RF extender experiences with RF 100-500 1.4x vs 2.0? Locked

highdesertmesa wrote:

frostybe3r wrote:

I'm just going to say, don't bother with an extender on a non prime lens like this, especially as the cost of the extenders are ridiculous, you're new from what it seems and despite the 1.4X not necessarily losing much clarity in general, it will due to your using a zoom and don't forget that you're going down to f10 or so at 700mm, which just by basic physics will already lessen your quality a small bit, f10 just isn't ideal for light nor shutter speed or bokeh.

This isn't a professional lens and it does focus breath so bare in mind with your 1.4X extender, it's still not 700mm.

The 100-500 absolutely is a professional ZOOM lens (maybe the best zoom Canon has ever made, right up there with the 200-400L) – what it is not is a professional "big white" PRIME. The focus breathing – doesn't matter because you're still getting 1.4x more zoom that what you had before – the 1.4x is helping regardless of what the focal length is when set to 500mm.

On the R6, the 1.4x + 100-500 for 700mm is spectacular. On the R5, it's been reported that cropping can achieve the same result. I haven't tested them on my R5/100-500 setup yet, but I plan to. What the 1.4x probably does help with is making the subject larger in the frame, and therefore the animal-eye-AF can more easily lock on to the target. I'd rather have an image with the 1.4x that was in perfect focus than shoot the bare lens and be wondering why the eye-AF won't lock on.

16,000 ISO with 100-500 and RF 1.4 @700mm. I don't think I'll be using the 1.4 much for BIF, mostly for stills. I'm waiting to see what Canon puts out with the new RF primes next year that will go nicely with that 1.4.