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

Ordered the RF 100-500 - Seeking Opinions

yasser732
Apprentice

Got my R6 mark ii and was trying the 100-400 and my older sigma 150-600 but neither were clicking for me while birding. My sigma although great for the price kept focusing too slowly for the new camera and the low light performance on the 100-400 left a lot to be desired although the focus was better.
I’m hoping the new lens will bridge the gap! Got it refurbished from canon for $2500 after the loyalty discount and hoping it makes birding a breeze. I had gotten comfortable carrying the 150-600 so I don’t think the weight will bother me.
Anyone have any stories/good shots from personal use with it?

8 REPLIES 8

shadowsports
Legend
Legend

I don't have the 100~500 yet, I am actually waiting for a mkII (if it happens).  I believe this will be the last RF lens I need.  

I do have the RF100~400 and EF Sigma 600c.  The RF 100~500 is a tad shorter than the 600c.  Because its composite, it much lighter than the Sigma as well.  The Sigma has a F6.3 aperture where the 500mm is at f7.1.  Not a huge difference to most.

Animal eye tracking on the adapted Sigma is slow and there is occasional hunting.  Especially when you are shooting through reeds, bushes or branches.  It struggles a bit more in low light.  There is a slight variance between copies with some working better than others.  I do not know how Sigma's lens FW affects this performance specifically on the R6 mkII.  Mine is using v2.03, latest from 2020. 

A few of the guys here have the 100~500 and it delivers extremely sharp images.  It should work well with the R6 mkII.  If you add a 1.4x TC for added reach note the following.  You're going to lose some AF points, lose some low light performance and cannot use it below 300mm.  I do not recommend the 2.0x at all.  Just get closer if needed.

I don't shoot birds.  Mostly landscape and architecture (well , some nature).  I have a trip to Alaska planned in 2023, so my lens decision will be made early summer.  I suspect some of my shots will be from a boat, so I am going to need some reach.  I'll buy this lens if no other RF option exists.   

Not sure if the mkII is your first experience with MILC?  I held out forever and when I finally upgraded was absolutely blown away by the camera's performance.  While I had planned to use adapted lenses for a while, I noted the same performance issues you mentioned.  Not so much in photo mode, but in Cinema mode instead.  I immediately purchased 4 RF lenses.  I'm now glad I did.  Adapted Canon glass works very well on MILC body's.  3rd party can get a little sticky and most do immediately notice the difference between their DSLR's and MILC body's AF performance.  This is where RF glass shines.  I spent many years using 3rd party glass on my DSLR's with great results.  This perception has changed as of June this year (R5 C).  I have embraced Canon glass and truly appreciate the "system".  Its a package deal and solid. 

We will be interested hearing about your new lens experience and seeing some of your bird photos. 👍   

~Rick
Bay Area - CA


~R5 C (1.0.7.1) ~RF Trinity, ~RF 100 Macro, ~RF 100~400, ~RF 100~500, ~RF 200-800 +RF 1.4x TC, BG-R10, 430EX III-RT ~DxO PhotoLab Elite ~DaVinci Resolve Studio ~ImageClass MF644Cdw/MF656Cdw ~Pixel 8 ~CarePaks Are Worth It

ebiggs1
Legend
Legend

"...low light performance on the 100-400 left a lot to be desired although the focus was better."

 

I doubt you will see any improvement in low light performance since none of these have a significantly larger aperture form one to the other. I have had some friends tell me the Sigma and Tamron 150-600mm super zooms don't play well with the R series cameras. No first hand experience since I don't have an R series body.

I use the Sigma 150-600mm f/5-6.3 DG OS HSM Sports Lens on my 1DX and it works beautifully. The one complaint I do have is this is a lens Canon should have made. IMHO, they dropped the ball there. My prefered way to use it, is with Av mode where the lens is set to f8. Auto ISO (upper and lower limits set) and One shot AF. Always shooting Raw so the other settings are not important. Edit in Lightroom and/or Photoshop where exposure adjustment can be up to 4+ stops. That does make a big difference in low light conditions.

EB
EOS 1DX and 1D Mk IV and less lenses then before!

amfoto1
Authority

I don't have all those lenses (does anyone?)... But have researched them a lot.

The RF 100-500mm appears to be a fantastic lens. Premium image quality throughout the zoom range. Reasonably compact for such a powerful lens and actually lighter than the Canon EF 100-400s. There's a guy on YouTube with a "Wild Alaska" channel who has given the RF 100-500mm a real workout shooting birds and other wildlife. I recommend you check out his reviews as well as some of his "setup" videos, to get the best focus performance out of the lens. He has been using the lens on R5, R7 and R10. (Currently is experimenting with it adapted for use on a Z9! Says he's waiting for the Canon R1.)

What do you mean by "low light performance"? You don't get any larger lens aperture, so shutter speeds and background blur effects are going to be about the same. The R-series cameras are able to autofocus in much, much lower light than the DSLRs ever could, especially the more recent ones like the new R6 Mark II. The IS has improved, plus the camera helps with it's IBIS.  

Which 100-400mm did you try? The Sigma and Tamron are okay. The older Canon EF 100-400mm with the push/pull zoom is better built and has better image quality than those 3rd party lenses. The later Canon EF 100-400mm II is excellent, well built, with even better image quality and IS. Were you adapting one of those or were you trying the RF 100-400mm, which is quite small, light and surprisingly affordable... compromises on lens aperture (f/8 at 400mm) and a little bit on image quality (compared to the EF 100-400mm or RF 100-500mm). . 

The RF 100-500mm can beat all those in image quality (though an adapted EF 100-400 II comes quite close). It should give the best AF and latest IS, working in combination with the camera's IBIS. The only further "step up" is one of the super telephoto primes, like 300mm f/2.8, 400mm f/2.8, 500mm f/4 or 600mm f/4. All of those are 3X, 4X or more the price of the RF 100-500mm.

