Thoughts on EF 500mm F4 with Mirrorless Body

[batmn319]

I’m thinking about trying to pick up a used EF500mm F4 to use with my mirrorless bodies. 

Obviously there is a huge price difference between I and II, but I thought I’d see if there is any experience with one or both on here. 

I’ve read at least a bit about some AF challenges with the I’s on mirrorless bodies. 

Insight and experience welcomed!

[shadowsports]

Greetings,

I don't have any experience with this lens in particular.  I did see some discussion about it on CanonRumors and using in conjunction with R series body's. 

Based on my own experience, I would not recommend using the v1 (which came in 2 variants) f4.5 non-IS and f4 with IS released in 1992 and 1999 respectively.

Your best bet (chance for success) and a positive user experience would be with the mk II f4 released in 2011.

I am not saying the v1 won't work, it might.  How well??  Not sure, but it has many more hurdles to overcome.  I would not risk it personally.   

If you are going to stick with EF, other options exist.  I'd recommend an RF 100-500 over the EF 500 myself.  Check my images from Alaska if you have any doubts.   

Others can chime in.

[batmn319]

Hi Rick 

really appreciate your response…I actually have the RF100-500mm but feel like I am missing out on lens speed at the long end. 

Lower light birds are tough and I’d love a bit more depth of field. 

mike 

[FloridaDrafter]

I have no experience with the EF 500mmL, but FWIW, I shoot birds (and other subjects) quite a bit in low light, be it forest canopy/floor, underbrush, or morning and evening light, using an R5, R6 II, and the RF 100-500L. I have no problems in these conditions. I do have to run my ISO up and usually shoot at f/7.1, but focus is snappy and depending on distance, I get creamy bokeh. I have quite a few RF L lenses, and they all are pretty sharp wide open, even the non-L RF 100-400 at f/8.

This shot is probably a worse case scenario, but I personally like to show ambient lighting to give a feel of the conditions birds live in. I could have upped exposure in post, but I liked the effect. This was shot late evening just after a rain storm. 1/640, f/7.1, ISO 6400 at 70'.

Gray Catbird

Under heavy canopy - 1/640th, f/7.1, ISO 1000.

Pine Warbler

Under heavy canopy on forest floor - 1/500th, f/7.1, ISO 1600.

Phaon Crescent Butterfly

Newton

[shadowsports]

Newton,

These are lovely.   

[FloridaDrafter]

Thanks, Rick! I love the R5 and RF 100-500 combo.

Newton

[shadowsports]

Hi Mike,

I understand what you are saying.  I don't necessarily feel a Sigma or Tamron 150-600 will get you out of this given there is less than a stop of available aperture between both and the RF 100-500.  You are likely assured of faster focus and better tracking though. 

Braches and thickets can be challenging for any lens and if your background is close, you cannot get the subject isolation at f6.3 or above. 

Renting might help.  Its an ouch, but might help you decide.  I didn't see any canon refurbs in stock except for the 600mm f4 $11.7k

Where are you looking to buy?

[batmn319]

Thanks Rick. Have you used lensrental? I have a great local shop that I’ve rented from in the past but they don’t have the super telephoto primes…

[shadowsports]

Used lens rentals, I have not.  I'm sure there are folks on the community who have.  They do have a good reputation and based on what I've read stand behind the gear they rent and sell.  A local shop is always a good way to go too, especially when there's a relationship.  I'd probably rent a lens first, before buying in the $6K or above range.  I don't se myself using a lens like this enough to make purchasing it a good investment, but if these are the pics you like taking, then I'd go for it once I knew it was going to meet my needs.       

[ebiggs1]

IMHO, if you already have the RF 100-500mm forget the ef 500mm. I see no real advantage going that route and it is certainly going to be less responsive on any mirrorless camera. Its an expense that will cost more than it will benefits.