Weight of RF 200-800 versus RF 100-500 + 1.4x TC

[nisek]

There have been a lot of posts about the RF200-800 vs the RF100-500 and I'm not going to add to that. One just has to search to see all the prior threads and/or find YouTube video reviews. I am specifically asking if anyone who has used the RF 200-800 has opinions on the weight of it.

Option 1: RF200-800 lens only = $1,900 retail and 2,050 grams

Option 2: RF100-500 lens + 1.4 TC = $3,200 retail and 1,750 grams

(Bonus: RF 200-800 + 1.4 TC = $2,400 retail and 2,275 grams)

Obviously there's a big difference in cost between Options 1 and 2, but it's amazing that even with the TC the 100-500 is 300g less in weight. For comparison, my R8 alone is like 460g.

I'm renting the 200-800 but it wont come for another month. Last time I used the 100-500 I thought it was *so heavy* but I was still carrying on my Black Rapid strap then, and now I've moved to a monopod setup.

Obviously there are lots of other things I'm considering like max aperture at the different focal lengths, focusing speed, etc., but weight is definitely a consideration. So I'm just wondering if anyone wants to share his/her opinion. Thanks!

[March411]

One important note is the RF100-500 lens + 1.4 TC combination only works in the 300-500mm range. With the 1.4 TC the lens cannot be brought below 300mm.

[Tronhard]

Hi and welcome to the forum:

I appreciate that you have done the math on the factual stuff - that is the actual weights of the lenses.  A couple of comments I shall make before the perceived weight issue is that if you are going to compare like for like, then I would eliminate the 200-800 with the 1.4xTC: it is a different beast as regards FL, whereas the 100-500 + 1.4TC is nearer the focal range of the 200-800 on its own. It also depends on what you are going to photograph and under what conditions for both FLs and weight, or perceived weight.

Note: I say perceived weight.  The numbers speak for themselves, but what one person says is 'heavy' is another person's 'light' or 'moderate' weight.  Such opinions are of dubious use without context: that is gender, age, fitness, strength, period of carrying or hand-holding.  As such, opinions without such context are not necessarily going to be applicable to you. Certainly telling you it's light or heavy is speculation without knowing your specifics.

So, with those caveats. I shall give you both my context and opinion.   I am as close as makes no difference, to 72, male, and I have shot predominantly wildlife for over 40 years, pretty much always only hand-held for hours at a time.  I own both the RF100-500 and RF200-800, along with the Sigma EF60-600s, (with the EF-RF adapter) but don't use teleconverters - I prefer to get the right optic for the job.  In the field I don't want to be having to take off and put on a TC - it opens the camera up to environmental elements like dust, and it takes too long.  So, in fact I often take two camera bodies and lenses with me and that is not an insignificant factor.  With either one in a holster across my shoulder or hip belt and carry the other.  I shoot with the R5, R6 and R6II, all with battery grips attached.  I do weight training for general fitness, and to be assured of being able to handle these optics steadily for extended periods. 

If you go to the Share Your Photos section, you will see plenty of images I shot hand-held in available light with these, and I give the EXIF info for context . You can decide if you think the images are relevant or acceptable.

So, with all of that in mind - what do I think?  Sure, they are not 'lightweight' optics, any of them, but they are manageable for my purposes and using them hand-held I get a high percentage of sharp images: (I might add that on top of all of the previous elements, I shoot single point centre Back Button Focus, and animal face/eye tracking as appropriate).

I have no idea of your situation, but for the majority of people, I would say if they really want to photograph a set of subjects, using a specific camera and optic, then one does the necessary fitness work to be able to do so, unless one has some physical inhibitor - and being unfit is not, IMHO, one that cannot be overcome.  Using a weighty lens is an excellent inspiration for doing the light weight training to keep our muscle mass as we age and that is true for both genders.  Like any athlete, one trains for the specific demands of the activity. 

In this case weight approximating a bit more than the weight of camera and lenses doing quite a few reps - Pump Classes are a good type of exercise.   ( I used to teach and certify fitness professionals and was a rehab specialist personal trainer in Canada, so I hope I can express an opinion here), but there is lots of material on this on the web in any case.

So, there you have one opinion, FWIW...