How the R5 Lightens the load for Wildlife Trips (Africa)

I did not buy into mirrorless for the small size, but the weight savings have created a much lighter pack for big wildlife trips. I was comparing what my bag would look like for my next trip to Africa vs my 2017 trip. I know I loose a bit of image quality and low light performance not carrying the big f4 glass, but my back appreciates the sacrifice. Now I just need a vaccine so I can return to Africa in 2021!

Africa in 2017 Before R5

• Gura Gear 32 L
• Canon 1dx II, Canon 5dIV
• 24-800mm f2.8 - f8
  • TC 2x III
  • 24-70 f2.8 L II
  • 100-400 f4.5-5.6 L IS II (200-400 is heavy and sometimes you need more versatility)
  • 200-400 f4 L IS w/1.4x TC
  • Macro Extension Tubes
• 36 lbs
  • Includes gear / bag pictured plus Memory cards batteries, power bank, chargers, AC adaptor plugs, filters, etc.
  • Does not include iPad or laptop (which I don’t normally take)
  • I do not take a tripod to Africa

    

Africa in 2021 After R5

• Mindshift Backlight 26 L
• R5 + grip (A), R5 (B) - when in stock, no grip
• 24-700 mm f2 - f10
  • RF 85 f2 IS
  • RF 24-105 f4 L IS
  • RF 70-200 f4 L IS (Ordered)
  • RF 100-500 f4.5 - f7.1 L IS + RF 1.4x TC when needed for 420-700
• Other Changes
  • Binoculars replaced by Leica 8x Monocular
  • Extension Tubes eliminated because of 85mm f2 Macro and close focusing RF lenses
• 20.5 lbs. (17.5 lbs pictured + Additional R5 1.62 lbs + RF 70-200 f4 L IS 1.5 lbs)
  • Empty slots in bag for second body + RF 70-200 f4 L IS
  • Weight could be reduced 1 lb eliminating 85mm f2 Macro or 2.5 lbs eliminating the 85mm and 70-200.
  • Includes same or equivalent accessory items in Before R5 configuration
  • Eliminates the need for portable luggage cart to roll the 36lb bag around the airport.

    

David M. Anglin wrote:

I did not buy into mirrorless for the small size, but the weight savings have created a much lighter pack for big wildlife trips. I was comparing what my bag would look like for my next trip to Africa vs my 2017 trip. I know I loose a bit of image quality and low light performance not carrying the big f4 glass, but my back appreciates the sacrifice. Now I just need a vaccine so I can return to Africa in 2021!

Africa in 2017 Before R5

• Gura Gear 32 L
• Canon 1dx II, Canon 5dIV
• 24-800mm f2.8 - f8
  • TC 2x III
  • 24-70 f2.8 L II
  • 100-400 f4.5-5.6 L IS II (200-400 is heavy and sometimes you need more versatility)
  • 200-400 f4 L IS w/1.4x TC
  • Macro Extension Tubes
• 36 lbs
  • Includes gear / bag pictured plus Memory cards batteries, power bank, chargers, AC adaptor plugs, filters, etc.
  • Does not include iPad or laptop (which I don’t normally take)
  • I do not take a tripod to Africa

Africa in 2021 After R5

• Mindshift Backlight 26 L
• R5 + grip (A), R5 (B) - when in stock, no grip
• 24-700 mm f2 - f10
  • RF 85 f2 IS
  • RF 24-105 f4 L IS
  • RF 70-200 f4 L IS (Ordered)
  • RF 100-500 f4.5 - f7.1 L IS + RF 1.4x TC when needed for 420-700
• Other Changes
  • Binoculars replaced by Leica 8x Monocular
  • Extension Tubes eliminated because of 85mm f2 Macro and close focusing RF lenses
• 20.5 lbs. (17.5 lbs pictured + Additional R5 1.62 lbs + RF 70-200 f4 L IS 1.5 lbs)
  • Empty slots in bag for second body + RF 70-200 f4 L IS
  • Weight could be reduced 1 lb eliminating 85mm f2 Macro or 2.5 lbs eliminating the 85mm and 70-200.
  • Includes same or equivalent accessory items in Before R5 configuration
  • Eliminates the need for portable luggage cart to roll the 36lb bag around the airport

Looks like the biggest change you did was to remove the 200-400 f4 L IS w/1.4x TC from your bag. You could have done this on your previous trips too if you were willing to sacrifice "light performance" seeing as how you already had a 100-400 f5.6. Do you feel that the 100-500 f7.1 is really that much better than the 100-400 f/5.6?  I'm asking because I was looking to get a 100-500 to replace my Tamron 150-600mm, but now I'm really on the fence as the lens has many downsides that really don't excite me, especially for the price they're asking.

Dan-Z wrote:

David M. Anglin wrote:

I did not buy into mirrorless for the small size, but the weight savings have created a much lighter pack for big wildlife trips. I was comparing what my bag would look like for my next trip to Africa vs my 2017 trip. I know I loose a bit of image quality and low light performance not carrying the big f4 glass, but my back appreciates the sacrifice. Now I just need a vaccine so I can return to Africa in 2021!

Africa in 2017 Before R5

• Gura Gear 32 L
• Canon 1dx II, Canon 5dIV
• 24-800mm f2.8 - f8
  • TC 2x III
  • 24-70 f2.8 L II
  • 100-400 f4.5-5.6 L IS II (200-400 is heavy and sometimes you need more versatility)
  • 200-400 f4 L IS w/1.4x TC
  • Macro Extension Tubes
• 36 lbs
  • Includes gear / bag pictured plus Memory cards batteries, power bank, chargers, AC adaptor plugs, filters, etc.
  • Does not include iPad or laptop (which I don’t normally take)
  • I do not take a tripod to Africa

Africa in 2021 After R5

• Mindshift Backlight 26 L
• R5 + grip (A), R5 (B) - when in stock, no grip
• 24-700 mm f2 - f10
  • RF 85 f2 IS
  • RF 24-105 f4 L IS
  • RF 70-200 f4 L IS (Ordered)
  • RF 100-500 f4.5 - f7.1 L IS + RF 1.4x TC when needed for 420-700
• Other Changes
  • Binoculars replaced by Leica 8x Monocular
  • Extension Tubes eliminated because of 85mm f2 Macro and close focusing RF lenses
• 20.5 lbs. (17.5 lbs pictured + Additional R5 1.62 lbs + RF 70-200 f4 L IS 1.5 lbs)
  • Empty slots in bag for second body + RF 70-200 f4 L IS
  • Weight could be reduced 1 lb eliminating 85mm f2 Macro or 2.5 lbs eliminating the 85mm and 70-200.
  • Includes same or equivalent accessory items in Before R5 configuration
  • Eliminates the need for portable luggage cart to roll the 36lb bag around the airport

Looks like the biggest change you did was to remove the 200-400 f4 L IS w/1.4x TC from your bag. You could have done this on your previous trips too if you were willing to sacrifice "light performance" seeing as how you already had a 100-400 f5.6. Do you feel that the 100-500 f7.1 is really that much better than the 100-400 f/5.6? I'm asking because I was looking to get a 100-500 to replace my Tamron 150-600mm, but now I'm really on the fence as the lens has many downsides that really don't excite me, especially for the price they're asking.

Leaving behind the 200-400 is only 8lbs of the weight reduction. The rest comes from the the lighter bodies, lenses, and accessories of the R system. You would have still been at 28.5lbs and that is with adding additional capability with the RF 85 f2 and the RF 70-200 f4 L IS. I put the stress on the weight loss, but it is also the improved performance and characteristics of the gear. For example, I was using the 1dx II with the heavier body, batteries, battery charger, etc. The R5 delivers all of the capabilities + of my 1dx II in a smaller, lighter body and accessories. The only real loss is the "made like a tank" body which which is not critical for me (why I carry a backup). While my 200-400 has better IQ and can reach 560 mm with TC engaged, the 100-500 can get to 500mm with almost comparable IQ (still can't match f stop). I was also able to add new capability with the capability of the 85mm f2 macro and the versatility of the 70-200 f4 L IS II while still reducing overall weight. This is not only weight lost but a balancing of lens capabilities.

As to the 100-500 vs the 100-400 II, I believe the 100-500 is as good or better than the 100-400 II. In addition, you pickup an extra high quality 100mm without having to add a TC. I find that a lot of of my shots with he 200-400 were in the 400-500 mm range with the TC engaged. The 100-500 + 1.4x TC takes you to 420-700mm and seems to have IQ as good or better than the 200-400 using a 2x external TC for 400-800 @f8

The only real companies is it would be nice if the lens were a bit faster on the long end and you were limited to 420mm-700 when using the 1.4x TC - can't zoom below 420.

David

I would think twice about 200-400, you are loosing over one stop on long end, also less DOF control, background blur on safaris are sometimes really important to separate animal from background.

Also on safaris you are on vehicle so not to much to cary around. I would always bring longest fastest lens I have to safari.

Some of my images from first safari in Masai Mara:

https://www.kristiansekulic.com/masai-mara-2019

All the best

Kristian

kristian1 wrote:

I would think twice about 200-400, you are loosing over one stop on long end, also less DOF control, background blur on safaris are sometimes really important to separate animal from background.

Also on safaris you are on vehicle so not to much to cary around. I would always bring longest fastest lens I have to safari.

Some of my images from first safari in Masai Mara:

https://www.kristiansekulic.com/masai-mara-2019

All the best

Kristian

Beautiful shots.  Love the lens and feel it is the most versatile wildlife lens on the planet but got tired of the weight.  I will buy back in if they do an RF version with the big white weight reduction program to the 6lb range ( like EF III’s).  I sold my 200-400, but can always rent.

kristian1 wrote:

I would think twice about 200-400, you are loosing over one stop on long end, also less DOF control, background blur on safaris are sometimes really important to separate animal from background.

Also on safaris you are on vehicle so not to much to cary around. I would always bring longest fastest lens I have to safari.

Some of my images from first safari in Masai Mara:

https://www.kristiansekulic.com/masai-mara-2019

All the best

Kristian

Really amazing images!  Love these.  May I ask, since we are on a gear-related site, what gear specifically cameras/lenses you used?  I didn't see a way to view EXIF data on the images.

kristian1 wrote:

I would think twice about 200-400, you are loosing over one stop on long end, also less DOF control, background blur on safaris are sometimes really important to separate animal from background.

Also on safaris you are on vehicle so not to much to cary around. I would always bring longest fastest lens I have to safari.

Some of my images from first safari in Masai Mara:

https://www.kristiansekulic.com/masai-mara-2019

All the best

Kristian

Wow, those are some beautiful shots!

David M. Anglin wrote:

kristian1 wrote:

I would think twice about 200-400, you are loosing over one stop on long end, also less DOF control, background blur on safaris are sometimes really important to separate animal from background.

Also on safaris you are on vehicle so not to much to cary around. I would always bring longest fastest lens I have to safari.

Some of my images from first safari in Masai Mara:

https://www.kristiansekulic.com/masai-mara-2019

All the best

Kristian

Beautiful shots. Love the lens and feel it is the most versatile wildlife lens on the planet but got tired of the weight. I will buy back in if they do an RF version with the big white weight reduction program to the 6lb range ( like EF III’s). I sold my 200-400, but can always rent.

Thanks David, I am sure you will get great shots with 100-500, for sure it will be much lighter and easier to carry and use.

All the best

Kristian

MikeB_2018 wrote:

kristian1 wrote:

I would think twice about 200-400, you are loosing over one stop on long end, also less DOF control, background blur on safaris are sometimes really important to separate animal from background.

Also on safaris you are on vehicle so not to much to cary around. I would always bring longest fastest lens I have to safari.

Some of my images from first safari in Masai Mara:

https://www.kristiansekulic.com/masai-mara-2019

All the best

Kristian

Really amazing images! Love these. May I ask, since we are on a gear-related site, what gear specifically cameras/lenses you used? I didn't see a way to view EXIF data on the images.

Thanks Mike, I am glad you liked them, this images are mostly done with Canom 1dx2 and Canon 500mm f4 II , some are used with 1.4tc and in rare cases I used 2.0tc.

Also I had with me 5d4 and 70-200mm f4. but didn't use it as much.

All the best

Kristian

Dan-Z wrote:

kristian1 wrote:

I would think twice about 200-400, you are loosing over one stop on long end, also less DOF control, background blur on safaris are sometimes really important to separate animal from background.

Also on safaris you are on vehicle so not to much to cary around. I would always bring longest fastest lens I have to safari.

Some of my images from first safari in Masai Mara:

https://www.kristiansekulic.com/masai-mara-2019

All the best

Kristian

Wow, those are some beautiful shots!

Thank you Dan for kind comment

All the best

Kristian

kristian1 wrote:

MikeB_2018 wrote:

kristian1 wrote:

I would think twice about 200-400, you are loosing over one stop on long end, also less DOF control, background blur on safaris are sometimes really important to separate animal from background.

Also on safaris you are on vehicle so not to much to cary around. I would always bring longest fastest lens I have to safari.

