topic Re: Best focal length combination for wildlife photography in Gear Guide

Best focal length combination for wildlife photography

desaigj — Tue, 17 Feb 2026 05:24:59 GMT

Hi All

I have two camera bodies - EOS R5, Mark II and EOS R7. I mostly use it to photograph birds and mammals. My primary lens is the RF 100-500mm. It is an excellent lens, but of late I have realised that I can do with a bit more reach especially for bird photography. I recently paired it with the RF 1.4x extender (which I got on rent) and the results were excellent. The drawback of using this combination, however, was that I lost the ability to use the lens at the shorter focal length under 420mm. I also have a kit lens and a RF 100mm macro but both of these are not entirely suitable for the type of photography that I do. I am now thinking of whether I buy the RF 1.4x extender and use it with the RF 100-500mm but to do that I will also need to buy another lens to cover the focal lengths under 420mm. The two options that I could think of was to get a 70-200mm lens and pair it with the RF100-500 with the 1.4x extender or to keep the 100-500mm as is and get a RF 600 mm or 800mm both f/11 and use this with the other body. Any thoughts or comments will be much appreciated. Many thanks.

Re: Best focal length combination for wildlife photography

kaditey995 — Tue, 17 Feb 2026 07:48:20 GMT

Hello!

For bird photography, the RF 100‑500mm with the 1.4x extender gives excellent reach and image quality, but you lose the 100–420mm range. The RF 600mm or 800mm f/11 primes are lightweight and affordable for long reach, though limited in low light and background blur. Pairing a 70‑200mm with the extender setup covers the full range but adds cost and weight. A practical approach is to keep the 100‑500mm as is and add the RF 600mm f/11 on your second body, giving you both flexibility and dedicated super‑telephoto reach.

Re: Best focal length combination for wildlife photography

desaigj — Tue, 17 Feb 2026 07:52:01 GMT

Thanks very much.

Re: Best focal length combination for wildlife photography

justadude — Tue, 17 Feb 2026 15:16:27 GMT

If it's more reach that you want, have you considered the RF 200-800mm f/6.3-9 lens? A lot of people that own it really love it for wildlife. I know the RF 800mm f/11 is nice as well, but you might miss not having the reach between where your 100-500mm ends, and the 800mm starts.

Personally, I've never been too happy with extenders just because of the drawbacks.

Re: Best focal length combination for wildlife photography

ebiggs1 — Tue, 17 Feb 2026 15:16:47 GMT

Any of that can work but the best and easiest solution would be to get the Canon RF 200-800mm f/6.3-9 IS USM and be done wit it. No FL limitation, no tel-cons. Reasonable f-ratio, not too heavy and it is a very good lens.

Re: Best focal length combination for wildlife photography

justadude — Tue, 17 Feb 2026 15:31:52 GMT

LOL - looks like we both suggested the same thing at the exact same time. Great minds?

Re: Best focal length combination for wildlife photography

desaigj — Tue, 17 Feb 2026 16:48:38 GMT

Thanks very much, seems like the RF 200-800mm is the way to go!

Re: Best focal length combination for wildlife photography

desaigj — Tue, 17 Feb 2026 16:49:20 GMT

Thanks very much.

Re: Best focal length combination for wildlife photography

FloridaDrafter — Wed, 18 Feb 2026 04:38:27 GMT

@desaigj wrote:

Thanks very much, seems like the RF 200-800mm is the way to go!

I photograph just about anything that presents itself while I'm out shooting (northeast Florida), mostly birds, insects, and plants. Primarily, I use the RF 200-800 on an R5 and the RF 100-500 on an R5 II.

