RF 100-500mm F4.5-7.1 L IS USM and RF extenders

Started 2 months ago | Discussions
BirdShooter7 Veteran Member • Posts: 4,271
Re: RF 100-500mm F4.5-7.1 L IS USM and RF extenders

I’m having trouble buying that but if you say so.

-- hide signature --

Some of my bird photos can be viewed here: https://www.flickr.com/photos/gregsbirds/

gimp_dad Senior Member • Posts: 1,870
Re: RF 100-500mm F4.5-7.1 L IS USM and RF extenders

BirdShooter7 wrote:

I’m having trouble buying that but if you say so.

What was your onramp to bif equipment? Did you start with a $10k lens and a $6k body the first time you went out?

BirdShooter7 Veteran Member • Posts: 4,271
Re: RF 100-500mm F4.5-7.1 L IS USM and RF extenders
1

In my experience very few people are going for the $10k lens, not just because of the cost but also the weight.  It’s why Sigma and Tamron have sold so many 150-600’s.  You get all the way to 600 and it doesn’t cost a huge amount and is still pretty manageable weight.  I think that’s the sweet spot and would have lived to see what Canon could have done with it, I’m sure it would have been excellent.  Instead we get this half-measure.

-- hide signature --

Some of my bird photos can be viewed here: https://www.flickr.com/photos/gregsbirds/

BirdShooter7 Veteran Member • Posts: 4,271
Re: RF 100-500mm F4.5-7.1 L IS USM and RF extenders
1

Actually it was a 400mm f/2.8 but that’s definitely not the norm and times have definitely changed since then.  Now you have the choices of several 150-600mm lenses, a 60-600, a 200-600 and a 200-500, all faster than this lens.  Competition in this area is pretty tight.

-- hide signature --

Some of my bird photos can be viewed here: https://www.flickr.com/photos/gregsbirds/

gimp_dad Senior Member • Posts: 1,870
Re: RF 100-500mm F4.5-7.1 L IS USM and RF extenders

BirdShooter7 wrote:

In my experience very few people are going for the $10k lens, not just because of the cost but also the weight. It’s why Sigma and Tamron have sold so many 150-600’s. You get all the way to 600 and it doesn’t cost a huge amount and is still pretty manageable weight. I think that’s the sweet spot and would have lived to see what Canon could have done with it, I’m sure it would have been excellent. Instead we get this half-measure.

I hope they build a 200-600 non L to compete with the Sigma.  I have the 150-600C but prefer the 100-400LII even with 1.4x compared to the sigma for when I really want light weight. I just realized I lent out the sigma to a friend a year ago and forgot it was gone.

The other bridge between $2.5k and $10k is the excellent EF400/4DOII. That's the tele lens I use the most and for birding I virtually always have at least my 1.4x attached as well (or sometimes 2x in bright daylight). Its a much better answer than a complex, expensive and heavy zoom which uses high end glass elements but still would end up with lower IQ IMHO.

gimp_dad Senior Member • Posts: 1,870
Re: RF 100-500mm F4.5-7.1 L IS USM and RF extenders

BirdShooter7 wrote:

Actually it was a 400mm f/2.8 but that’s definitely not the norm and times have definitely changed since then. Now you have the choices of several 150-600mm lenses, a 60-600, a 200-600 and a 200-500, all faster than this lens. Competition in this area is pretty tight.

You started at the top! I didn't go to that lens until I spent time with lighter lower cost lenses. I guess we'll  see how the new lens fares. I'm expecting it to be surprisingly good and I will definitely buy it. But while I am not expecting it to be a replacement for my DO, I expect it outperform third party lenses (even if they are theoretically brighter) by a good margin.

What I really want to see is a new light weight RF500/4L. Should be able to come in at about 5 lbs. That will be an awesome lens with the 1.4x.

BirdShooter7 Veteran Member • Posts: 4,271
Re: RF 100-500mm F4.5-7.1 L IS USM and RF extenders
1

Yes the 490 DO II is a nice enough lens but that price keeps most potential buyers away.  As nice as it is I don’t see many of them in the field and surprisingly enough most of the ones I do see are mounted on Sony A9’s!!!

-- hide signature --

Some of my bird photos can be viewed here: https://www.flickr.com/photos/gregsbirds/

BirdShooter7 Veteran Member • Posts: 4,271
Re: RF 100-500mm F4.5-7.1 L IS USM and RF extenders

Would love to see a new light 500mm f/4, I’ve been waiting a long time for it.  Hopefully we will get it soon.

I also have every expectation that this RF 100-500 will be plenty sharp.

