RF 1.4 extender worth it for 100-500?

Started 3 months ago | Discussions
draacor
draacor Senior Member • Posts: 1,791
RF 1.4 extender worth it for 100-500?

I am finding it hard to find examples of the RF 100-500 with 1.4 extender. I am going to order the 100-500 i already decided on that point, for my R5 but now I am debating whether i should also pick up the 1.4 extender. I used to have a Nikon D500 and 200-500 and with that combo i was around 750mm with the crop factor. It was a great setup but i was tired of juggling two systems, nikon and canon because I had the R. So i consolidated it all into the R5. I sure did love that 200-500 lens and the constant 5.6 was great. But it was a big honking beast of a lens too. Any thoughts if it is worth the $500 to grab the 1.4 or should i just stick with the 100-500?

-- hide signature --

Aaron Smith
Wolfe Photography
www.nvwolfe.com
https://www.flickr.com/photos/finalimpact/

 draacor's gear list:draacor's gear list
Canon EOS R5 Canon RF 35mm F1.8 IS STM Macro Canon RF 24-105mm F4L IS USM Canon RF 15-35mm F2.8L IS USM Canon RF 70-200mm F2.8L IS USM
Canon EOS R5 Nikon D500
If you believe there are incorrect tags, please send us this post using our feedback form.
Steve Balcombe Forum Pro • Posts: 14,487
Re: RF 1.4 extender worth it for 100-500?

draacor wrote:

I am finding it hard to find examples of the RF 100-500 with 1.4 extender.

Lots on my Flickr stream

https://www.flickr.com/photos/stevebalcombe/

Sonamair Regular Member • Posts: 494
On a separate note what macro lens are you using with your R5 shots

Wonderful

 Sonamair's gear list:Sonamair's gear list
Nikon D6
Mike Arledge Senior Member • Posts: 2,126
Re: RF 1.4 extender worth it for 100-500?

Steve Balcombe wrote:

draacor wrote:

I am finding it hard to find examples of the RF 100-500 with 1.4 extender.

Lots on my Flickr stream

https://www.flickr.com/photos/stevebalcombe/

Very nice feed, thank you for sharing.

 Mike Arledge's gear list:Mike Arledge's gear list
Pentax KP Canon EOS R6 Pentax smc DA 15mm F4 ED AL Limited Pentax smc FA 31mm F1.8 AL Limited Canon EF 35mm F2 IS USM +2 more
Bestpix Photography Regular Member • Posts: 316
Re: RF 1.4 extender worth it for 100-500?
1

I have never taken the 1.4 off my RF100-500 ever since I bought them

 Bestpix Photography's gear list:Bestpix Photography's gear list
Sony RX10 IV Olympus E-M1 II Olympus Zuiko Digital 1.4x Teleconverter EC-14 Sigma 19mm F2.8 DN | A Sigma 60mm F2.8 DN Art +5 more
tkbslc Forum Pro • Posts: 16,248
I'd just crop.
3

With an R5, I'd probably just crop. The 1.4x TC takes you to 700mm f10. Cropping to 700mm still leaves you with 23MP, which in the same class as most high end APS-C cameras. Noise should be about the same as well.

Or you can use 1.6x Crop mode for 800mm at 18MP. The main benefit there is your viewfinder will also be zoomed in which can help track some action better.

Remember the TC makes this lens stuck at 300mm+, and you cannot even fully retract the lens with it on. You probably will have to take TC off to put your camera back in your bag and then put it back on it again when you want to shoot more photos.   And with it being parked at 300mm, that's 420mm with TC.  So you basically only have extreme telephoto reach and little flexibility.

tkbslc Forum Pro • Posts: 16,248
Re: RF 1.4 extender worth it for 100-500?

Bestpix Photography wrote:

I have never taken the 1.4 off my RF100-500 ever since I bought them

Do you find the lens cumbersome to carry and store, since the TC prevents the lens from retracting?

Bestpix Photography Regular Member • Posts: 316
Re: RF 1.4 extender worth it for 100-500?

tkbslc wrote:

Bestpix Photography wrote:

I have never taken the 1.4 off my RF100-500 ever since I bought them

Do you find the lens cumbersome to carry and store, since the TC prevents the lens from retracting?

