RF 100-500 where are the doubters now?

Started 1 month ago | Discussions thread
Bhotoz Senior Member • Posts: 1,432
Re: those grapes... came with a caveat

David M. Anglin wrote:

Marco Nero wrote:

panther fan wrote:

BirdShooter7 wrote:

How often are you really going to use the TC?

Well if you don't the discussion is pretty meaningless for you

Caveat: "...a warning or proviso of specific stipulations, conditions, or limitations."
.
If I'm shooting surfers on a beach with any of my DSLRs or mirrorless cameras, I simply won't change the lens. It's not worth the risk of what salt-laden air can do to the interior of a camera. Not to mention the damage sand will do if merely a few grains of sand are blown into the mount aperture. If I'm in the mountains and there's mixed weather or high wind, it's not worth the trouble there either. So I'll squeeze my gear into my Lowepro backpack and move on when I'm done. Imagine being forced to remove the Extender just to be able to collapse the lens so you can get it into your backpack? Canon could have designed around this but chose not to. I'm not going to justify their logic here. I'm sure they had great reasons to let the 'tail wag the dog'.
.

Canon's EF Mk III Extenders

.
The way I see it, the new RF 100-500mmL lens was very exciting when previewed/leaked and even when it was announced. But very little attention has been focused on this lens at the announcement party. We know that the EF version works beautifully on the R system. Image quality remains unaffected. Now that we look closer, we can see that there's a caveat attached to this new gear: Canon released a matching set of RF Extenders, just as they did with the EF 100-400mmL II lens. But you can't collapse the new RF 100-500mm lens with an Extender on it because... reasons. This isn't ideal. It's not an improved design with this flaw and the focal length of 1000mm (R+RF500mmx2) is outmatched for reach alone by an APS-C camera with 1280mm equiv (APS-C+EF400mmx2).
.
Has anyone looked closer at the new RF 800mm lenses? You end up with f/22 with a 2x Extender attached... I'm not kidding: F/22. Sure, you get 1600mm but at f/22. But don't worry, the new R5 + R6 can handle it with "less noise" and therefore higher ISO. DPAF II allows for considerably less noise than DPAF 1. And that's nice.
.
The bottom line for me is that I expected much more from Canon with the RF 100-500mmL lens. I'm sure it will take great pictures all by itself without any extenders. I was quite keen to consider this new RF lens. I'll be interested in reading what people make of it when it's in the hands of the public. The Demo/Sample models of this lens... were pre-production models. For some reason, Canon were unable to supply any functional versions for the reviewers I spoke with. How interesting?\.

I am not a big birder, but for almost everything I have shot in North America and Africa I can't think of many images I would want to shoot at more than 800mm. At those distances and magnifications, atmospherics can degrade the image and poor lighting make the images worthless. You might make the shot at more than 800mm, but I am not sure of the quality unless you are using one of the Big Whites. While the f2.8 & f4 primes take a 2x extender pretty well, the only other lens I have liked with that combination is the 70-200 f2.8 L IS II. I ordered the 800mm f11 to play with but have no intention of using it with a TC. I did buy the TC for use with the 100-500 on Africa trips if I done want to take one of the f4's. The 800mm will be returned if I don't like the IQ.

David

Cannot wait to see the images from 800mm f11 and hear how AF works...

Post (hide subjects) Posted by
jnd
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow