cancel
Showing results for 
Show  only  | Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

Just got a Canon EOS R5. Which lenses will be best?

taradeone
Contributor

I got my dream camera, the Canon EOS R5! I am beyond thrilled! I'm a huge fan of wildlife and landscape photography, and I also enjoy capturing people.

 

As you can imagine, after investing so much in the camera, I need to be mindful of my budget for the lens. I'm looking for something that will not compromise on quality but won't break the bank either. And, as I take a lot of trips to the PNW in the US, I'd love a water-resistant/waterproof lens that can withstand the elements. 

 

I'm exploring options in the range of 24-800mm and am open to getting multiple lenses. Does anyone have any recommendations?

I would love to have a good lens to where I can shoot photos from a short distance for landscape, but also a lens that can allow me to zoom in a far distance to shoot wildlife.

12 REPLIES 12

Danfaz
Enthusiast

My suggestion, since you require weather resistance, would be the RF 24-105 f/4 for landscapes, people,  etc. and the RF 100-500 for the wildlife (of course, the RF 200-800, but it's not in stock anywhere right now).

The 24-105 is often on sale for $900-1000. The 100-500 is definitely more expensive, but it's a fantastic weather resistant lens. If you can do without weather resistance, the RF 100-400 is a very budget friendly alternative. 

Thank you so much for the reply!

I have very much considered getting the 24-105 but also the 24-70mm lens. Although, it is more expensive. I have also considered using the RF 100-500 lens but am curious if I could use a Canon RF 1.4x Teleconverter to increase the focal length. Would you know if using a teleconverter would decrease the quality?

I hope you don't mind if I respond to this. I am not really a fan of extenders, a RF1.4x is not cheap, will cost you a stop of light, and you have to have the 100-500 at a focal length of more than 300mm to use it.  If you then want go to a shorter FL, you have to take the darned thing off.   
If you want even more focal length, then I would suggest considering the new RF 200-800 lens.  Note that it is not an L unit but cheaper than the 100-500L and is a great optic - again, the question is how hostile an environment will you shoot in... 
These taken with the R6MkII and the RF 200-800 hand-held, available light.
Red Panda @10m: 600mm, f/9, 1/500sec, ISO-6400Red Panda @10m: 600mm, f/9, 1/500sec, ISO-6400  Stick Insect: 200mm, f/7.1, 1/40sec, ISO-6400Stick Insect: 200mm, f/7.1, 1/40sec, ISO-6400  Serval: 800mm, f/9, 1/500sec, ISO-6400Serval: 800mm, f/9, 1/500sec, ISO-6400  Gouldian Finch: 570mm, f/8, 1/250sec, ISO-6400Gouldian Finch: 570mm, f/8, 1/250sec, ISO-6400Emu: 481mm, f/8, 1/500sec, ISO-2500Emu: 481mm, f/8, 1/500sec, ISO-2500 R5,  RF 200-800@1280mm FoV, f/9, 1/1250sec, ISO-1600R5, RF 200-800@1280mm FoV, f/9, 1/1250sec, ISO-1600
Finally, if you are prepared to use the EF-RF converter, the Sigma 60-600sports (weather sealed) is a great lens that works perfectly with the R5.
NZ Kaka EOS R6, Sigma 60-600@ 475mm, f/6.3, 1/400sec, ISO-1600NZ Kaka EOS R6, Sigma 60-600@ 475mm, f/6.3, 1/400sec, ISO-1600  EOS R6II, Sigma 60-600s@600mm, f/9, 1/645sec, ISO-1250EOS R6II, Sigma 60-600s@600mm, f/9, 1/645sec, ISO-1250   EOS R6II, Sigma 60-600s@600mm, f/6.3, 1/475sec, ISO-1600EOS R6II, Sigma 60-600s@600mm, f/6.3, 1/475sec, ISO-1600


cheers, TREVOR

"The Amount of Misery expands to fill the space available"
"All the variety, all the charm, all the beauty of life is made up of light and shadow", Leo Tolstoy;
"Skill in photography is acquired by practice and not by purchase" Percy W. Harris

Thank you so much for the reply. I am definitely going to look into the Sigma! It's definitely a little more budget-friendly than the 100-500.

In that case, I would recommend the Sigma 60-600 for wildlife , alternatively there is a cheaper lens also available that also works well with the R5, and that is the Sigma 150-600 Contemporary lens.  It too has excellent optics and it is also lighter because it does not have to cover the extreme focal range.  You will need a Canon EF-RF adapter to make either Sigma lens work with the RF mount.
Testing the Sigma 150-600 with the Canon EOS R5. - Page 2 - Canon Community

For the lower end of the focal range, than the RF 24-105 or the RF 24-240 lens would be good choices.  The second one would give you more flexibility over a wider range of subjects, so that you don't have to take the large and heavier Sigma.
Trying out the RF 24-240 on Wildlife with the R5 - Page 2 - Canon Community

As I don't live in the USA, I shall leave the pricing for your own research.  I hope this helps.


cheers, TREVOR

"The Amount of Misery expands to fill the space available"
"All the variety, all the charm, all the beauty of life is made up of light and shadow", Leo Tolstoy;
"Skill in photography is acquired by practice and not by purchase" Percy W. Harris

Addisonjones
Enthusiast
Enthusiast

I personally love the 70-200mm. I use it all the time for both landscape and wildlife. You cant get TOO close to wildlife but it definitely does the job. It is amazing but it is a little more expensive.

Thank you so much for the reply. I will take it into consideration!

rs-eos
Elite
Elite

Please provide a budget for your lenses.  Also, do you have any existing lenses from a prior camera? If so, have you considered a Canon EF to RF adapter to work with those lenses? Could be a good shorter-term solution until you can save up more for RF lenses.

--
Ricky

Camera: EOS 5D IV, EF 50mm f/1.2L, EF 135mm f/2L
Lighting: Profoto Lights & Modifiers

Before I had the Canon Powershot SX530 HS so I did not have any lenses. My budget is preferred to be $1,500 or under. Although, I am willing to spend more on multiple lenses.

National Parks Week Sweepstakes style=

Enter for a chance to win!

April 20th-28th
Announcements