Out birding, especially with a full frame camera like the R6 Mark II, you may want to get an RF 1.4X teleconverter. That will work well on the RF 100-500mm, although it's limited to use with the lens' longer focal lengths.

Weight? The RF 100-500mm weighs 3 lb. The Tamron 150-600mm G2 w/EF to RF adapter weighs more than 4.5 lb. Even the Canon EF 100-400mm "push/pull" weighs about 3.25 lb., while the EF 100-400mm "II" comes in at about 3.5 lb. So you should be happy with the new lens!

Let us know what you think of it and the R6 Mark II, once you've had a chance to try them out.

***********


Alan Myers
San Jose, Calif., USA
"Walk softly and carry a big lens."
GEAR: 5DII, 7DII (x2), 7D(x2), EOS M5, some other cameras, various lenses & accessories
FLICKR

 

 

FloridaDrafter
Authority
Authority

@yasser732 wrote:

"Anyone have any stories/good shots from personal use with it?"


I've had the RF 100-500 for about a year now and it's impressive to say the least. Although we have the R6, it lives on the R5 and is my primary lens. TBH, we haven't seriously used it on the R6 that much, but I have done some testing and don't see why it wouldn't give great results on the R6 or R6 II. My problem with the R6 is the 20mp sensor because the majority of the birds we shoot are in the 3-6 inch size range and usually between 30-50 feet away, so I like the ability to crop in a little tighter than the R6 will allow and still have good resolution when I'm out to near 100 feet, and the R5 does that. My wife uses the RF 100-400mm on the R6, which does a good job, but she is normally closer to our primary subjects. She is usually stationary and I am a stalker.

A lot of folks make a big deal out of how dark Canon's supper tele's are, and in the DSLR world they would be correct. However, these newer MILC's are a different beast when it comes to handling higher ISO and noise in general. Canon knows this and can take advantage these f/7 - f/8 supper zooms. We shoot low light, typically forest floor under canopy, and a lot of times in brush, also early mornings and late evenings. Even our yard yard is wooded, so no break from low light when we stay home 🙂 I  just bump up the ISO in these conditions, and shoot as usual. I moved from the 5D mark IV and the 7D mark II, and although both of those cameras have excellent high ISO capabilities, The R5 & 6 are much much better and seldom do I have to apply NR in post.

I also have the RF 1.4X extender, but that is for my wife's R6 and RF 100-400. I have tested it on the 100-500, but haven't put it to a real field test, except for some shots of Jupiter and some of its moons and our moon. Jupiter isn't terribly impressive, but you can tell what it is, LOL! I can say this, both the R5 and 6 retain all but a small strip of focus points around the perimeter of the sensor when the RF 1.4X is attached to the RF 100-500. Not sure how "you loose most of your focus points" got started, but it's not true.

Sorry I don't have any examples of the RF 100-500 on the R6. These were all taken on the R5 and processed in DPP 4.

Hermit Thrush.Hermit Thrush.Northern Cardinal.Northern Cardinal.Red-bellied Woodpecker.Red-bellied Woodpecker.Ruby-throated Hummingbird.Ruby-throated Hummingbird.Swallow-tailed Kite.Swallow-tailed Kite.Jupiter and Three Galilean Moons With RF 100-500 and RF 1.4X Ex.Jupiter and Three Galilean Moons With RF 100-500 and RF 1.4X Ex.

Here are some more examples that I took within minutes of unboxing the RF 100-500mm L that I posted in the members photos section. Hope to see some of yours there soon 🙂

Newton

shadowsports
Legend
Legend

Newton,

AWESOME!

~Rick
Bay Area - CA


~R5 C (1.0.7.1) ~RF Trinity, ~RF 100 Macro, ~RF 100~400, ~RF 100~500, ~RF 200-800 +RF 1.4x TC, BG-R10, 430EX III-RT ~DxO PhotoLab Elite ~DaVinci Resolve Studio ~ImageClass MF644Cdw/MF656Cdw ~Pixel 8 ~CarePaks Are Worth It

ebiggs1
Legend
Legend

"Out birding, especially with a full frame camera like the R6 Mark II, you may want to get an RF 1.4X teleconverter."

 

On the list of bad ideas this would be near the top. For around $3000 bucks I would expect much better performance then a f11 lens that has only partially useable FL.

EB
EOS 1DX and 1D Mk IV and less lenses then before!

shadowsports
Legend
Legend

Canon just patented a 200~500mm design.  Built in 1.4x TC too.  

Canon RF 200-500mm f/4L IS 1.4x

  • Focal length: 207.0mm – 487.9mm
  • F-number: 4.1
  • Half angle of view: 5.97-2.54
  • Image Height: 21.63mm
  • Length Overall: 410.05mm
  • Back Focus: 39.998mm

If this happens, I will be stoked.  Saving my pennies now.

~Rick
Bay Area - CA


~R5 C (1.0.7.1) ~RF Trinity, ~RF 100 Macro, ~RF 100~400, ~RF 100~500, ~RF 200-800 +RF 1.4x TC, BG-R10, 430EX III-RT ~DxO PhotoLab Elite ~DaVinci Resolve Studio ~ImageClass MF644Cdw/MF656Cdw ~Pixel 8 ~CarePaks Are Worth It

ebiggs1
Legend
Legend

"If this happens, I will be stoked.  Saving my pennies now."

 

You better save a lot of'em!😁 Canon EF 200-400mm f/4L IS USM Extender 1.4x Lens = $7,500.00 for even a used copy. Ten grand new!

 

EB
EOS 1DX and 1D Mk IV and less lenses then before!
Avatar
Announcements