800mm on R5

[CameraMews]

I need to get to 800mm on my R5 (without using the crop mode). It is for wildlife, but I don't need to track fast moving animals.

I wanted to know if I'm better off with the rf 800 f11, or the 2x extender with the rf 100-400mm (I already own), or an ef lens, like the Sigma?

The issue I think I'm going to have with the Sigma is eye detect, which I've been advised might not work (unsure if that's true) - but I'll need it.

Budget wise would be about the £1k mark.

 

[Bikeridr]

I recently bought the RF 800 f/11 lens for my R5, to use for wildlife and, to a certain extent, astrophotography.
You can only use the center focus (the bigger focus square, not only the spot focus) and being an STM motor it's fairly slow. If you want to use multiple shots, the only option is the slowest setting in servo and the middle setting in one-shot. The highspeed+ will not track focus. Apart from that, I'm satisified with my choice.

Be aware that if mounting an extender on the 100-500 lens, you won't be able to fully retract the lens as the rear lens element will crash with the extender.
I do not own the 100-500, I just saw a YT vid by Jan Wegener (I think) where this was emphasized, and to him it was a major drawback.

 

[BobKnDP]

I believe "CameraMews" referred to the RF 100-400 STM, not the 100-500 L.

I have the 100-400, but not the TC. I believe that there's no restriction on the zoom range with the 100-400. At 400 X2, you'd get f/16, a full stop slower than the 800 f/11.

Is there really a potential issue with damaging the 100-500 or the TC? I own neither, but my impression was that there is no issue, save that the 100-500 is limited to 300+ with a TC.

 

[Ray Chen]

You can only use the center focus (the bigger focus square, not only the spot focus) and being an STM motor it's fairly slow. If you want to use multiple shots, the only option is the slowest setting in servo and the middle setting in one-shot. The highspeed+ will not track focus.

Can you elaborate more on that? Provided I've not shot frequently with my 800mm f/11, I do know the smaller autofocusing area, but I'm not sure there are other restrictions such as the drive speed.

One aspect that I don't like about the 800mm is that the images seem more flat. I think it is a reasonable sharp lens otherwise. I am super impressed that I can shoot it handheld, and the AF speed is reasonable.

 

[Steven Blackwood]

Just to make a small correction the rf 100-400 has a USM Motor.

 

[Bikeridr]

You can only use the center focus (the bigger focus square, not only the spot focus) and being an STM motor it's fairly slow. If you want to use multiple shots, the only option is the slowest setting in servo and the middle setting in one-shot. The highspeed+ will not track focus.

Can you elaborate more on that? Provided I've not shot frequently with my 800mm f/11, I do know the smaller autofocusing area, but I'm not sure there are other restrictions such as the drive speed.

One aspect that I don't like about the 800mm is that the images seem more flat. I think it is a reasonable sharp lens otherwise. I am super impressed that I can shoot it handheld, and the AF speed is reasonable.

Probably my clumsy wording (English is not my native language).
What I noticed was that tracking in AF Servo works best in the slowest burst setting, whereas the "burst icon" in the side menu became green when in Servo (blue AF dots) mode, indicating it won't track subject in "middle speed" burst and not track at all in high speed+ burst.

 

[Kokopelli_Rocks]

I believe "CameraMews" referred to the RF 100-400 STM, not the 100-500 L.

I have the 100-400, but not the TC. I believe that there's no restriction on the zoom range with the 100-400. At 400 X2, you'd get f/16, a full stop slower than the 800 f/11.

Is there really a potential issue with damaging the 100-500 or the TC? I own neither, but my impression was that there is no issue, save that the 100-500 is limited to 300+ with a TC.

FYI, the RF 100-400 is a USM lens not a STM lens. I own the all three of the lenses mentioned in the post. The RF 800 f/11 is great for the price. You have some limitations, it is a fixed f/11 lens. The AF is not as fast as the other two lenses, but it works well. I have used the RF 1.4 with the lens and it works.

The RF 100-500 is a great lens, easily the best lens I have owned in my 45+ years of photography. I wish the lens did not have limits when using a TC. From what I can see, I think if the lens was 1-2 inches longer it would not be limited when using a TC. The lens is designed to not have any issues when using a TC. The lens IQ is great with a TC. I have never liked using a 2.x TC, but after my experience using the 100-500 with the 1.4 I bought the RF 2.x and I am very pleased with the results.

I have not used any TC's with the RF 100-400. One of the reasons I really like the RF 100-400 is its size and weight. The lens has great AF. One item to consider, using a 2x TC with the lens will be f/16.

 

[Bikeridr]

I believe "CameraMews" referred to the RF 100-400 STM, not the 100-500 L.

I have the 100-400, but not the TC. I believe that there's no restriction on the zoom range with the 100-400. At 400 X2, you'd get f/16, a full stop slower than the 800 f/11.

Is there really a potential issue with damaging the 100-500 or the TC? I own neither, but my impression was that there is no issue, save that the 100-500 is limited to 300+ with a TC.

That is what was ephasized in the YT vid I saw. You can not "retract" down below the F300-ish range as the TC will obstruct internally in the lens.
I can't find the vid just now (it was not Jan Wegener after all), but I saw it just a couple of days ago.

 

[Bikeridr]

I believe "CameraMews" referred to the RF 100-400 STM, not the 100-500 L.

I have the 100-400, but not the TC. I believe that there's no restriction on the zoom range with the 100-400. At 400 X2, you'd get f/16, a full stop slower than the 800 f/11.

Is there really a potential issue with damaging the 100-500 or the TC? I own neither, but my impression was that there is no issue, save that the 100-500 is limited to 300+ with a TC.

That is what was ephasized in the YT vid I saw. You can not "retract" down below the F300-ish range as the TC will obstruct internally in the lens.
I can't find the vid just now (it was not Jan Wegener after all), but I saw it just a couple of days ago.

Found it. It's from Gordon Laing; here, watch from 8:56

 

[BobKnDP]

Just to make a small correction the rf 100-400 has a USM Motor.

Right, thanks.

I made the mistake of using STM as a synonym for non-L.

 

[R2D2]

Be aware that if mounting an extender on the 100-500 lens, you won't be able to fully retract the lens as the rear lens element will crash with the extender.
I do not own the 100-500, I just saw a YT vid by Jan Wegener (I think) where this was emphasized, and to him it was a major drawback.

The RF 100-500 (esp with 1.4x TC) is WAY above the OP's budget!

I do in fact own this particular lens, and use the TC the vast majority of the time. It's a wonderful combination. And in all truthfulness, I have almost never (in way over 50,000+ shots) run into an issue where I needed to zoom wider than the enforced minimum. I basically just take what the lens gives me in those cases.

Here's one that was just right...

.

There are some recent threads with great info about the RF 800. Here are a few for the OP...

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/4671660

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/4671758#forum-post-66484260

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/4670818#forum-post-66471081

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/4669737#forum-post-66456066

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/4669507#forum-post-66452992

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/66413735

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/66396642

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/66308029

--
Good judgment comes from experience.
Experience comes from bad judgment.

Galleries by Jekyll & Hyde

www.pbase.com

 

[Kokopelli_Rocks]

Price wise your only option is the RF 800 f/11. Just wanted to add a few more comments, the lens is good and can take a TC if you ever want to go longer. The RF 100-400 is a good option if you want additional versatility in the zoom range. If I could only have one option I would probably choose the Rf 100-400 and a TC. The challenge is the f/16 and the cost is over your budget.

The RF 800 is light and can be hand held for static to slow moving subjects. I have hand held the lens every time I have used it. I have found the lens very hard to use for fast moving subjects like BIF. Others may have a steadier hand, but I find the limited focus square challenging.

 

[Rick65]

I've captured some decent bird images with my R5 RF 800 f/11 combo. It's even nicer now on my R7 (1280mm) though that combo poses some even more challenging compositions. When not using my 800, I use my adapted EF 100-400 II which works quite well on both bodies.

The 800 is a great option for the price. It's light, produces good images, can be shot at slower shutter speeds hand-held (>250) depending on the lighting. There are some challenges: a) center focus box b) f/11 but the R bodies do a good job of dealing with higher ISO settings. The image compression is a function of the focal length

 

[PicPocket]

choose the Rf 100-400 and a TC. The challenge is the f/16

100-400 + 2x TC should still top out at 800mm f/11. Getting f/16 on the 800 prime will be challenging though

I agree with the rest of your advice

--
PicPocket
http://photography.ashishpandey.com

 

[TeeJay626]

choose the Rf 100-400 and a TC. The challenge is the f/16

100-400 + 2x TC should still top out at 800mm f/11. Getting f/16 on the 800 prime will be challenging though

I agree with the rest of your advice

The RF 100-400 does become f16 with the 2x TC, f11 with the 1.4x TC. I have the RF 100-400 and had the 1.4x and can confirm that. Also, the RF 800 f11 prime is a fixed aperture so it's always f11.

 

[BobKnDP]

choose the Rf 100-400 and a TC. The challenge is the f/16

100-400 + 2x TC should still top out at 800mm f/11. Getting f/16 on the 800 prime will be challenging though

I agree with the rest of your advice

The Canon RF 100-400mm f/5.6-8 IS USM would give f/16 at 400mm with a 2X TC.

Were you thinking of some other lens?

 

[Kokopelli_Rocks]

choose the Rf 100-400 and a TC. The challenge is the f/16

100-400 + 2x TC should still top out at 800mm f/11. Getting f/16 on the 800 prime will be challenging though

I agree with the rest of your advice

The Canon RF 100-400mm f/5.6-8 IS USM would give f/16 at 400mm with a 2X TC.

Were you thinking of some other lens?

He was probably thinking of EF 100-400 II with a 2x.

 

[PicPocket]

choose the Rf 100-400 and a TC. The challenge is the f/16

100-400 + 2x TC should still top out at 800mm f/11. Getting f/16 on the 800 prime will be challenging though

I agree with the rest of your advice

The Canon RF 100-400mm f/5.6-8 IS USM would give f/16 at 400mm with a 2X TC.

Were you thinking of some other lens?

He was probably thinking of EF 100-400 II with a 2x.

Yes, indeed. I somehow was thinking of the EF version, sorry

Maybe I haven't yet come to terms that the RF one goes to f/8

--
PicPocket
http://photography.ashishpandey.com

 

[Nimonus]

I recently bought the RF 800 f/11 lens for my R5, to use for wildlife and, to a certain extent, astrophotography.
You can only use the center focus (the bigger focus square, not only the spot focus) and being an STM motor it's fairly slow.

• RF811 is a super fast lens even it's a STM.

If you want to use multiple shots, the only option is the slowest setting in servo and the middle setting in one-shot.

• You must have a faulty RF811.

The highspeed+ will not track focus. Apart from that, I'm satisified with my choice.

• RF811 tracks @20fps very well

 

[Nimonus]

choose the Rf 100-400 and a TC. The challenge is the f/16

100-400 + 2x TC should still top out at 800mm f/11. Getting f/16 on the 800 prime will be challenging though

I agree with the rest of your advice

You may talk about EF100-400 + 2X.

I had ever owned both. Base on IQ and AF performance @800mm, RF800/11 wins. It AF faster and it has better contrast, sharpness and coloring.

Two issues of RF800/11,

1. It's cheap. You will be treated as 3rd class citizen in the field with this lens mounted on your camera.
2. It's not weather sealed.