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

RF 100-500mm Lens Components Floating?

hoot24
Contributor

So I finally received the new Canon RF 100-500mm F4.5-7.1 L IS USM lens. Took it for a test run and shot about 40 photos. Everything seemed good. Purchased a clear lens filter and installed it. During installation of the filter, I noticed inside the lens that the components seemed to be floating and rattling around. Not just a little bit, like 1/4" or more, while the lens was off the camera. Re-installed the lens on the camera (EOS-R) and attempted to "re-park" the IS, but nothing seemed to change after I took the lens off. The same interior movement with the insides banging around. Is this normal? I can't imaging this is good for wear and tear on the lens. The insides will be banging around just while walking down the street. Anyone else notice this? Or is my lens defective? Just never had this happen before with a lens. Thanks.

31 REPLIES 31

Although it is not free you can buy the Canon care package if you are worried about it.  I personally would not worry about it at all but I would not abuse the lens either. The only time you need to take caution is when it is turned off or not mounted on a camera.

 

BTW, this lens doesn't interest me in the slightest so I don't have one to speak of personally. For $2500 bucks I expect something a bit faster than an nearly f8 open aperture.

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

It's great that Canon is making so many different lenses so people can pick and choose based on what is important to them.  I'm guessing it's the biggest reason why so many stick with Canon.

 

That said, I can tell you that this lens "feels" faster than you might expect for the aperature.   And of course it's great for portability, hiking, travel, etc.   If there was another version that was faster - but equally larger - I'd probably stick with this (for my needs anyway).

shellbo6901
Enthusiast
LOL I know that, but I want someone to actually move it not just stick it on a tripod. However, the canon contact I spoke to about it yesterday mentioned it could be that the stabilizer was on and to turn it off. So for the same of when it’s being lugged around and moved I’m gonna see if that does make it stop. Just for such a heavy camera when I paid attention to the fact that it moves, my first thought was “why don’t they have it built so it is locked in place when not in use”, which is a legitimate question. I ordered it through Amazon so I wasn’t just gonna trust only one persons answer on it. I have the 4 year carepak. As much as I want that to be the best option for an extended warranty and such I’ve heard “horror” stories, and of course read the fine print lol

shellbo6901
Enthusiast
Ebiggs1: long story short fortunately I only paid around $1500 for it(just had to wait for it to be in stock on Amazon to reap the benefit) but it still should be built to last for the long haul. If a camera has a shutter count and is of course tested for that, I would hope that canon also spent plenty of time making sure that it moving inside won’t cause harm with everyday use. Otherwise I would hope they wouldn’t put out an L series lens with something bad happening inside just by moving/carrying it. Gonna check to see if turning the stabilizer off helps but probably not.

I had a Zoom call with a rep from B&H Photo about a month ago.  He had this exact lens in hand and was able to see exactly what we are talking about here.  He assured me that this was normal for this newly designed lens (according to Canon).  He also indicated that I could certianly return the lens if I was not satisfied with it.  But I was hesitant to return this lens thinking it would months before I could get another copy.  So, like the story goes..... I am just going to wait and see how this lens performs before the end of the warranty period.  Ands so far, so good.  This lens continues to be sharp.  Fingers crossed!  

"I would hope that canon also spent plenty of time making sure that it moving inside won’t cause harm with everyday use."

 

Just use it and don't worry about it. I have no doubt in my mind it is OK. It's probably not a lens, even though its an "L", that many pros will choose. Just enjoy it.

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

shellbo6901
Enthusiast
It seem like the RF line loves to have mostly L lenses while keeping non L just to keep the RP users happy too. I just had double and triple check to make sure it wasn’t just me

I too purchased the RF 100-500mm lens from Amazon a couple of moths ago, but did not have the time to test it at the local sled dog races in the interior of Alaska.  I finally mounted the lens on my R6 last week and spent a couple of hours outdoors photographing the mushers and dogs.  The ambient temperature was around 2 degrees F.

 

I havent' experinced the problems mentioned above with this lens, but so far I am am not impressed by it, and feel that instead of this lens I should have purchased the EF 100-400mm L (version II) plus a 1.4x extender, simply because this lens has been proven as a workhorse.  RF lenses with IS plus IBIS working together are supposed to be superior to EF with IS and IBIS.  But is this true in real life situations?  

 

Since I am not en expert, all I can do is to tell you how the RF 100-500 lens performed for me at the sled dog races compared to the EF 135mm L USM (this lens does not have IS).  The R6's image stabilization was turned on, and so auto ISO. I left the lens aperture to its default. I zommed the lens to 200mm, all the way to 500mm depending on the shot I was taking at the moment.  The ISO chosen by the R6 was 100, and the shutter speed remained around 400s all the way through.

 

Yes, I could have changed the shutter speed to 500s or even 800s, but I wanted to test the lens alllowing the R6 to do its work automatically on Av mode.  When looking at the RAW images at home, they were not as sharp as I expected from a L lens.  These images look soft to me, specially the dogs eyes (I set the R6 for animals, eyes focus, and to track the lead dogs).

-------

The second day of the races I decided to used my trusted EF 135mm f/2 L "adapted" to the R6 (remember, not IS on this les).  I set the aperture to f/6.5, and preceeded to shootway.  The shutter speed stayed around 500s thoughout, and the images are quite sharp compared to the ones above (some cropped to 400%).  I can only assume that they are sharper because of the faster shutter speed (?).  Camera was handheld.

 

I will continue testing the 100-500mm lens, but I already know that I am not using it to photograph the sled dog races in the interior of Alaska. For this I will continue using my very of and reliable EF 200mm f/2.8 L (black color with a red ring at the front and no IS), and the 135 f/2 L.  The images resulting from my 7D and these two lenses can be cropped over 300% and still look very sharp. Not so the photos I just took usig the RF 100-500. In fact, 100% crop was not good enough for me. 

 

I will return to post some photos in the near future.

 

By the way, I have already registered both the R6 and the RF 100-500mm lens, but they still don't show in my list of Canon products I own.

------------

 

Edited on March 09, 2021

 

I had to come back and edit as a token of apology to all who have read my coments about my first impressions of the canon RF 100-500mm.  

 

My apology is as folllows:  The main problem relating to the performance of this lens relates to user error, not the lens itself.  in this case I forgot to switch the lens IS from the number 1 position (stationaty subjects) to number 2 (moving subjects), so only IBISn was active when I was photgraphing the sled dog races.  The lens performe quite well when zoomed to perhaps 200-250mm, and not as well when zoomed past that because its aperture was then greatly reduced to perhaps f/7.

 

I have a lot of testing to do in the near future, but at least the lens operation in relatively cold weather for a period of two or three hours went well.  The ambient temperature was from just below zero F. to perhaps a maximum of 10 degrees F. 

" I should have purchased the EF 100-400mm L (version II) plus a 1.4x extender, ..."

 

I agree with you on this. The 100-500mm zoom is a lens I would never consider.

 

"The R6's ..., and so auto ISO."

 

This is also something I would never do.  I never let the camera have control over two auto selections. Av mode and a fixed ISO, IMHO, would have been much better. Letting the R6 have the SS.

 

 

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

I have gotten used to Av mode.

In relation to the RF 100-500mm lens, while my initial impressions of it were not positive, I am certain that I will change my mind as I practice and learn to use it. After all, i just purchased the lens before the race and didn't have the time to test it.

 

Announcements