Something you won't hear mentioned about the 200-800 is it's lack of built-in lens corrections and fewer element coatings, unlike the 100-500L. Just one example, the 200-800 has 17 elements in 11 groups whereas the 100-500L has 20 elements in 14 groups, so the latter is much better SOOC when camera/post corrections are disabled which equates to way less time in post. The 200-800 was designed to be corrected in camera or post or both, so depending on the way you shoot (time of day), the amount of time you are willing to allocate to post, and the results you are happy with, it may not be a concern, just be aware so there are no surprises. Despite it's price tag and FL, it is still a "consumer" grade lens and I'm not saying that in a bad way 🙂

I may not be the typical shooter because the majority of my shots are under forest canopy, mornings, and evenings. Lighting is always a challenge and, lets face the facts, the 200-800 at f/9 is a dark lens and even the outstanding low light abilities of the R5 series at high ISO, it's still a balancing act. It does better on our R6 series cameras, but I prefer the the higher res R5's.

I do not have regrets buying the 200-800 and it's a fun lens, but it's relegated to mid-day shooting when there is lots-o-light 🙂

Cedar Waxwing: R5 mark II with RF 200-800 from 60 feet. This image was processed in DPP 4 then cropped, framed, sharpened, and lighting adjusted in Topaz Photo 4. During this 10 minute session, I captured over 350 images which is typical for me. My keeper rate is well over 90% and I keep and edit them all (you just never know when you are going to get that "special" pose) so a days shooting with the 200-800 often turns into marathon post sessions. I have three 4TB and four 2TB NVMe external drives, all USB C and fast enough to work from.

Yellow-throated Warbler: R5 mark II with RF 200-800 from 20 feet.Since I was closer, editing didn't have to be as strong, still needed it, just not as intense with the sliders 🙂 I was under forest canopy for this one so light was poor.

Osprey: R5 with 100-500 and 1.4X telecon which gave me 700mm. Shot from 120 feet. This image took very little post and even with the telecon is far sharper and vibrant SOOC over the 200-800, I just gave up 100mm.

Herring Gull: R5 with 100-500 and 1.4X telecon. Shot from 150 feet.

I do believe the RF 200-800 is good enough if you are prepared to deal with it's shortcomings. As I said, it's a fun lens to have. Between the 2, I use the 100-500 (without the telecon) more because it's sharper and renders better, I just have to position myself better or crop a little closer. But as you probably know, the high-res, stacked, R5 II cuts you some slack in that area 🙂

Newton

Re: Best focal length combination for wildlife photography

desaigj — Wed, 18 Feb 2026 10:43:58 GMT

Thanks very much for the very comprehensive reply, Newton.

Re: Best focal length combination for wildlife photography

ebiggs1 — Wed, 18 Feb 2026 15:20:15 GMT

"Great minds?"

Re: Best focal length combination for wildlife photography

ebiggs1 — Wed, 18 Feb 2026 15:27:03 GMT

"I recently paired it with the RF 1.4x extender ... and the results were excellent. The drawback ..."

Here's the thing you are adapting or converting or whatever you call it, something that wasn't designed to do something to something else. It can work but there is always a price to pay. The best, the very best is native focal length. End of story.

This goes for extension tubes or add-on filter adapters or diopters or even EF to RF adapters. You are still making something do something it wasn't designed to do. You never get the same level of return.

Re: Best focal length combination for wildlife photography

justadude — Wed, 18 Feb 2026 15:37:55 GMT

"Great minds?"

Or as my friends and I like to say "Slightly twisted minds think alike". 😂

Re: Best focal length combination for wildlife photography

ebiggs1 — Wed, 18 Feb 2026 15:44:22 GMT

""Slightly twisted minds think alike".

Say, I represent that remark!

Re: Best focal length combination for wildlife photography

desaigj — Thu, 19 Feb 2026 04:56:46 GMT

Thanks again. Would you say that in decent light conditions, the RF 600mm or RF 800mm, f/11 might be a good alternative? I love the RF 100-500mm and would like to continue using it so switching to the 200-800mm is something that I am hesitant to do right now. Thanks again.

