RF 100-500 Lens with 1.4 or 2X Extender

[waldojess]

Wondering to get either a 1.4 or a 2X extender with the Rf 100-500 lens. Two concerns, one is a lot of wildlife photography is in lower lighting conditions and the 2X drops it to 11/14. Also, was surprised to see that the extender only works 300-500mm (not 1-299mm). Anyone have any experience with this lens and extenders?

[jrhoffman75]

I’m not saying buy a prime lens. I can’t afford them either. I am saying don’t add the telextender until the zoom reaches 500mm and you still need reach. Then it doesn’t matter that it only works >300mm.

[ebiggs1]

Two lenses I do confess work well with the 1.4 tele-con is the 70-200mm f2.8L and the 300mm f4L.

[Waddizzle]

I think you would be better off with the RF 800mm prime compared to the 100-500 with a teleconverter. The prime would focus faster and more accurately. For that price I would take the f/11 fixed aperture..

With either setup, your available AF points will no longer cover edge to edge. You will probably be limited to a center AF Zone comparable in size to what you might see in a high performance DSLR.

[waldojess]

It becomes the prime vs zoom debate. When shooting wildlife, your "zoom" is moving your feet with. prime vs zoom on the camera. Many times you are too close or the subject moves. That being said, you make great points about the AF. And the price of that 800mm seems reasonable. The 2X extender is $599 and the RF800 is $899. Thinking to carry both lenses. Thank you!

[ebiggs1]

"Then it doesn’t matter that it only works >300mm."

Most zoom teles like the 100-500mil or the 150-600mm lenses are at max FL probably 75%-80% of the time anyway. If you have a program like Lightroom this can easily be checked and confirmed

[Guyster]

I have a Sigma 150-600 C hanging on an R5, and am considering the Canon RF100-500mm with a 1.4x TC for military aircraft.  I live near a training route, and distance to subject varies a lot, so a prime lens would likely result in a lot of missed shots.  Looks like this would be about $3,200 U.S. all in.  Not sure what the used market is for the Sigma. (I could sell it to soften the blow a little).  I wonder if there's an appreciable improvement in IQ or performance over the Sigma.  I don't have buyer's remorse over that lens, but it does seem to make somewhat soft images - often Topaz Labs makes a very noticeable improvement.  Still it's hard to parse how much is lens and how much me struggling to keep that much reach on a fast moving target.  Also, how do you keep from retracting the lens too far when using the TC?  Is it possible to have an element collide with the TC?

[shadowsports]

Greetings,

I own both lenses + the Sigma and Canon 1.4x TC's.  The Sigma 150-600c is a special lens.  I bought the lens and TC as a package.

The RF 100-500 is also exceptional.  I purchased the RF 1.4x TC refurb about a month ago.  I haven't used it yet.  Like Ernie said >300mm only.  Which is what you'd want anyway.  

Subject tracking using the sigma on a MILC body works pretty well adapted.  I have not tried adapted and extended.  I wouldn't bother.  Adapted is one thing, adding an extender to an adapted lens and trying to track aircraft would be more challenging.  Even on MILC.  

For this, I would recommend the RF 100-500.  First choice would be without the TC.  Try getting closer.  If it's not possible, then add the 1.4x and know you'll be challenging the lens.  I purchased the TC for stationary photos (mostly).  I'm sure others will chime in.

[Guyster]

Hey Rick, thank you for the input.  I also bought the extender, dock and lens as a package.  I tried the extender a couple of times, but as I recall, the images were really soft (on an EOS R) so I shelved it.  What's a MILC?  Going from the R to the R5 made a huge difference in the number of keepers compared to the R.  I just wonder given that hefty price tag, if the RF100-500 would offer a significant improvement over the Sigma. I'm reasonably happy with it on the R5 (adapted).

[shadowsports]

Guyster,

The center to corner sharpness on the RF100-500 is consistently better than the Sigma 150-600c.  The Sigma does offer fine detail.  In comparison, the RF 100-500 produces a razor sharp focus and level of detail slightly above the Sigma, nearly 100% of the time.  There are always going to be shooting conditions that affect IQ, lighting, distance to the subject, etc.  You can see the difference when you zoom in on the corner of an image.  The sharpness is consistent across the entire frame.

I would recommend the 100-500 over the Sigma in your case for its tracking ability.  Flying birds and aircraft specifically.  Tracking wise, the EF protocols are not quite as good for moving subjects on an adapted body.  That said, I have years of happy memories with my sigma lenses.  By the way, MILC is mirrorless interchangeable lens camera.

Another compelling reason for your upgrade.  The R5 should be getting a firmware update this summer that adds enhanced AF and subject tracking similar to the algorithms in the R62.  Pre-shooting buffer is also possible, and lens breathing correction for video.  Probably more.  It's not confirmed but I believe it's very likely.  Everyone expected it with the last update when R5 users got pixel shift.

The RF 100-500 is a perfect mate for the R5, it's ibis and lens IS.  It's existing functionality is already better than the Sigma.  I have not parted with my 150-600c or my EF 70-300 USM II. (yet). But I will. I don't do much BIF or planes.

The Canon 100-500 is lighter, slightly shorter and  doesn't require an adapter.  I've also fully embraced the RF mount.  Canon on Canon.  It was worth the additional cost for me.  

[Guyster]

Hey Rick, thanks for the information.  I was hoping that 1.8.1 would get the M6 MKII tracking, but I've read a few places that it may be coming next month or at least sometime this year.  I recently attended an airshow at March AFB and tried the tracking and it was pretty darn good...much better at holding a focus than I managed without it.  Still, in a series of shots in a single pass, some would be really good and others just a little off - like the focus was shifting just a bit...or it could be motion blur.  The RF lens sounds really good so I may try and sell my Sigma and EOS R to offset the cost.  I have a birthday in July, I'll have to start dropping hints for my wife.  😃  Thanks again, and have a great weekend!