Canon EOS R5 with Canon RF 100-500mm F4.5-7.1 L is USM Super-Telephoto Lens

I just got my R5, and shooting with an Adapter + EF100-400L-2 lens, which works quite well, but I'll be "going for" an RF 100-500L, which appear to be scarce in the US currently.

Coming from a 20MP 7D-2, the R5's FF sensor, even in 17MP 1.6 Crop Mode has somewhat less resolution, so getting an additional 100mm, without a TC, or Adapter "is the ticket" for me.

Birder Paul wrote:

Hello all,

Thinking of upgrading and wondering if I should invest more in this combination for primarily bird photography...I've seen great images from other folks and wonder if you use this, what you think of it, and whether you use a t/e.

Do I make the switch or save my money and stick to Canon 90D with a Sigma Contemporary 150-600mm?

Thanks for any input.

I upgraded from 5D IV and Sigma 150-600C to R5 and RF 100-500 and RF 1.4x, as well as RF 800.

For birding in particular, I think the upgrade will improve in just about every way. My 5D IV and Sigma combo provided me very satisfactory results, but I went for the R5 due to greater crop-ability of 45MP sensor, Eye-AF and tracking, 12/20 fps, IBIS, etc.

While the Sigma yielded tack sharp images, I also wanted lighter in every part of my gear, including lenses. I found the RF 100-500 to be even sharper than the Sigma, and there was no discernable IQ loss by stacking the RF 1.4x to it. Because of the way Canon has designed the lens and the extender, it's rather awkward to attach the two (you have to extend the barrel, otherwise the 1.4x would not attach, and once the 1.4x is attached, you're only good from 420mm to 700mm, unlike the EF counterpart). Since I'm always at the long end, anyway, the lens and the extender are always attached together, so no hassle of detaching them. Even with the extender attached, you can attain the focus from a relatively close range, I found, so all the more reason to have the combo at ready at all times.

SSO Photography wrote:

Birder Paul wrote:

Hello all,

Thinking of upgrading and wondering if I should invest more in this combination for primarily bird photography...I've seen great images from other folks and wonder if you use this, what you think of it, and whether you use a t/e.

Do I make the switch or save my money and stick to Canon 90D with a Sigma Contemporary 150-600mm?

Thanks for any input.

I upgraded from 5D IV and Sigma 150-600C to R5 and RF 100-500 and RF 1.4x, as well as RF 800.

For birding in particular, I think the upgrade will improve in just about every way. My 5D IV and Sigma combo provided me very satisfactory results, but I went for the R5 due to greater crop-ability of 45MP sensor, Eye-AF and tracking, 12/20 fps, IBIS, etc.

While the Sigma yielded tack sharp images, I also wanted lighter in every part of my gear, including lenses. I found the RF 100-500 to be even sharper than the Sigma, and there was no discernable IQ loss by stacking the RF 1.4x to it. Because of the way Canon has designed the lens and the extender, it's rather awkward to attach the two (you have to extend the barrel, otherwise the 1.4x would not attach, and once the 1.4x is attached, you're only good from 420mm to 700mm, unlike the EF counterpart). Since I'm always at the long end, anyway, the lens and the extender are always attached together, so no hassle of detaching them. Even with the extender attached, you can attain the focus from a relatively close range, I found, so all the more reason to have the combo at ready at all times.

With the 100-500 plus TC being so good, have you found much need of the 800mm lens?

With the 100-500 plus TC being so good, have you found much need of the 800mm lens?

I purchased the 800 not so much for birding as wildlife in general, say, for a trip to Yellowstone. Because of my aging and aching body, I also rely on the 800 for hiking or anywhere a light gear is desired. I don't want to carry the 100-500 with the extender on a hiking trip, for sure. The 800 isn't an ideal for BIF and not as versatile as the 100-500, but with the 1.4x, it does come in handy for shooting moon at 1120mm or something similar. For my purpose, the 100-500, 1.4x and the 800 IS my current holy trinity set up for bird/wildlife photography. Even if I can afford, there's no way I'm going to be looking at the RF 800 f/5.6 due to weight, should it come out in near future.

I’d definitely recommend the R5, it’s awesome.  I have found it actually works great with the Sigma lens so maybe start with that.  The Canon lens is nice but frankly I don’t see the improvement over the Sigma to be worth the huge price difference.

BirdShooter7 wrote:

I’d definitely recommend the R5, it’s awesome. I have found it actually works great with the Sigma lens so maybe start with that. The Canon lens is nice but frankly I don’t see the improvement over the Sigma to be worth the huge price difference.

I can second this recommendation. The Sigma worked very nicely with the R5, and I'd have stayed with this combo if it weren't for my desire to lose more of my gear weight. At my age, every ounce now counts. If I were younger, I'd have stayed with the Sigma. One area of significant enough a difference, though, is that the 100-500 AF speed is faster, not that the Sigma was so slow by comparison that I couldn't get what I wanted out of it.

The R5 and RF 100-500 are a great combo. The AF is the best I've used and this is coming from a Sony A9. The animal eye AF almost feels like cheating, it really is that good. The lens pairs really well with the 1.4 extender. The only issue, as mentioned before, is that due to the lens design you have to extend the 100-500 to 300mm in order to use the 1.4 extender. This seemed a bit awkward at first, but after using this combination for 3 months I don't notice it anymore.

I was nervous spending what I spent to get into the Canon system (coming from Sony and Olympus), but I can honestly say I have no regrets.