Upgrading from RF 100-400mm for birding pics

[mandrewleif]

Hi all - first time poster here 🙂

Last year for Father's Day I purchased an R10 and the RF 100-400mm primarily for birding pictures and have loved them both!  I'm one of the many millennials who got into birding during the pandemic (it's basically real life Pokemon), and I enjoy taking pictures to being able to ID them while building up my photography chops.

Now that I've filled just over two 128GB cards, I'm ready to start saving up to invest in an upgrade to my RF 100-400mm lens.  What recommendations are out there?  I recently purchased an EF-EOS R adapter, so I'm not married to it being an RF lens.  Budget-wise, I'm comfortable saving up for awhile, so if you think the $$$ is worth it for a higher price lens I'm open to hearing your rationale.

Thanks in advance!

[ebiggs1]

Again, Trevor, you nailed the photos!

[ebiggs1]

"...but the extra reach also sounds lovely."

Maybe but maybe not and more likely maybe not. "Extra reach" can also mean farther away and farther away can introduce problems all by itself which can not be overcome by the photographer. The extra 200mm from the 200-800mm over one of the 150-600mm super zooms should be used to enlarge the bird (subject) in the frame not extend the distance. Although, I am sure you can get some minor gain there too. As distance increases resolution decreases.

[ebiggs1]

I repeat ...

"First, nobody buys a super tele zoom to shoot at 60mm or even 150mm. This is one reason I applauded Canon for making their super zoom a 200 to 80mm. A far better FL to offer in a super tele zoom."

As Trevor's photos show the shortest FL he used in the sample shots was 133mm. However, I would venture most people will have shots more toward the 600mm side then the 60mm side. Besides I suspect each photo was cropped in post editing which further affirms a longer FL where cropping is essentially the same thing. And that makes the reported FL somewhat misleading.