It fits fine in my bag which is not that big. The fact that the image quality is so good makes it an easy decision imho

 Bestpix Photography's gear list:Bestpix Photography's gear list
Sony RX10 IV Olympus E-M1 II Olympus Zuiko Digital 1.4x Teleconverter EC-14 Sigma 19mm F2.8 DN | A Sigma 60mm F2.8 DN Art +5 more
spec68 Regular Member • Posts: 236
Re: I'd just crop.

tkbslc wrote:

With an R5, I'd probably just crop. The 1.4x TC takes you to 700mm f10. Cropping to 700mm still leaves you with 23MP, which in the same class as most high end APS-C cameras. Noise should be about the same as well.

Or you can use 1.6x Crop mode for 800mm at 18MP. The main benefit there is your viewfinder will also be zoomed in which can help track some action better.

Remember the TC makes this lens stuck at 300mm+, and you cannot even fully retract the lens with it on. You probably will have to take TC off to put your camera back in your bag and then put it back on it again when you want to shoot more photos. And with it being parked at 300mm, that's 420mm with TC. So you basically only have extreme telephoto reach and little flexibility.

This is what I eventually decided to do, for that reason, though I think everyone’s situation is different. Personally, losing the wider end of the range was the killer. I’d rather rather crop or put the camera in crop mode when needed than lose the 140-400mm range the 1.4x TC locks out. When I’m shooting I’d be almost as likely to lose a shot b/c of too much zoom as not quite enough.  So the 1.4X ended up being more of a wash than help.

That said, if one only shoots tight BIFs and the wider end isn’t used anyway I can see where it would be a definite plus. So it is a specialized tool more than a one size fits all that a more conventional TC would be.

tonyoco Regular Member • Posts: 167
Re: I'd just crop.
1

From my experience, the quality of the shots uning the 1.4 TC is very good and given the right conditions I would have no issue using it. The problems are as already desribed, f10 and limited zoom range.

Moving forward I will be using the 100-500  without the TC when normally walking round, but would always carry the 1.4 TC. That way if I need a bit of reach I can enter crop mode and take the shot or crop inpost. If I have time and the subject is distant I then have the option of putting the 1.4 Tc on.

As has previously been discussed it depends on what you shoot.

Marximus
Marximus Regular Member • Posts: 209
Re: RF 1.4 extender worth it for 100-500?
1

I agree with the others. Crop mode gets you to 800mm, which is better than the 750 equivalent of the 200-500. I haven't been able to justify getting the 100-500/1.4 because I have a 100-400 II/1.4x that works pretty well.

 Marximus's gear list:Marximus's gear list
Panasonic G95 Canon EOS R5 Canon EOS R6 Canon Extender EF 1.4x III Canon Extender EF 2x III +9 more
johncal Contributing Member • Posts: 563
Re: RF 1.4 extender worth it for 100-500?

I use the RF 1.4x with my Rf800. It is extremely well built and causes no visible image degradation whatsoever. I highly recommend. Mine lives of the RF 800. There is another thread about the 1,4x used on a 100-500 with good results

 johncal's gear list:johncal's gear list
Canon EOS 70D Canon EOS R Canon EF 50mm F1.4 USM Canon EF 28-135mm F3.5-5.6 IS USM Tamron 28-300mm F3.5-6.3 Di VC PZD +8 more
R2D2 Forum Pro • Posts: 22,972
Re: RF 1.4 extender worth it for 100-500?
4

draacor wrote:

I am finding it hard to find examples of the RF 100-500 with 1.4 extender. I am going to order the 100-500 i already decided on that point, for my R5 but now I am debating whether i should also pick up the 1.4 extender. I used to have a Nikon D500 and 200-500 and with that combo i was around 750mm with the crop factor. It was a great setup but i was tired of juggling two systems, nikon and canon because I had the R. So i consolidated it all into the R5. I sure did love that 200-500 lens and the constant 5.6 was great. But it was a big honking beast of a lens too. Any thoughts if it is worth the $500 to grab the 1.4 or should i just stick with the 100-500?

Agree with the others that the RF 1.4x is an excellent addition to the bag.  It's very sharp and fast-focusing, even more capable than the 1.4x iii (on the 100-400ii).   I've hardly had mine off the RF 100-500, it's that good (I do mostly birding).  A couple of samples from the R5...

Click on "original size" for a larger view.

.

.

R2

-- hide signature --

Good judgment comes from experience.
Experience comes from bad judgment.
http://www.pbase.com/jekyll_and_hyde/galleries

 R2D2's gear list:R2D2's gear list
Canon EOS M6 Canon EOS M6 II Canon EOS R5
tkbslc Forum Pro • Posts: 16,248
Re: I'd just crop.

tonyoco wrote:

From my experience, the quality of the shots uning the 1.4 TC is very good and given the right conditions I would have no issue using it. The problems are as already desribed, f10 and limited zoom range.

Moving forward I will be using the 100-500 without the TC when normally walking round, but would always carry the 1.4 TC. That way if I need a bit of reach I can enter crop mode and take the shot or crop inpost. If I have time and the subject is distant I then have the option of putting the 1.4 Tc on.

As has previously been discussed it depends on what you shoot.

I wonder if 600 or 800mm f11 would better if you know you’ll always be at full zoom.  Not much different than 700mm f10, but a lot cheaper and lighter.

tonyoco Regular Member • Posts: 167
Re: I'd just crop.

tkbslc wrote:

tonyoco wrote:

From my experience, the quality of the shots uning the 1.4 TC is very good and given the right conditions I would have no issue using it. The problems are as already desribed, f10 and limited zoom range.

Moving forward I will be using the 100-500 without the TC when normally walking round, but would always carry the 1.4 TC. That way if I need a bit of reach I can enter crop mode and take the shot or crop inpost. If I have time and the subject is distant I then have the option of putting the 1.4 Tc on.

As has previously been discussed it depends on what you shoot.

I wonder if 600 or 800mm f11 would better if you know you’ll always be at full zoom. Not much different than 700mm f10, but a lot cheaper and lighter.

There will probably not much in it, but comparing these lenses with the 100-500 is a bit pointless as it is a lot more versatile than either the 600 or 800.

draacor
OP draacor Senior Member • Posts: 1,791
Re: I'd just crop.

tkbslc wrote:

tonyoco wrote:

From my experience, the quality of the shots uning the 1.4 TC is very good and given the right conditions I would have no issue using it. The problems are as already desribed, f10 and limited zoom range.

Moving forward I will be using the 100-500 without the TC when normally walking round, but would always carry the 1.4 TC. That way if I need a bit of reach I can enter crop mode and take the shot or crop inpost. If I have time and the subject is distant I then have the option of putting the 1.4 Tc on.

As has previously been discussed it depends on what you shoot.

I wonder if 600 or 800mm f11 would better if you know you’ll always be at full zoom. Not much different than 700mm f10, but a lot cheaper and lighter.

the flexibility of the 100-500 cannot be understated. Also the MFD is a deal breaker for me as I regularly like to shoot from my office at small birds on my feeder which is a lot closer than the MFD.

-- hide signature --

Aaron Smith
Wolfe Photography
www.nvwolfe.com
https://www.flickr.com/photos/finalimpact/

 draacor's gear list:draacor's gear list
Canon EOS R5 Canon RF 35mm F1.8 IS STM Macro Canon RF 24-105mm F4L IS USM Canon RF 15-35mm F2.8L IS USM Canon RF 70-200mm F2.8L IS USM
Steve Balcombe Forum Pro • Posts: 14,487
Re: On a separate note what macro lens are you using with your R5 shots

Sonamair wrote:

Wonderful

Thanks

Mostly the EF 100L macro adapted to the R5.

tkbslc Forum Pro • Posts: 16,248
Re: I'd just crop.

draacor wrote:

tkbslc wrote:

tonyoco wrote:

From my experience, the quality of the shots uning the 1.4 TC is very good and given the right conditions I would have no issue using it. The problems are as already desribed, f10 and limited zoom range.

Moving forward I will be using the 100-500 without the TC when normally walking round, but would always carry the 1.4 TC. That way if I need a bit of reach I can enter crop mode and take the shot or crop inpost. If I have time and the subject is distant I then have the option of putting the 1.4 Tc on.

As has previously been discussed it depends on what you shoot.

I wonder if 600 or 800mm f11 would better if you know you’ll always be at full zoom. Not much different than 700mm f10, but a lot cheaper and lighter.

the flexibility of the 100-500 cannot be understated.

Obviously. However as we discussed if you leave the TC on you are stuck past 420mm and flexibility is greatly reduced anyway. Which is why I said "if you know you'll always be at full zoom" above

Also the MFD is a deal breaker for me as I regularly like to shoot from my office at small birds on my feeder which is a lot closer than the MFD.

That's definitely something to consider.

JayLT4 Regular Member • Posts: 164
Re: RF 1.4 extender worth it for 100-500?
2

The 100-500L works amazingly well with the RF 1.4x converter. I was never a huge fan of the EF converters, and I preferred not to use them unless it was necessary. However, the RF converters have completely reversed my previous thoughts. When I'm out shooting wildlife I'll have the 1.4x on more often then not.

Obviously you need the right conditions and it makes the 100-500 slightly less flexible in terms of the zoom range (420-700) and the smaller aperture range as well. For me these are usually non-issues as I live in Phoenix AZ so I have an over-abundance of available light most of the time, and I prefer to shoot tight when possible anyway.

The 1.4x also takes the pseudo-macro capabilities of the 100-500 and punches it up a bit. Having a 700mm lens that can focus so closely means things like bees and butterflies are easier to get from a distance, yet still fill the frame. In fact I rarely use my EF 100L Macro lens for butterflies anymore, the 100-500 + 1.4 has all but taken that completely over.

Sure you can crop in later, but there have been plenty of times where I still need to cop in when using the 1.4x on the 100-500, and those shots just would have been out of reach of the bare 100-500 lens.

Anyway, I have an album on my Flickr account dedicated to shots I take with the 100-500 + 1.4x converter on my R5, anything from aviation to wildlife, to "macro" is what's mostly there.

https://flic.kr/s/aHsmUhXSra

-- hide signature --
 JayLT4's gear list:JayLT4's gear list
Canon EOS R5 Canon EF 100mm F2.8L Macro IS USM Canon RF 100-500mm F4.5-7.1L IS USM Canon MP-E 65mm f/2.5 1-5x Macro Canon EF 16-35mm F4L IS USM +4 more
draacor
OP draacor Senior Member • Posts: 1,791
Re: I'd just crop.

tkbslc wrote:

draacor wrote:

tkbslc wrote:

tonyoco wrote:

From my experience, the quality of the shots uning the 1.4 TC is very good and given the right conditions I would have no issue using it. The problems are as already desribed, f10 and limited zoom range.

Moving forward I will be using the 100-500 without the TC when normally walking round, but would always carry the 1.4 TC. That way if I need a bit of reach I can enter crop mode and take the shot or crop inpost. If I have time and the subject is distant I then have the option of putting the 1.4 Tc on.

As has previously been discussed it depends on what you shoot.

I wonder if 600 or 800mm f11 would better if you know you’ll always be at full zoom. Not much different than 700mm f10, but a lot cheaper and lighter.

the flexibility of the 100-500 cannot be understated.

Obviously. However as we discussed if you leave the TC on you are stuck past 420mm and flexibility is greatly reduced anyway. Which is why I said "if you know you'll always be at full zoom" above

Also the MFD is a deal breaker for me as I regularly like to shoot from my office at small birds on my feeder which is a lot closer than the MFD.

That's definitely something to consider.

Definitely something to consider is the minimum zoom with the TC on. But the flexibility is still there at least, just remove the TC and you got that range if you need it.  I will most likely have it off when traveling and will only use it when the situation presents itself. It will not be something I will keep on the lens all the time. I also enjoy shooting wild horses and such near my home so a TC is not necessary as I can get relatively close to them.

-- hide signature --

Aaron Smith
Wolfe Photography
www.nvwolfe.com
https://www.flickr.com/photos/finalimpact/

 draacor's gear list:draacor's gear list
Canon EOS R5 Canon RF 35mm F1.8 IS STM Macro Canon RF 24-105mm F4L IS USM Canon RF 15-35mm F2.8L IS USM Canon RF 70-200mm F2.8L IS USM
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads