podcast just because you recommended this.

To me personally, it just makes so much more sense to use my current EF glass on the R5, especially since you're not having to use any glass in between the adapter and the EF lens. Of course I do own a couple of RF lenses (14-35, 28-70 and the RF100), but for my telephoto lenses (70-200 and 100-400), I don't see the need to replace those, especially since I can use the 1.4 III teleconverter on then when needed.

Im a R7 user and have been taking pics of birds on my property. I have tried the 100-400 and there wasn't enough reach. I then bought the 800mm and have taken some awesome pics with it and I can fill the frame without having to be so close and scaring the birds away. I splurged and bought the 100-500 and while it is nice it is heavy and I'm back to having to be extra stealthy to get my shots. It was handy for getting some hummingbird pics as I could crank up the shutter speed and still have enough light. I have the 100 macro and its amazing. The latest is my 24mm 1.8 macro and it worked well for astro and shooting flowers with bugs but not sure if I would like it on a FF body for flowers as you would have to be even closer to fill the frame. Its pretty good with video since it has IS.

I'm absolutely loving the R7 with RF100-400. Great value. Obviously limited outside of sunlight but the reach is great, it's cheap, and it's compact and light if you are hiking or on long walks like me. Easy to hand hold. I carry a 3 stop ND with it in case I see larger animals and want to get video in 24p, but for birds I shoot in 120p and lose the ND (also for photos). While I would love the 100-500 I think the portability of the 100-400 might make it more useable on hikes. It's probably the best value of any RF lens.

Some of our personal choices are driven by the type of photography we do. For example, the standard zooms have never been a big part of my life. Because of this - I favor the 24-105. But, I do have the 50 1.2 and the 85 1.2 - so that makes up for it. :) For my wide lens, if I had it to do over, I would probably buy the 14-35 f4 over the 15-35 f2.8 that I own now. I honestly don't need 2.8 when shooting wide, at least not enough to justify the expense, especially with the high iso performance of the new bodies. Truth be known, whatever I buy, I always want all the others too!

I love my RF 50mm 1.2 🙏🏻 Great video!

I use the DS version of the 85 f1.2. Fantastic lens. Image quality is superb. The bokeh is one of a kind. Focus speed is sufficient for portraits. I even use it to take pictures of my kids play.

Love the creative use of High Park, lol! 😆

I do not own a Canon RF camera but I once considered it. Here are the lenses that tempted me before (and the newer ones that tempt me still). 16 f2.8 24-240mm 24mm F2 macro 28-70mm F2 35mm f1.8 macro 85mm f2 macro

Good balanced outline of the Canon RF mount. RF stands for Rigorously Financed!!. I hoped on mirrorless with the R6 3 years ago. I have been making it with the 24-70 2.8 zoom and the kit 24-105 f4 zoom. I sprinkled in 100mm 2.8 35mm 85mm 16mm. The choices are limited. Canon choice to close the mount to 3rd parties betray us all. Then only offer $2500-$3100 options is barbaric . Sony is a freaking humanitarian!!!!😢

I have the 16mm f/2.8 - 35mm f/1.8 and 50mm f/1.8. They get the job done, but man they feel lackluster in the hands. My 35mm’s focus ring has become so loose you can go from minimum to infinity in the smallest nudge. We also have a Nikon Z set of 35-50-85mm and those lenses (even though they’re also f/1.8) just feel so much better to use. I am thinking of getting the 28-70mm f/2 next.

The 28-70mm is such a beast. It's a go to if I'm shooting portraits and I want to make sure it's done right. But the weight does eventually cause my arms to fall off. The 15-35 f2.8 and the 100-500 are almost always present in my camera bag. I genuinely love those lenses and despite the costs, I have gotten so much use out of both. Beyond that, the nifty 50 has been very nice. I did have the 800mm lens but after a year, I realized it was just not something I was using enough to justify keeping.

RF lenses may have advantages over their adapted EF counterparts, but part of me also wishes that EF will continue to live on because adapters with drop-in filters make it so much easier to use the same filters for multiple lenses.

Thanks so much for sharing another wonderful video like always 👍🤗

The thing that makes me disappointed with my canon lenses is each one has some weird limitation that other brands don’t have and shouldn’t be issues for expensive lenses. 70-200, sorry no TC. 100-500, sorry tc use is limited above 300mm and take a 7.1 for the heck of it. 50 1.2 sorry loud clunky af with no internal focus barrel. 15-35 2.8 don’t look at the vignette that’s too much for software to correct. Tele primes, sorry here’s some ef versions with adapter built in.

Was between the 28-70 F2 or the 24-70 F2.8... Bought the F2.8. More versatile than the F2 beast. Love to have 4mm in the wider range and less to carry around.

Hello, what a great video. Thank you so much.. For wildlife, taking photos close to sunset or sunrise, if I have an R5 would you still get f2 or would f4 be overall enough...?

I’m disappointed with the lack of lens choice for my R6. Look at Nikon, Sony and Panasonic and the range is huge because they have 3rd party options. I have a decent amount of EF glass to adapt but don’t see this as a long term answer. I want to replace my EF glass with RF but it seems Canon only offer entry level or full on pro priced options. As I haven’t bought any RF lenses (apart from the pretty ordinary 50mm f1.8) I’m thinking of changing brands as Canon seem uninterested in providing realistic options.

With Lightroom's AI noise removal, I really like the 100-400 even with the 1.4x teleconverter for walk-around birding. Super lightweight!

I actually have the 100-400 rf lens. Using it inside is basically impossible, however shooting outisde is not an issue and its produced some great photos! 400mm is a tad blurry but otherwise terrific. If your doing nature or widelife and on a budget you should consider.

Love it! Cant wait for the Sony and Leica episodes :)

As a macro, instead of Canon brand I'm using Laowa 90mm f2.8 2x Ultra Macro and I just love it.

yes, I got the 85 mm f2 it stays full time on my RP, very good photos. Macro, the Laowa 100 mm is a very good macro lens, reasonably priced.

Thee must be some sample variations. I have the 24-105 F4 L and my copy is very sharp, and resolves scenes quite well. I would suggest anyone wanting something in this range would be well served by trying it out and seeing if it works as well for you as for me.

I am waiting for L-series primes in the price range of $600-$1200 before pulling the trigger on entering the Canon system. These would target the enthusiast / semi-pro market. Thus, 50 mm 1.4, 35 mm 1.4, 20 mm 1.4 or 1.8 would be a good start. Failure for Canon to execute in this regard will open the door for another brand. For example, all Nikon needs to do is come out with a $2500 full frame mirrorless camera with much improved autofocus compared to their current cameras in that price range for me to buy into their mirrorless system. I do have a D7100 so I am familiar with Nikon.

I have only been using EF glass and it’s amazing 😊

Working for PetaPixel was an excellent idea, Keep up the good work my dear friends.

Thanks for the great review on the Canon RF line up. If Canon willing, lens like the Tamron or Samyang 35-150mm f/2.0-f/2.8 zoom lens is the very reason why I decided to go with Sony after switching from Canon APS-C/Full Frame DSLR to Fuji APS-C and now to Sony Full Frame Alpha due to the competitive pricing and excellent image quality. Once I heard Canon was not allowing 3rd party to build AF lenses anymore last year, I cross it right off my list IMMIDIATALY regardless how good the Dual Pixel focus is finally in its maturity stage (that took a loooooong time!)

I feel that the EF Sigma Art primes are better choices than some of your recommendations.... waiting for their eventual RF versions.

NEED the same video for all other brands!

Hey, Chris. One thing we agree on is the paucity of RF lenses. For me, especially in the 200-600mm range and wide angle Ld. Canon owned the 300-400 range: 300mm f/4, 400mm f/5.6, 300mm f/2.8 (smashing lens), and the 400mm f/4 DO II (my favorite telephoto ever). Oh, and the 200-400 f/4-f/5.6. I recently bought the EF 70-200 f/2.8 for use on an R5 for the TCs and I wanted that big honker white monster. Anyway. Thanks for the good presentation. [ ADDED ] I searched for RF L wide angle lenses, finding only the 5.2mm f/2.8 L Dual Fisheye 3D VR. There were several STM RF wide angle lenses, including the ones you picked, of course. It helped explain to me why you picked STM lenses, as it seems counterintuitive for a photographer at your level. I thought your admonition against EF glass on the EOS R cameras odd, as it's the best solution for the missing Canon RF L glass. One of the major success in the introduction of the EOS R series cameras was the ability to use EF glass, and keep the image quality for those lenses. I was amazed. For those lucky enough to already have one or more of the best EF lenses, keep them, and hold onto them until the comparable RF L glass is on the market.

I run the 14-35mm F4 L, the 24-105mm F4 L and the 70-200mm F4 L on an R5 body, it makes for a small lite kit, great for travel and stunning sharpness, thanks Canon 😀

I sold the Sigma EF 105mm F/2.8 macro for the Canon RF 100mm F/2.8L and I don't regret it. Yes, the Sigma is much less expensive. Its AF is also slower and louder, with a tendency to hunt. The Canon is lighter, focuses quicker, focuses closer, and is a little sharper. I had to laugh when Chris kept saying "there's not a lot to choose from" for every category, because he's right. Canon have some great lenses, some not matched by anyone else; but there's still a lot of gaps. Where's a fast 20mm prime? A tilt/shift? A fast 14mm? And more affordable non-L lenses, especially RF-S for those R7/10/50 owners?

Great video. I agree with your picks….. my RF50mm 1.2 does shoot a little darker than my other lenses - but I love it all the same. My biggest gripe is the RF85mm. I have tried both and at the time Samyang was still selling it’s RF version of the 85mm (at 1.4); this by far is my ALL TIME FAVORITE RF mount lens…..sharp with buttery smooth bokeh and BEAUTIFUL color rendition that none of my native Canon RF lenses can achieve. Shame Canon cut them off at the knees. Shortly after Canon did that - I stopped investing in any more Canon products….. I own enough to keep my kit relevant (RF35mm which I find a focal length that I cannot stand, RF50mm, RF28-70 and RF70-200) but I doubt I will buy another RF lens from Canon…..I found their decision to block other third-party companies to be nothing more than a money grab to its already loyal consumer base and often think of jumping ship entirely out of principle but don’t want to cut off my nose to spite my face as the saying goes. Well done presentation. So glad you guys didn’t disappear when DPReview did.

The RF 35mm f1.8 is a great lens, selling normally for $399 on sale, with a slight distortion. True, a macro should not have any distortion, but it is corrected in camera, at least on JPG. It is sharp, and low cost.

great vid !!! please do one for ef :D

I would definitely appreciate a Sigma 150-600mm native. 500mm and a 7.1 aperture on the long end doesn’t really feel like a good deal when there are less expensive, faster 600mm zooms out there, even from first parties like Sony and Nikon.

I'm using some RF lenses on my R8. But, even tho it's not the most versatile one, my fav is the 85mm F2. Got it on sale with a Eba* discount code for almost 500 bucks and I love the look it delivers and the sharpness.

Hey Chris I just came across your your channel, I own a canon eos 70D as my intro to dslr I was wondering if you have any recommendations for crops lens for this type of camera as I’m looking to upgrade. I currently own the 75-300mm and 24-105mm. My interest are the following: landscape, street photography and architecture, night photography and photography and my woodworking projects. If there’s nothing worth upgrading to to progress my my learning with the things I want to shoot would upgrading to a more modern canon camera help my choices? Or should look at another brand like Sony A70 line up so I can have more choices in lenses be the way to go. curious to know your thoughts on which way to go. 😊

The dude just shows a cheap lens, then shows a lens that costs 10 times more, and says "buy the expensive one." Thank you, you really helped me a lot with the choice. I think it works on Canon, because it doesn't even explain why a 10 times more expensive lens is better than a cheap one.

For me the 100-500 will probably the long range zoom I am going to take if I ever get the RF mount. I got a 100-400 now and at first I just bought this lens because I seriously wanted a white lens to give me the feeling I am a professional. But then I started using it and now 4 years later it's the only lens I bought back then I still use as it's just the best EF lens I've ever had. It helped me ou in so many situations. So I would probably want that white one for the RF mount to. That 100mm extra would be perfect. And even if in normal ranges, I do care about as much light as possible. I see with the EF lens, even in the darkest situations, I get excellent shots. So I not going to watch the 2.8 prime and/or zoom lenses that still need to be made. It will however make me also get a RF-S camera, just for that extra range feeling I also get now with my EF-S camera xD

Petamaniacs 🙌🙌👌

Wow.. just realized how much more Nikon has pulled ahead of Canon on the telephoto end, and I didn’t realize Canon’s 70-200s don’t take their teleconverters..

Cool video guys. Even for a non Canon shooter! I think you should do it for all brands :) I do look at that 28-75 F2 and drool.

Canon 50mm 1.8 STM was an immediate return for me. The focusing is a bit slow, and the motor noise is very annoying. It’s also not weather sealed.

RF 28-70mm F2 fabulous lens 📸

As someone that runs a real estate media company. I find the 14-35 has far more distortion and optical flaws compared to the 15-35.

I think Canon is fantastic. The RF glass I’ve bought takes great photos. I am not put off by their decision on 3rd party glass. I worked for a manufacturer and R&D costs are high. Reverse engineering is cheaper. If they can’t recoup your costs there will be less innovation.

Great Video. Really well at grabbing attention.

Picking the best RF lens is like picking the most favorite Ferrari… They are only so few and the mist expensive is the best. This kind of test does only make sense where you have REAL options and REAL decisions to make: For Sony and Fuji.

Need a 24mm 1.4 RF from canon, but for now I’ll run the sigma adapted

I think for beginner/hobbyist/budget/travel, we have only 2 options. 1. RF 24-105 F4 L 2. RF 85mm F2 IS STM Macro For Pro: RF 24-70 2.8 + 70-200mm 2.8

can you use canon ef or rf lenses on other camera bodies at all if you were to switch brands in the future?? (still learning)

I'm totally new to photography, what's your opinion on the 24-240 f4-6.3 usm, my RP came with 24-105, which one will be the best fit for my camera?

I would love to see Sigma RF lenses. Also agree that in telephoto category winer is Nikon. Adapting EF lenses is ok when you already have them, but buying EF to adapt it on RF is not good idea in my opinion. I bought RF 100-400 and it's fun little lens to have in a park or to take for a hike, also good for landscapes if you need extra reach, but as a wildlife is rather mediocre, not enough light to freeze motion, typically I need high ISO anyway and with this lens it is going to the roof.

I have such a love/hate relationship with the 28-70 f2. It's massive, heavy, not stabilized (which on the R5C means double not stabilized), but if you can afford it, carry it, and keep your shutter speed high enough...dang it's pretty.

Need a RF 300 F4 l and RF 400 F5.6 L like the classic EF lenses. Thanks for the video.

I have the 100-400mm ƒ5.6-8. For the price, it's a great lens with the most redeeming feature being how light it is. It's not heavier than my 24-105 ƒ4 and can produce decent pictures, however I'm uncertain if the lack of sharpness is due to the lens or my EOS RP which already has a bit of a softer sensor. Those two plus the nifty 50 is what I have in my bag until I get something else. Right now, my eye is on the 70-200mm ƒ4. It's stupid sharp wide open, weighs nothing, and covers the range that the 24-105 doesn't. I also agree with the lack of options on the Canon side. Their stuff is great, but the price is prohibitive for people who don't do this to make money. I can't see myself spending over 2 grand on a lens at this point in my life. The 24-105 only made its way in because I trade in the kit lens and used a gift card to get it for 1 grand. I'm not convinced that the most expensive glass is the best way to go. I've read multiple reviews that say the 70-200 ƒ2.8 wide open is a bit on the soft side, but sharpens up at ƒ4. If that's the case, I'd just spend less and get the ƒ4.

Hi, what about RF 24-240 ? Did you try it as a one to do it all lens? Probably my pick to go lightweight on a hiking/bike/motorcycle adventure

Wow! I had no idea that canon lenses were so pricey. This system is way outta my budget! 😢

I got to play with the 28-70 some over the weekend and I have a few thoughts... The images are spectacular so I don't blame anyone who drools over it, BUT... it's uncomfortably big and heavy IMHO. It makes me wish for something like a 2-lens f/2 kit where each is more appropriately sized, maybe at the expense of range... something like 20 or 24-50 f/2, and maybe another lens not unlike the Tamron 35-150 f/2-2.8. The other thing going against the 28-70 is the lack of IS (not that it's needed for stills). I've owned the RF 24-70 for years now and it just makes for a nicer viewfinder experience and works great for video too. I shot one clip on my R5 with the 28-70 hand held, doing my best to brace the lens against my face (something I do all the time with the 24-70) and it was pretty shaky. Not a deal breaker-to me the size is the real deal breaker. Can absolutely see why wedding/event/ and portrait shooters love it so much though.