Some of my images from first safari in Masai Mara:

https://www.kristiansekulic.com/masai-mara-2019

All the best

Kristian

Really amazing images! Love these. May I ask, since we are on a gear-related site, what gear specifically cameras/lenses you used? I didn't see a way to view EXIF data on the images.

Thanks Mike, I am glad you liked them, this images are mostly done with Canom 1dx2 and Canon 500mm f4 II , some are used with 1.4tc and in rare cases I used 2.0tc.

Also I had with me 5d4 and 70-200mm f4. but didn't use it as much.

All the best

Kristian

Kristian,

Thank you.  Wonderful and truly stunning images.  Thank you for sharing your images as well as some of the info on gear.

I hope to go on safari in Africa one day.  Your images are certainly an inspiration to go.

A small packing tip concerning the very bulky RF70-200 and RF100-500 lens hoods! Both lenses share the same hood! You need to carry only one! Secondly with only minimal less prtection you can mount the RF50/1.2 lens hood ES-83.  I checkted it for vignetting and protection and there is no risc involved.

Franz Kerschbaum wrote:

A small packing tip concerning the very bulky RF70-200 and RF100-500 lens hoods! Both lenses share the same hood! You need to carry only one! Secondly with only minimal less prtection you can mount the RF50/1.2 lens hood ES-83. I checkted it for vignetting and protection and there is no risc involved.

I have a pre-order in for the new Rf 70-200 f4 L IS, so I am not sure if it shares the same hood with the 100-500.  I was debating the RF 70-200 f2.8 L IS, but opted for the f4 version due to size and weight.  I may have to give it some more thought since it would save room to share the hoods.

Thanks for the information.

kristian1 wrote:

MikeB_2018 wrote:

kristian1 wrote:

I would think twice about 200-400, you are loosing over one stop on long end, also less DOF control, background blur on safaris are sometimes really important to separate animal from background.

Also on safaris you are on vehicle so not to much to cary around. I would always bring longest fastest lens I have to safari.

Some of my images from first safari in Masai Mara:

https://www.kristiansekulic.com/masai-mara-2019

All the best

Kristian

Really amazing images! Love these. May I ask, since we are on a gear-related site, what gear specifically cameras/lenses you used? I didn't see a way to view EXIF data on the images.

Thanks Mike, I am glad you liked them, this images are mostly done with Canom 1dx2 and Canon 500mm f4 II , some are used with 1.4tc and in rare cases I used 2.0tc.

Also I had with me 5d4 and 70-200mm f4. but didn't use it as much.

All the best

Kristian

I prefer the versatility of zooms, but the  500 f4 II is my favorite big white prime.  I have shot it quite a bit over the years with great results.  Enough reach to be useful and works great with the 1.4x & 2x III.  If they can get a 600 III to 6.7lbs, I hope they can take the RF 500 close to 6lbs.  I also wonder how much empty space there is in the 500 and if we may see a telescoping design like the 600 & 800 DO.  If they don't do a lighter RF equivalent of the 200-400 f4, the RF 500 may be in my bag.

Spectacular images!

Some of my images from first safari in Masai Mara:

https://www.kristiansekulic.com/masai-mara-2019

Wow!! Just Wow!! Those are some fantastic images. Seeing them makes me want to visit Africa even more. It's certainly a bucket list destination for me.

... I have a similar situation with the change of lenses overthe years now getting older. My 300/2.8 and 500/4 also stay more at home with the two great RF telezooms zooms and the 1,4x extender.

Franz Kerschbaum wrote:

... I have a similar situation with the change of lenses overthe years now getting older. My 300/2.8 and 500/4 also stay more at home with the two great RF telezooms zooms and the 1,4x extender.

I am a very healthy, still reasonably strong 68 but the bag gets heavier every year. I know a couple of top pros that would never have considered using anything other than big glass that are using the zooms more often as they age.

It sometimes just comes down to not wanting lug around a lot of gear and focus on enjoying the moment for me. That doesn't mean I don't want to capture good images.

David

I’m supposed to be in Botswana right now, but now going November of 2021. Was waiting since February for this trip, now have to wait another year.

The R5 really isn’t going to change my bag, may actually make it a little heavier since I may take three bodies now.

R5 and grip up top 1DX2 and 600/4 100/400 and 24-70 F4. Will throw in the 1.4 and 2x tc’s also. Could fit the 5dsr in there also.

Not sure how much it weighs, this has been my carryon set up for awhile now except the R5 that’s replacing the 5dsr.