Re: Best focal length combination for wildlife photography

justadude — Thu, 19 Feb 2026 14:50:16 GMT

"I love the RF 100-500mm and would like to continue using it so switching to the 200-800mm is something that I am hesitant to do right now."

Speaking for myself... when I suggested the RF 200-800mm, I didn't mean switching from the RF 100-500mm. I meant "in addition to". That RF 100-500mm is a keeper! Use the 100-500mm when you don't need the extra reach, then grab the 200-800mm during the times that you do need it.

I could be wrong, but I think Ernie meant the same thing.

If you were to go with either the 600mm or 800mm instead, personally I would go with the 800mm. If you think about it, the extra 100mm on the 600mm isn't that much extra reach. You are simply going to need better light, and higher ISO with one of these two lenses.

Re: Best focal length combination for wildlife photography

March411 — Thu, 19 Feb 2026 15:41:49 GMT

Great information Newton, pretty accurate review of the 200-800mm!

Re: Best focal length combination for wildlife photography

ebiggs1 — Thu, 19 Feb 2026 15:55:35 GMT

"... when I suggested the RF 200-800mm, I didn't mean switching from the RF 100-500mm."

Actually, I would sell the 100-500mm to offset the cost of converting to the 200-800mm. If you do go that route then the 600mm or 800mm prime are a non-factor you don't need either. If on the other hand if you just love the 100-500mm so much, I would go for the Canon RF 800mm f/11 IS STM Lens. But why would you want to go two lenses when the one zoom, 200-800mm, will do both? (and give you 600mm, too)

IMHO, 400mm is about the shortest FL for wildlife, of course depending on what wildlife you want to photograph. You don't need as huge FL lens to shoot elephants as you might if you want to do small birds. Keeping this thought the 100-500mm is only giving you an extra 100mm of FL (compared to the 400mm minimum) while the 200-800mm is giving you 400mm more.

I have a 150-500mm super zoom form Sigma and I do like that lens a lot. It is super sharp reasonably fast AF, but at times I feel the 500mm limit is limiting me and wishing for more FL.

For a long, long time, very long time, I have wondered why or who at Canon makes the decisions they make. For years I lobbied, to no avail, for Canon to make a 150-600mm f5 super zoom. They never did and let Sigma and Tamron totally dominate that market. Huge market everybody has one! Why they stopped the 100-500mm at 500mm instead of 600mm, who knows. Not that it is a bad lens it isn't it is infact a fine lens. It is just 100mm too short. IMHO, of course as always.

So my friend you have a decision, a choice to make, which direction do you proceed?

Re: Best focal length combination for wildlife photography

March411 — Thu, 19 Feb 2026 16:01:43 GMT

The one thing to mention about the RF600mm and RF800mm @ F11 morning and evening shooting is going to be a little more challenging as these lenses aren't going to perform well in low light. The RF200-800mm will give you more light, 1 stop @ 800mm and 2 stops @ 600mm. While it is $1000 (or a little more) then the other two mentioned it won't matter if it sits in your bag or cabinet because you don't have good light. Like Gary I own both the RF100-500mm and Rf200-800mm. If I head out in the morning or evening and the skies are gray I grab the 100-500mm, clear skies the 200-800mm. I have a 1.4x extender that I pretty much always keep in my bag and only recently used it because I couldn't get any closer to my subject at Yellowstone. The results on the 200-800mm were fairly decent, clear day and some post helped the image. It's good to have one in your bag when you really want to grab an image but just don't have enough focal length.

Aperture Range Rf200-800

200–267mm: f/6.3
268–454mm: f/7.1
455–636mm: f/8.0
637–800mm: f/9.0

R5 - 1/100 @ f13 ISO 2000
Lens RF200-800mm F6.3-9 IS USM + EXTENDER RF1.4x @ 1120mm

Re: Best focal length combination for wildlife photography

desaigj — Fri, 20 Feb 2026 07:23:37 GMT

Thanks. Super complicated! How about trying to mount my RF 100-500mm on the R7 for the extra reach?