Canon's weird policy regarding third party lenses is the main reason I'm still not considering going mirrorless. I keep on using my Canon DSLRs. And if I ever do buy mirrorless, it might not be Canon.

For Macro, there are even (manual) 3rd party options, that don't need to be adapted, like the wonderful laowa 90mm f2.8 2x macro

I wish they'd revive the 40mm pancake lens for the RF mount. I have the EF one and it's my absolute favorite lens, but I keep worrying about it breaking because it's now discontinued.

Chris, get out of my head!! I picked up my first mirrorless (the Canon R6) last year, and my lens lineup is VERY on point with your list. I have exactly three RF "L" lenses, and they're all "Chris's Picks": the RF 50mm f/1.2, the RF 28-70 f/2, and the RF 70-200 f/2.8. Also, I'm CONSTANTLY singing the praises of the humble RF 85mm f/2 as a budget BEAST! Of course, I've got an RF Nifty Fifty in my bag for travel or quick shoots in dicey terrain or areas of town. Oh, and the 100mm macro is next on my list! :D

What camera did you guys film this video with? 😅

Our picks are pretty similar. 14-35, 50 1.8, 70-200 2.8, 100-500, EF 100 macro IS. And others EF 11-24, TS-E 17mm and 24mm Mark II. Might rent the 28 pancake when it comes out. Could be a fun walk around.

In my opinion, Canon is in dire need of some f/1.4 primes targeting the $1200-1800 price range. I am very fortunate to own the 50 1.2 and 85 1.2...but I would have NEVER considered the 85mm f/1.2L again because of its size. I sadly regret selling my EF 85mm f/1.4L to complete my journey to full RF mount. There are no knocks on image quality whatsoever, but the price I paid out of pocket after selling my EF 85 and having to rethink the way my roller bag is packed if I want to bring this lens...it's annoying. No other way to describe it. I want my smaller 1.4 with nearly indistinguishable image quality. BTW, I must fully disagree with your sentiments toward the RF 24-105L. I've somewhat retired my RF 24-70 because I prefer the 24-10, which has less flare when working with strobes.

I have the RF 14-35, RF 35mm 1.8, EF 50mm 1.8, RF 85mm 2.0 and RF 70-200 2.8 I love the RF lenses, They are great ! I am surprised that they don't like the RF 35mm. It may be my most used lens. Love the 35mm focal lenght, it has IS and macro, Great ! The RF STM lenses focus slowly in video. That may be a dealbraker. I use the 85mm rarely, it is good for portraits and closeups. 85mm is my prefered focal length for portraits so I will be keeping it even if I do not use it as much. It can be used for macro, f2.0 so faster than a 2.8 macro and better focal length for my use. Had the RF 50mm 1.8. It was soft compared to the EF version and I did not see any benefit in keeping it. If I ever need to use a EF lens I have the EF-RF adaptor. RF 14-35 and 70-200 are superb

My fav Lenses for my Canon is my RF 35mm f1.8 STM, my RF 14-35mm L f4 and my RF 70-200mm L f2.8. 🫶🫶🫶🫶🫶

This is a masterpiece.

Bought the rf 15-35 2.8 when I was going to get the 14-35 f4 but it was on sale and only 200 more so got the 2.8 version, the 24-105 2.8 i tried and like that extra reach and loving the 200-800 its 6.3 at 600 so better than my 100-500 7.1.

Easy answer. Sony uses a 46mm mount that will vignette & 10 & 11mm, Canon and Nikon use a 52mm mount. One of my favourite lenses is my Samyang XP 10mm f/3.5 Lens for Canon EF rectilinear, adapted to my R5. 10mm is really wide, and, is often the only choice in tight gorges, slots, etc. Or, realestate to make that tiny room or yard look really big. But, only MF If adapted for Sonys 46mm mount, it will vignette. If you accept that the big three all have good glass available, then the final differentiator, infact a show stopper for some, is Sonys tiny 46mm mount. As a Canon R5 shooter, I cannot wait to try Canons new RF 10-20mm F4 rectilinear. If it is sharp as (it should be) I will buy it. This will also be a killer vlog lens. Btw, I read that even the Sony 12mm rectilinear will vignette if the ibis is on.