>I think it is more a ding on the non L rf lenses. They are pretty slow for the price and some of which use plastic elements. The 85mm f2.0 rather than a 1.8 for example on the slow side and the 50mm 1.8 that definitely uses plastic elements.

The RF 85/2 lost 1/3 stop to its EF predecessor while the RF 35/1.8 gained 1/3; it's a minor difference and f/2 is definitely not slow. But yes, the variable zooms are slower at their longer ends.

Canon have been using plastic in some of their optical designs for many years now; it's nothing new or bad, and hasn't just been used in lower end models, either.

>The real issue is that canon went after both Samyang and Viltrox for making cheaper and better 85mm and 35mm rf autofocus lenses. So basically you either have to adapt older ef Lenes many of which are 20+ years old and not really made for modern sensors and AF or pay the L premium or settle for sharp but slower rf non L glass that is kinda over priced.

Yes there are some 20+ y.o. EF designs, there are also plenty of newer designs too. But I'm yet to adapt an EF lens onto RF that hasn't AF'd at least as well—if not better—on the mirrorless body than on Canon's DSLRs. As for sensors, Canon's most-demanding FF sensor is still the 50MP one in the 5DSr; in APS-C it's the 33MP one in the R7, essentially the same as that in the 90D's, so it's not like the mirrorless sensors are any more demanding than those in the DSLR lineup.

Your summary of lens options neglects to mention that 3rd party EF lenses can also be used, something that frequently gets overlooked by people complaining about a lack of options on RF. If 3rd party optics and pricing are so compelling, people can simply adapt it.

Finally, the non-L RF lens pricing is actually fairly competitive when you start comparing it to other brands and the launch prices of comparable EF models.