-- hide signature --

Some of my bird photos can be viewed here: https://www.flickr.com/photos/gregsbirds/

gimp_dad Senior Member • Posts: 1,870
Re: RF 100-500mm F4.5-7.1 L IS USM and RF extenders

BirdShooter7 wrote:

Would love to see a new light 500mm f/4, I’ve been waiting a long time for it. Hopefully we will get it soon.

This is the main thing causing me to hesitate to pull the trigger on the EF600/4LIII.

I also have every expectation that this RF 100-500 will be plenty sharp.

Bhotoz Senior Member • Posts: 1,277
Re: RF 100-500mm F4.5-7.1 L IS USM and RF extenders

BirdShooter7 wrote:

Yep, I have and use the heck out of the Sigma 150-600C and it is a great lens, I even get lots of in flight shots with it. It definitely would be nice to have a Canon version with better AF and IS. Unfortunately this isn’t it and this lens suggests we won’t be seeing one any time soon.

I’m sorry that you find the Sigma difficult to hand-hold. Somehow if that’s difficult for you I would bet this lens will be too, especially considering that it’s an L lens.

-- hide signature --

Some of my bird photos can be viewed here: https://www.flickr.com/photos/gregsbirds/

Sigma C is 1.93 kg. I'd think this RF-lens is a bit lighter than that, and feel better balanced with R. I'd like to have RF 300-600mm f5-6.3 for birds. But sure R + RF 24-105L and R5 + RF 100-500L will be handy combo in many situation when out.

shawnphoto Contributing Member • Posts: 635
Re: RF 100-500mm F4.5-7.1 L IS USM and RF extenders

richardperson wrote:

I'm holding out for the RF 200-500mm f/4 with built in 1.4x tele. Come on Canon, make it happen.

Wouldn’t want to waste time with that, lol. Not when a 500 f/4 does the trick 99% of the time.

 shawnphoto's gear list:shawnphoto's gear list
Canon EOS R Canon EOS RP Canon RF 28-70mm F2L USM Canon RF 70-200mm F2.8L IS USM Canon RF 24-240mm F4-6.3 +3 more
gsmayes Regular Member • Posts: 142
Re: RF 100-500mm F4.5-7.1 L IS USM and RF extenders
2

I'm holding out for a 105-543mm f/6.7 with 1.62x built-in teleconveter and one moon dust coated element. It's the only thing that will work for my very specific genre of photography - mythical creatures.

 gsmayes's gear list:gsmayes's gear list
Canon EOS RP Canon RF 35mm F1.8 IS STM Macro Canon RF 15-35mm F2.8L IS USM Canon RF 24-70mm F2.8L IS USM Canon EOS 70D +14 more
Bhotoz Senior Member • Posts: 1,277
Re: I missed the part where Canon claimed this was a birding lens

gimp_dad wrote:

BirdShooter7 wrote:

Yes 200mm is short for soccer and that’s where the frustration comes in and all the TC’s. They get the 70-200 because they are getting blurry shots so the salesperson says they need the f/2.8 to replace their non-L 70-300. Unfortunately that is too short so they buy the 2x TC but then it’s too slow again. Then they see what your 400mm f/2.8 costs and they give up and crop the 200mm shots.

I almost never see any white lens on a soccer parent's camera and certainly not a 70-200/2.8L of any kind. For the price issue you mention they usually get a first party 70-300 or tamron 100-400. It actually works fine on a Nikon 7200 or T7 class body for entry to mid-level soccer action. Until high school and college they play in bright daylight 100% of the time. I've spent 30 years on these soccer fields up to college level but mostly competitive youth leagues. Once they are in high school the parents realize they cant really follow the action well enough anyway so they ask me to get some shots of their kids.

I've also spent quite a lot of time beside the kids' soccer fields. And I'm probably the only Canon shooter that has used white lenses? Most of them seem to use black 70-300 or maybe 18-135? My white lenses do draw attention, unfortunately.  I'm usually sitting on the ground very close, so I find 70-200 2.8 and 300 f4 IS on FF pretty good range. (400mm prime is too restricting for me.) I don't even try to shoot everything and everywhere. I'm waiting for the good moment near me.

I did buy Sigma 100-400 to get more reach & versatility for shooting soccer (& other sports, and IS + shorter mfd than 400mm f5.6L for static birds and butterflies), but I ended up using it mainly for landscapes, especially after I bought a used 300mm f4 IS + 1 4x iii... It's (Sigma) very nice landscape lens, but not the best (AF) for faster action. Haven't tried Tamron 100-400.

