topic Re: Lens Search in EF & RF Lenses

Lens Search for Wildlife Photography

emsher — Thu, 29 Sep 2022 12:45:07 GMT

Hello everyone,

I am getting into wildlife photography and I want to invest in a good lens. I currently shoot with a Canon R6 + 70-200 2.8 lens but for capturing wildlife I need a little extra reach. I am looking for something under $5k and it can either be a fixed lens or a zoom lens. I am trying to stray away from adapters, so preferably a RF mount. In a perfect world, I would love to purchase the 600 mm...

Please let me know you're suggestions, opinions, experience, etc!

Re: Lens Search

jrhoffman75 — Mon, 26 Sep 2022 17:52:06 GMT

If you do not want to adapt EF lenses this would be the longest RF lens with your budget.

Re: Lens Search

FloridaDrafter — Mon, 26 Sep 2022 18:58:01 GMT

I have the RF 100-500mm L that John referenced and use it on an R5 and R6. It is an excellent lens. Since I shoot a lot of small birds, usually at distance (30-50'), I prefer it on the R5 because of its higher MP sensor which allows me to crop and still get very good prints. For larger birds, other animals, flowers, butterflies, etc., it is a great lens for the R6. I mention flowers and butterflies because this lens will focus, at 500mm, to just under 3' so you can fill the sensor of the R6.

I understand that the cropping thing is just a personal preference and won't be an issue with most photographers, but I thought I would throw it out there in case you are in a similar situation, so you will know what to expect. I still highly recommend this lens for the R6 🙂

Newton

Re: Lens Search

deebatman316 — Mon, 26 Sep 2022 21:40:49 GMT

Another good option that is budget friendly is the RF 100-400mm F/5.6-F/8 IS USM lens.

-Demetrius

40D, 5D IV, EF 16-35mm F/2.8L III, EF 24-70mm F/2.8L II, EF 28-135mm F/3.5-5.6 IS USM, EF 50 F/1.8 STM

430EX III-RT & 600EX II-RT

Re: Lens Search

FloridaDrafter — Mon, 26 Sep 2022 23:05:56 GMT

@deebatman316 wrote:
"Another good option that is budget friendly is the RF 100-400mm F/5.6-F/8 IS USM lens."

My wife uses that on her R6. She is disabled and needs a light rig and this lens is very light, which is one of the things I like about RF glass, both L and non. I've used it a bit on the R5 and it is a very capable lens and the photos she takes with it on the R6 are really good.

However, I wouldn't consider it if the RF 100-500mm L was within my budget, as the OP has stated. For us, it's a special needs lens. But I agree, it is a great "budget friendly" lens and not to be overlooked 🙂

Newton

Re: Lens Search

deebatman316 — Mon, 26 Sep 2022 23:30:54 GMT

How do you like RF glass so far with Canon's offerings. The only thing I don't like is the consumer level tend to have very slow apertures slower than F/5.6. Which doesn't help so well in low. I mainly take pictures in low light. Or the decent to fast aperture lenses cost a lot. I have tested the R, RP, R5 and R6 in low light (The R3, R7 and R10 were not released at that time). With native RF glass and the R5 performed the best but the camera still needed the AF Assist Beam from the camera body. Or my 430EX III-RT (Even set to IR AF Assist) and 600EX II-RT provided pre-flashes/ pre-fires to assist with low light AF.

-Demetrius

40D, 5D IV, EF 16-35mm F/2.8L III, EF 24-70mm F/2.8L II, EF 28-135mm F/3.5-5.6 IS USM, EF 50 F/1.8 STM

430EX III-RT & 600EX II-RT

Re: Lens Search

Danfaz — Tue, 27 Sep 2022 00:41:37 GMT

RF 100-500mm hands-down. It's fast-focusing, very sharp, and can even get pseudo macro shots with its .33X magnification at 500mm.

Re: Lens Search

FloridaDrafter — Tue, 27 Sep 2022 00:44:47 GMT

@deebatman316 wrote:

How do you like RF glass so far with Canon's offerings. The only thing I don't like is the consumer level tend to have very slow apertures slower than F/5.6. Which doesn't help so well in low. I mainly take pictures in low light.

We only have four RF lenses and I love them all, but the only consumer grade RF lens we own is the RF 100-400mm f/5.6-f/8 and on the R6 the pair handles low light admirably at wide open f/8 and up, we usually push it a stop or two to get it into its "sweet spot" by bumping up the ISO, so we rarely shoot wide open. Still, AF is snappy with the RF 100-400, but I suspect the R6 has something to do with that 😉 For us, low light is forest canopy and underbrush on the forest floor, and the habitat we frequent is pretty dark (for photography) at midday. Mornings and evenings are really dark, and this seems to be the times that our subjects are the most active. Now, switch to the RF 100-500mm in the same light, and things really improve 🙂

Newton

Re: Lens Search

deebatman316 — Tue, 27 Sep 2022 00:58:46 GMT

Generally on DSLRs the limit for AF was F/5.6 but the 5D Mark III and IV, 7D Mark II, 6D Mark II, Rebel T8i and all 1D series cameras allow AF at F/8. When it came time to upgrade my old EOS 40D the only EOS R series bodies were the R and RP. I didn't like the battery life because it was quite low. I instead went with the 5D Mark IV. But in the future I'm open to the EOS R series. When I tested the R5 and R6 the battery life was much improved over the R and RP. I generally shoot closer to wide open with a speedlite. I mainly deal with low light indoor photography. Even though photo is more of a hobby and not my full time job.

-Demetrius

40D, 5D IV, EF 16-35mm F/2.8L III, EF 24-70mm F/2.8L II, EF 28-135mm F/3.5-5.6 IS USM, EF 50 F/1.8 STM

430EX III-RT & 600EX II-RT

Re: Lens Search

FloridaDrafter — Tue, 27 Sep 2022 01:05:46 GMT

@Danfaz wrote:
RF 100-500mm hands-down. It's fast-focusing, very sharp, and can even get pseudo macro shots with its .33X magnification at 500mm.

I'm right there with you! It was the same with the EF 100-400mm L II. You can really get close at 400mm with that lens and it's saved my bacon a few times when I left home without my 100mm L macro. Obviously, nothing beats a good macro lens, but it sure is nice to have a long lens that can close focus.

Newton

Re: Lens Search

ebiggs1 — Tue, 27 Sep 2022 15:50:08 GMT

I think you are going to find 500mm and certainly 400mm wanting if you are truly after great bird photos. Of course the lens you have is always better than the one you wished you had.

As to cropping or more focal length and/or cropper vs FF all have their points and weaknesses. Use what works best for you.

Re: Lens Search for Wildlife Photography

ronstoecklein — Sat, 08 Oct 2022 13:25:39 GMT

Like others have already said the RF 100-500 is a game changer for birds\wildlife photography. I often use it with the 1.4 extender. I shoot both video and stills. I've set the camera up so that with a push of a button I' can switch from photo to video mode--- most times shooting 4k 120fps when handheld. I also shoot 8k at times for smaller subjects(mounted on a tripod)--cropped and output at 1080 from FCPX it's like I had a massive telephoto lens on. It's amazing to me how far technology has come for wildlife photography, and not just Canon. I still have my Canon 5Ds with a number of ef L lenses but rarely bring it out. Still a great camera but using it with the 100-400 is II -- there is no comparison to the R5 with the RF 100-500. For photography other than sports or wildlife I'm not sure it would make a great difference. And that's just my opinion.

Re: Lens Search for Wildlife Photography

Tronhard — Sat, 08 Oct 2022 22:26:40 GMT

I have been shooting wildlife for four decades and when I moved to the R-series (I use 1xR5 and 2xR6), I went for the Rf 100-500 lens (Corrected Lens from error 100-400). I recommend you look at the specs and other sources of information - there are good reviews by Justin Abbott HERE, Jan Waganer HERE and Gordon Laing HERE.

