Canon RF 100-500mm f/4.5-7.1 as an upgrade to 70-200mm f/2.8 for sports?

Tazz93 wrote:

I can't see the 100-500 being worthwhile indoors for action. ISO 12,000 and higher just seems counter productive.

It does, doesn't it? I was thinking about those close ups of the reactions I am missing, but other than that, every post or video on sports photography calls the 70-200 the most versatile, and isn't that the truth?

However, outdoors, I think it could work for you. Honestly, I would suggest continuing to put a band aid on it until Canon filled out their RF line up.

What would you see as an improvement on the current 100-500 offering in the same price range? Sure, they can make it 1/2 to a full stop faster, but at what cost? $5K? $7K? They keep filling out their line up with beautiful lenses that are all $$$.

An EF 70-200 with a 2x would likely be my tool of choice. Which is very close in performance to the 100-400 II, which is close to the 100-500L. That way you can remove the 2x and shoot indoors or put it on and shoot at 400mm outdoors at 5.6.

If reach is a problem, I'd stay away from the RF 70-200's none of them can take an extender at all.

Right. I was looking at the RF 70-200 to continue doing what I do with EF 70-200, no extenders, but with three areas of improvement:

1. Lighter and smaller

2. Sharper throughout the frame -- there is a well documented post about this, forget whether it's here, on YouTube or FStoppers.

3. True 12/20 fps. I wrote about how slowly (in terms of fps) my adapted EF 70-200 seems to be performing.

4. Control ring. Certainly not a crucial factor, so I did not even count it. And frankly neither is the sharpness around the edges for sports photography. So 3 and 4 are each half a reason as I keep looking for reasons to do it.

While I think the improvements would be real, are they worth the extra $1700? That's my estimated difference between what I can sell the EF 70-200 for and the new RF. While I was pondering this question (and leaning towards a 'no'), the option of the 100-500 came to the forefront. Sure, it's a more expensive overall proposition, but it's a chance to own two great lenses that only partially overlap in use cases.