I have already traded my EF 70-200 2.8ii (great lens!) to RF, and cannot wait to trade my other longer / older lenses to RF 100-500 or smth with great AF and IS... Interesting to see the final "specs" of 100-500..

Pphotosweden
Pphotosweden Forum Member • Posts: 56
Re: This is ...

It's going to be interesting to see the pricing of that lens. I owned the 100-400 mark II and as long as it's enough light that lens was optically good. If this lens produce the same result at the 400 mark and it keeps the aperture at 5.6 there this could be interesting.

Of course I like more light gathering lenses, but if they would have made a 500 5.6 or as some people want 600 5.6 the pricing is going to be different, and not to be forgotten the size and weight. This

This lens is going to be for the enthusiasts, not the pros. And by the time when Canon release there they're first pro mirrorless camera R5, there probably going to be more candy on the way.

ZX11
ZX11 Veteran Member • Posts: 5,310
All internal

gsmayes wrote:

I'm holding out for a 105-543mm f/6.7 with 1.62x built-in teleconveter and one moon dust coated element. It's the only thing that will work for my very specific genre of photography - mythical creatures.

Sounds like a great lens. I need that and will wait for it instead of using the less capable RF 100-500. That is as long as it is an all internal design without a moving front element. If it is an air pump, then no sale.

In the real world, it will be nice to be able to compare the EF 100-400 with the RF 100-500 and decide which one fits my needs best for $2000-ish.  Good times.

-- hide signature --

"Very funny, Scotty! Now beam me down my clothes."
"He's dead, Jim! You grab his tri-corder. I'll get his wallet."

 ZX11's gear list:ZX11's gear list
Canon EF 50mm F1.4 USM Canon EF 85mm F1.8 USM Canon RF 24-105mm F4L IS USM
HSway
HSway Veteran Member • Posts: 3,176
Re: RF 100-500mm F4.5-7.1 L IS USM and RF extenders

Slow telephoto is defined by bokeh. These focal lengths OOF characteristics are favourable for subject isolation, the DOF appears more narrow compared to technically the same DOF of a wider lens. So that’s a foundation for the potential. And the ML wide mount brings a room for perfection the DSLR lenses have been striving for. It will be interesting to see the weight of this creature. To hit it right, it shouldn’t be too far from the 1200 g mark of the Sigma 100-400 OS C. Even then, it can be a very interesting lens. This is a new (or a type of) 100-400 in RF coat rather than a direct competitor to the faster or longer lenses.

-- hide signature --
MAC Forum Pro • Posts: 14,912
Re: RF 100-500mm F4.5-7.1 L IS USM and RF extenders

BirdShooter7 wrote:

Yep, I have and use the heck out of the Sigma 150-600C and it is a great lens, I even get lots of in flight shots with it. It definitely would be nice to have a Canon version with better AF and IS. Unfortunately this isn’t it and this lens suggests we won’t be seeing one any time soon.

I’m sorry that you find the Sigma difficult to hand-hold. Somehow if that’s difficult for you I would bet this lens will be too, especially considering that it’s an L lens.

question, couldn't this new lens be f5.6 at 400 mm

and the R 5 is at least -1ev at f7.1 making it more useable than a tele on the 100-400

 MAC's gear list:MAC's gear list
Canon EOS 6D Canon EOS Rebel SL1 Canon EOS 7D Mark II Canon EOS Rebel T7i Canon EOS RP +12 more
BirdShooter7 Veteran Member • Posts: 4,271
Re: This is ...

This is an L, RF Mount lens, you can expect it to be $2000+ at introduction.

-- hide signature --

Some of my bird photos can be viewed here: https://www.flickr.com/photos/gregsbirds/

BirdShooter7 Veteran Member • Posts: 4,271
Re: RF 100-500mm F4.5-7.1 L IS USM and RF extenders

Well given that it’s 100mm shorter and 1/3 stop slower it would be pretty embarrassing for Canon if it wasn’t lighter than the Sigma.  About balance, I guess that’s a matter of personal preference.  The balance of the Sigma on the RP feels pretty great to me.

-- hide signature --

Some of my bird photos can be viewed here: https://www.flickr.com/photos/gregsbirds/

BirdShooter7 Veteran Member • Posts: 4,271
Re: RF 100-500mm F4.5-7.1 L IS USM and RF extenders

It’s theoretically possible that it could be but I’ll be surprised if it is (f/5.6 at 400mm).

Yes it’s slightly faster than the 1.4 on the 100-400 and slightly shorter (500mm vs 560mm) so a bit of a wash.

-- hide signature --

Some of my bird photos can be viewed here: https://www.flickr.com/photos/gregsbirds/

Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads