R5/R7 and RF100-500mm thoughts for those who use both

tsinvest wrote:

RDM5546 wrote:

tsinvest wrote:

Emile15 wrote:

I have too, but the jury is still out on this one in that I am not sure yet whether the combo with the R5 gives me a higher hit rate.

It's funny, I don't favor either one and I always feel I will get similar results with each. It looks like perhaps you may be in agreement with this.

I have both. I get similar results for sure. The R7 weighs less and has newer autofocus EV behavior like the R3. I use the R7 with the RF100-500 but more often with the RF100-400 & the 1.4X TC. I like low weight for cases when there is lots of light the R7 and RF100-400 X1.4 is lighter, easier to swing in heavy action and does a great job. The R7 1.6 crop sensor reach can be precious some times,

Does this mean FF is dead and do not like the R5. No. Not at all. I am keeping them both for what they are slightly better at. Low light and bokeh is for the R5. I would prefer the R5 with big aperture RF glass (50f1.2, 135f1.9, 15-35f2.8, 24-70 f2.8 and 70-200f2.8) for indoor sport in low lit gyms.

I value having the right tool for right job.

I agree with you, less weight is always a plus. I may buy the 1.4 extender as you mentioned and give it a try. I've never used extenders and it may be about time I try. Thanks for your comments 🙂

The 1.4X works very well with almost degradation from the extra glass.    The 2X pleases me when it is needed.  I particularly like full 4X zoom when using TCs rather the reduced zoom range of 300-500 when using the 100-500mm.   You need the right for the right job.  The 100-400 is both less weight and less bulk even when the 1.4X is used.