DPReview.com is closing April 10th - Find out more

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

Started Oct 16, 2020 | Discussions thread
This thread is locked.
Zeee Forum Pro • Posts: 25,627
Re: RF extender experiences with RF 100-500 1.4x vs 2.0?

frostybe3r wrote:

It's a cheap plastic, overpriced, less than adequate aperture lens it would snap in about 5 seconds out in the wilderness, the image quality is on par with the six year old EF 100-400 II, made of metal and a far better product for the price.

Do you use your lenses as baseball bats or for the optics which they were designed for.   Also at my age that one pound makes a huge difference handholding for longer period of times.

I had the 100-400 II with bit the 1.4 and 2X. Had a great 6 years but I'm glad with moving on. I don't regret my decision to go all out RF at all. I'm glad to have sold all my EF gear before the market saturates with it.

Plus that bokeh is ugh.

Sony's £1500 200-600 is a step in the right direction and I don't understand why Canon doesn't do the same, instead they release these awful RF 600/800 f11 lenses. But alas, if you feel you can't get closer to your subject, pickup the 1.4X, as you don't lose as much light nor image quality as the 2X.

Basically only use a 2X if you have to on a good quality prime.

-- hide signature --

A wonderful conclusion.

 Zeee's gear list:Zeee's gear list
Canon EOS R7 Canon EOS R6 Mark II Canon RF 24-105mm F4L IS USM Canon RF 100-500mm F4.5-7.1L IS USM +1 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow