How the R5 Lightens the load for Wildlife Trips (Africa)

David M. Anglin wrote:

I did not buy into mirrorless for the small size, but the weight savings have created a much lighter pack for big wildlife trips. I was comparing what my bag would look like for my next trip to Africa vs my 2017 trip. I know I loose a bit of image quality and low light performance not carrying the big f4 glass, but my back appreciates the sacrifice. Now I just need a vaccine so I can return to Africa in 2021!

Africa in 2017 Before R5

• Gura Gear 32 L
• Canon 1dx II, Canon 5dIV
• 24-800mm f2.8 - f8
  • TC 2x III
  • 24-70 f2.8 L II
  • 100-400 f4.5-5.6 L IS II (200-400 is heavy and sometimes you need more versatility)
  • 200-400 f4 L IS w/1.4x TC
  • Macro Extension Tubes
• 36 lbs
  • Includes gear / bag pictured plus Memory cards batteries, power bank, chargers, AC adaptor plugs, filters, etc.
  • Does not include iPad or laptop (which I don’t normally take)
  • I do not take a tripod to Africa

Africa in 2021 After R5

• Mindshift Backlight 26 L
• R5 + grip (A), R5 (B) - when in stock, no grip
• 24-700 mm f2 - f10
  • RF 85 f2 IS
  • RF 24-105 f4 L IS
  • RF 70-200 f4 L IS (Ordered)
  • RF 100-500 f4.5 - f7.1 L IS + RF 1.4x TC when needed for 420-700
• Other Changes
  • Binoculars replaced by Leica 8x Monocular
  • Extension Tubes eliminated because of 85mm f2 Macro and close focusing RF lenses
• 20.5 lbs. (17.5 lbs pictured + Additional R5 1.62 lbs + RF 70-200 f4 L IS 1.5 lbs)
  • Empty slots in bag for second body + RF 70-200 f4 L IS
  • Weight could be reduced 1 lb eliminating 85mm f2 Macro or 2.5 lbs eliminating the 85mm and 70-200.
  • Includes same or equivalent accessory items in Before R5 configuration
  • Eliminates the need for portable luggage cart to roll the 36lb bag around the airport

Looks like the biggest change you did was to remove the 200-400 f4 L IS w/1.4x TC from your bag. You could have done this on your previous trips too if you were willing to sacrifice "light performance" seeing as how you already had a 100-400 f5.6. Do you feel that the 100-500 f7.1 is really that much better than the 100-400 f/5.6?  I'm asking because I was looking to get a 100-500 to replace my Tamron 150-600mm, but now I'm really on the fence as the lens has many downsides that really don't excite me, especially for the price they're asking.