My own experiences are that the focus is blazing fast, thanks to dual Nano-USM motors that are silent. It works extremely well with the autofocus and IBIS of the R5 and R6 units. I recently posted some images of birds at a local sanctuary here in Auckland, NZ - you can find that HERE.

Re: Lens Search for Wildlife Photography

ronstoecklein — Sat, 08 Oct 2022 18:54:37 GMT

Hey Trevor--I probably should have clarified what I wrote -- I was referring to the ef version of the 100-400. I have no doubt the RF 100-400 would be excellent.

Re: Lens Search for Wildlife Photography

Tronhard — Sat, 08 Oct 2022 19:10:50 GMT

Ha, the error is MINE. Typo and at about 5:30am I had not had enough coffee... 🙄 I agree with you totally about the 100-500. I have the EF 100-400 MkII and it's an awesome lens: I have used it for some years with my 7DII and 5DIV bodies and loved it. I have used that on the R bodies and found it to work fine, but not quite a snappy as the native RF lens and of course, it's 100mm short on the long end.

Re: Lens Search for Wildlife Photography

shadowsports — Sat, 08 Oct 2022 20:50:49 GMT

Greetings,

Have you considered a RF 100~500 with a RF 1.4x extender? I would go this route over the 600mm ~f11

Oops I missed the earliers posts... Hands down a formidible combination. Don't lock yourself in on a fixed focal length or non L series glass if you can help it. You'll not regret this investment in the long run.

Re: Lens Search for Wildlife Photography

amfoto1 — Sun, 09 Oct 2022 03:57:35 GMT

The Canon RF 100-500mm f/4.5-7.1L IS USM would be my first choice. Sharp and versatile. Reasonable size and weight, too. And it works well with RF 1.4X teleconverter, if needed. And it's well within your budget. The only drawback is you need pretty good light for an f/4.5-71. aperture, but the R6 lets you use higher ISOs than a lot of other cameras.

***********

Alan Myers
San Jose, Calif., USA
"Walk softly and carry a big lens."
GEAR: 5DII, 7DII (x2), 7D(x2) some other cameras, various lenses & accessories
FLICKR & ZENFOLIO

Re: Lens Search for Wildlife Photography

garymak — Thu, 09 Mar 2023 22:20:42 GMT

I can suggest giving the 600mm ƒ11 a look. There are pros and cons and each photographer has their own preferences as to what's acceptable, what's not, and what their needs are. I've have an EF 100-400mm ƒ4.5-5.6 USM II for many years and I think it takes great images. I've had and used the 600mm ƒ11 for about 2 years now. I've used both on the same outings several times, and it's difficult to tell one is much superior to the other, given the nature of the shots. Also, given that you need to blow up your EF 100-400mm 50% more to equal what you shot with the 600mm ƒ11, there's the inevitable degradation of the image, which probably makes any claimed/perceive by some "inferiority" of the 600 ƒ11 image about the same then. If you are shooting mostly in the range within 100-400mm, and don't need the extra 200mm, then the EF 100-400mm is probably a better option, as it's more versatile. If you are shooting dawn and dusk images of wildlife, you will probably run into the problem of lack of light for the ƒ11 (which can impact focusing) and having to boost your ISO way up.

Shooting on bright days, I call it a draw, given all the above. Another factor, is that the 600mm is LIGHT! Wow! And compact! (I suppose if you have porters to carry your stuff everywhere, "Light" and "Compact" are not of much concern, but for me, that's a consideration!😉). You can carry the ƒ11 around on your camera like a "regular" lens, and it won't strain your camera or your neck.

The 100-400 gives good immediate versatility, especially when the subject is moving towards you, and allows you to frame your shot quickly. The 600mm will be great for those long-range shots, but if the subject is moving close or you suddenly want to include more, that will be difficult.

So, for me, I try to bring both and if I'm not sure what I might find, probably the 100-400 is the preferred option. But if I know in advance what I'm looking for, and want to get in as close as possible, the 600mm is my preferred option.

I hope this helps with the discernment process...