Thoughts on RF 100-400mm

[boyl99]

As a broke teenage photographer it’s hard to find gear in any hobby space, so I was kinda surprised when I saw a Canon RF 100-400mm lens for 750 on their site. Is it actually worth it? I’m

Currently learning wildlife u but needed a lens with a longer reach.

[deebatman316]

What camera are you using the lens on. DSLR cameras are NOT COMPATIBLE with RF Mount lenses. So you’ll need to look into the EF Mount counterpart. Which there happens to be an EF Mount counterpart of that lens.

[ebiggs1]

"...  learning wildlife u but needed a lens with a longer reach."

Of course depending on what the word "wildlife" means and what camera model you are using but 400mm is not a lot of telephoto. You will be at that long end way more than the 100mm end. 400mm is just not a lot of FL for much wildlife photography. I put it as the minimum FL required. However, any lens you have is better than any lens you wish you had.

[March411]

Hey boyl99, welcome to the site.

First deebatman316 post is important, the lens you are looking at is for R series mirror less bodies only. If you have an R body the lens you are wanting feedback on, great lens for the price point. Are you shooting FF or APS-C?

If you do a little research I believe you will find many enthusiasts and professionals using the RF 100-400 for wildlife. I personally own one and love it for travel and wildlife. I can mount it on my R3 and it's still an easy all day carry, on my R50 it's hard to know I are carrying something. I use it across several different bodies but on an APS-C it really shines. It will struggle a bit in low light as it is a little slow at f5.6 to f8 but the good news is the IS allows you to lower you shutter speed on static subjects without pushing the ISO. With good light the AF is fast and the IQ is pretty darn nice for a lens at this price point.

Here's a link on the same subject from a couple weeks ago. I think you will find the OP was pleased with his purchase with a focus on wildlife.  Thoughts-on-RF-100-400mm-F5-6-8-IS-USM 

Here are a couple of images with the RF100-400 mounted on the R6 MkII. The Ibis was shot very low light, high ISO and PS Camera Raw was used to knock down the noise.

[justadude]

I've had this lens for a couple of weeks now.  It is good for wildlife, if you are fairly close.  I don't mean right next to it, but if you have birds in a tree in your yard for example, it will do perfectly fine... but if they are flying through the air, it will be tougher (unless they are close).  Same if you are out in a field and you see some deer.  If they are way on the far side of the field, forget it.  If they are 100 years away, this lens will be perfect.

I went out to the lakeshore yesterday to try this lens out on static objects.  It pulls things in much closer than my 70-200mm lens (as expected) but actually even closer than I expected.  

Marc gave you some sample images of wildlife.  I'll give you an idea on how this also works well on landscapes.  The dunes were with the lens set at 100mm, the lighthouses at 325mm, and the pier with the white and green channel marker was at 400mm.  I think it is a great lens for the price.  Actually, it's quite a bit better than the price suggests.

[March411]

All beautiful shots Gary, the color really pops with the contrast against the snow and ice.I like the picture of the Dunes, I always get to see them in the spring and summer. They look cool with the snow.

Also a good overview of the abilities of this lens. A steal at it's current price point. It will be interesting to see how it performs on the R7 MkII when it finally gets released.

[justadude]

Thank you, Marc!  I prefer being at the dunes in spring and summer - but winters are beautiful on the shoreline.  This time of year with that cold air that crosses 50 miles of open water, on one of the coldest and windiest days of the year, then hits you in the face… well, let’s just say I only lasted two hours out there, and felt like a human popsicle.  😅

[March411]

Agreed on the preference of spring and summer.

I'm on the other side of you and any time that wind comes across the lake to Chicago during the winter it's brutal. You're a better man than I am because two hours out there is 1 hour and 45 minutes to long. Supposed to be -32 here tomorrow with the wind chill. 😲

[justadude]

Wind chill here today at the lake is much warmer than Chicago.  Today we are at a balmy -1 (wind chill is -23), which comparatively to where you live is tropical.  🏝🌞

Tomorrow is expected to be colder, and like today I'll be at home.  I may brave the cold on days when the wind chill is just a couple degrees below zero, but I'm not crazy lol. The day I took these the temperature was 14, and wind chill was only -5, so it wasn't too bad.