Lens dilemma for the r5

Started 2 months ago | Discussions thread
highdesertmesa Regular Member • Posts: 236
Re: Lens dilemma for the r5

Staale wrote:

My r5 is finally on the way, but I'm getting cold feet regarding the 800mm f11. 6m minimum focusing is going to be a pain.

I had the RF 600 + 1.4x and the MFD of just under 15' was much better. But the biggest drawback to the f/11 lenses is not f/11 or the MFD, it's being limited to a small area in the center where AF works. Even with perched birds and the animal eye-AF of the R5/6, you may not be able to get the composition you want without leaving the bird in the center of the frame. This can be partially negated by shooting in crop mode all the time, where the AF area then fills the frame top to bottom, and you only lose a little bit on the left and right.

I see the 100-500 is getting decent reviews but here comes the mental block for it.

In short I'm a camera flousy. I see something shiny and iI want it. But an expensive lens... I want milage out of it

I can't think of a lens outside of it's predecessor, the 100-400 II, that you would get more mileage out of than the 100-500.

A bit of background. I started out with a Canon 40D and a Sigma 120-300 F2.8. Then I upgraded later to 5D Mark Iii.

When the GH4 came out I jumped ship. But with metabones adapter I could keep using my nice Sigma.. great. I also got a Sony a6300 and a viltrox. Works fine as well.

Back to now... Getting RF lens doesn't seem to fit my flousiness for camera models.. unfortunatly the sigma now only gives me blurry shots, must have dropped it in my sleep

Price wise.. if I can afford the RF 100-500 why not get a second hand Canon 500 F4 II. They seem to be about the same price and the benefit is that I can mount that to any camera.

The cheapest 500 f/4 II on eBay is almost double the price of the 100-500. And think about how long the 500 f/4 II will be by the time you add the 1.4x and the EF adapter to it and how it will balance on the camera. Are you ok with being limited by a monopod? The 100-500 is hand-holdable all day long.

99% of my pictures are birds and small mammals.. so 2m or further with 500mm as minimum starting point. At least with F4 I can throw on a teleconvertor and still have relatively fast movement.

Any lens suggestions or thought welcomed...

If I had the money I think the Canon 400mm F2.8 III would be my choice.

If I already had an EF big white, I'd love using it on the R5/6, but for a hobby, I can't fathom throwing that much money toward an EF lens when any day now Canon could surprise us with an RF version that will drive down the value of the EF it replaces.

Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow