RP and 100-400 EF (not version II) and 2X Canon converter

jboyer wrote:

Thanks Marco.

Wisdom from Australia, as usual. Well researched and I can only agree with the proposed solution.

There is still a possibility: RF100-500 with 1.4X -- Budget is the issue and I am not sure how well the 100-400 will trade for.

I've come very close to buying the RF 100-400mmL lens more than twice.  Just be wary of the possible design 'defect' in relation to cracked lens elements for the RF 100-500mmL lens.  See the PetaPixel discussions on this problem before laying out the cash for that lens. I'm sure Canon will resolve it but it's gaining publicity at the moment for all the wrong reasons.

When fitted with the RF 24-105 L, the RP gives pictures that 'jump in your face'... The 100-400 feels 'mushy', even though sharp. These 'scientific' measures confirm your comments. Part of it is the IS, the shorter focal. But some is really that recent design and its fit to the new mount.

I've had my eye on the RF 24-105mm f/4 IS USM lens.  I still have the EF variant so I'm finding it hard not to stay sitting on the fence.

When I used the 6D, I found the 100-400 fine -- NO extender. But the percentage of use was very low: less than 10% of my pictures. Will a new longer lens change that?

On my  6D (which has the same sensor resolution as the R6), I found the Mk II lens and Mk III Extenders to produce good and pleasing results... although using extenders meant Live View only and not the OVF.  The difference in performance when using these lenses and extenders on newer cameras with DPAF sensors is almost breathtaking.

Marco, your comments and suggestions are germane and, along with the other posters to this thread, give me a good direction on where to save my money towards!

Thanks.  I was actually a little worried that my comments might have been perceived as 'negative' if they weren't what you expected to hear.  I think that there's enough information available out there now (since enough time has elapsed since the release of the new cameras, lenses and accessories) that most people can find what they need online and make a fairly informed decision as needed.  With the higher cost of modern lenses and cameras, it's getting to be a big decision when buying new equipment.  In order to buy the RF 85L lens, I had to trade in my absolutely pristine copy of the EF 85mmL II lens... which turned out to be the right decision for me since the EF lenses (even good copies) were still a little hit and miss.  The RF lens has been remarkable in never missing the target in thousands of pictures.  That's peculiar for an f/1.2 lens, it really is.  Another thing to note is that the 6D has a 100K shutter lifespan average and the R6 has a 300K average.  So for me, the migration made some sense.... I still have my 6D but the trade price for it was so low that I'd rather keep it for something risky (eg solar photography or a high dust environment event).
.
The R system is a mature one now.  I like the original R model and the RP.  The R6 (and the R5) seems to offer a bit more for people wanting even more AF speed/accuracy. I've tried about 7 different EF lenses and two RF lenses on the new R cameras and I've been really happy with the performance (though the EF 24mm f/1.4L II lens vignetted hard on my EOS Ra camera, something that Canon is at a loss to explain).