Rf 100-400mm f5.6-8 + 1.4 extender

here_and_there wrote:

Try looking at this comparison charts: The-Digital-Picture.com Canon RF 100-400mm F5.6-8 IS USM Lens Image Quality

Judging from the charts above, the RF100-400 with 1.4X gives a similar IQ to the EF II with the 2X converter, which is pretty reasonable, IMO, depending on your pixel-peeping level.

Here are a few real life photos of the RF, some taken with both 1.4X or 2X extenders: Fred Miranda - Canon RF 100-400mm F5.6-8 Image Thread

I own both the RF 100-400 (but not the extender, yet) and the EF 100-400 L II (with both the 1.4X and 2X), plus the R5. Many consider the EF with 2X to be soft, but in real life usage, the IQ is pretty good.

I'm actually considering getting the RF 2X, but I need to find more real life images to evaluate before spending the $600. Since getting it, I find that the RF 100-400 is so compact and light I'm using it much more because of that, so much so that I'm considering selling the EF lens+extenders to pay for new gear.

Thanks for sharing the Digital-Picture link, I should have thought of using that myself earlier. That said, I'm shocked and amazed at how much better the EF performs compared to the RF version.

I own both also and have considered selling the EF stuff but after seeing the link, I think I'll keep both. The RF does have its advantages with the size and weight though as the EF isn't used nearly as often because of the size and weight.

I bought the RF 2x for the RF 800 as the thought of having 1600mm at my disposal seems intriguing. I doubt if I'll use the 2x with the RF 100-400 though, and using your link the 800 appears to outperform the EF with the 2x.