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

Lens choice for wildlife photography with the R5

Started 9 months ago | Discussions thread
Steve Balcombe Forum Pro • Posts: 15,571
Re: Lens choice for wildlife photography with the R5
3

Canon Addicted wrote:

Hi everyone!

Enjoying an EOS R5, I have the opportunity to acquire a second hand EF 200-400 f/4 L IS USM for $5’000.

Apart from size and weight and a lesser price ($2’900), I’m wondering how the RF 100-500 would compete against that lens… What do you think?

I've known a couple of people who have used a 200-400 for wildlife. It's a nice focal range (including the 1.4x), and it has a respectable MFD which is important for some small wildlife subjects. But if you make the inevitable comparison with the EF 500/4L IS II, which is the same generation, it's somewhat heavier (though slightly smaller) and is f/4 at 400 mm vs f/4 at 500 mm. I think you would need to be very sure you need the zoom, and can handle the weight, before choosing it over the prime.

The RF 100-500 is a completely different kettle of fish. It's an eminently hand-holdable lens, and it works very well with the RF 1.4x (except that it physically limits the zoom range, as much discussed elsewhere). Image quality is very close to the big whites. The small aperture can be an issue, but it's much less of a problem with the R5, with its bright viewfinder and excellent AF even with the TC. It's a much better proposition than the EF 100-400 was on a DSLR.

I have an EF 600/4L IS III (which is also lighter than the 200-400), and an RF 100-500. Guess which one gets the most use?

Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow