R6 with EF 100-400mm II and TC EF 1.4x III for wildlife?

Hi,

Would like to get a R5, but don't really have the budget for it. 🤣I would like to ask if anyone had used the EOS R6 with the EF 100-400mm II and TC EF 1.4x III for wildlife before. May I know how is the result? Will this combination be long enough for most shot?

Buy yourself an R7 + RF100-400 for much better reach, speed and AF...  Great Wildlife setup and not too expansive.

They work very well together. Af is fast and accurate. Including the eye detect. Image quality is very good. The focal length equivalent at the long end is 560mm. Only drawback is the f8 aperture at the long end, but the r6 handles higher iso well. I use the combo often.

XN_Stein wrote:

Hi,

Would like to get a R5, but don't really have the budget for it. 🤣I would like to ask if anyone had used the EOS R6 with the EF 100-400mm II and TC EF 1.4x III for wildlife before. May I know how is the result? Will this combination be long enough for most shot?

Do you already have the lens and teleconverter? If so buying an R6 may work out well as long as you don’t have to crop much. If you don’t already have the EF gear I would suggest looking at the R7 and RF 100-400.

XN_Stein wrote:

Tom59 wrote:

They work very well together. Af is fast and accurate. Including the eye detect. Image quality is very good. The focal length equivalent at the long end is 560mm. Only drawback is the f8 aperture at the long end, but the r6 handles higher iso well. I use the combo often.

Thank you. I would like to ask if you crop the photos at 560mm? Will the internal crop mode further complement the teleconverter to get a closer shot of the animal or is it better for me to crop it in post? I'm not really sure if there are any different between using the crop mode and cropping in post.

Cropping in camera just means you are using fewer pixels to begin with. Cropping in post mean you use all the pixels to start with and then you decide what goes.

XN_Stein wrote:

Hi,

Would like to get a R5, but don't really have the budget for it. 🤣I would like to ask if anyone had used the EOS R6 with the EF 100-400mm II and TC EF 1.4x III for wildlife before. May I know how is the result? Will this combination be long enough for most shot?

I do, and it's a VERY good combination. In fact you get such a great response from this very combination that you may do what many others do and just leave the Extender on the lens most of the time. You'll basically get a 140-560mm with excellent image quality throughout the zoom range with the EF 1.4x III Extender attached. This particular Extender is also portable enough to fit into many pockets so it can be carried as an optional accessory if you like. AF speed it great.  As for if 560mm is long enough for your preferred shooting, only your subjects and shooting preferences are going to answer that.  Looking at examples from 500mm lenses this is more than enough focal length before other factors get in the way.  The images without the Extender at 100-400mm matched those from the RF 100-500mmL and side by side we found them indistinguishable from one another.  Whilst the RF 100-500mmL lens has an extra 100mm to play with, it's on the far end and the aperture is reduce much sooner in the zoom range than the EF lens permits.  Adding an EF 1.4x III Extender gives you an impressive 560mm to work with. I found this distance to be ideal when photographing animals in the wild and also in zoos during visits last year.  There's an image of a wild rabbit in a park below that I've posted and whilst I was able to creep up close to it, there's a limit as to how close you can get to these critters.  The Auto Focus is fantastic with this lens although I usually prefer to mount a collapsible monopod to the lens ring foot and that allows me to shoot for long hours as needed without fatigue in my arms.
.
BG-R10 Battery Grip (optional and unnecessary).
You DON'T need to buy the BG-R10 battery grip for use with this combination, but the shifting of weight by adding the BG-R10 can offer you more grip surface area for your hands and it will allow you a surprising amount of shots with two batteries. I got close to 7,000 shots on a beach in a single day using the grip.  But the R6 does NOT need the grip and it will perform very well without one.  I spent months waiting for my own BG-R10 to arrive and the difference in performance and handling was minor.  In fact I liked using it without a grip when using this lens combo.
.
Eye Defect AF performance on the R6 + 100-400mmL + EF 1.4x III
With the Animal Eye Detect-AF selected, you can select a few different options for AF methods... and you can force the Eye-detection to become active whenever you press down one of the back-buttons on the R6 camera ...and this makes is a pleasure to use when photographing just about any type of animal, bird, lizard etc. The weight isn't too bad although holding this combo for over 10 minutes in front of you with your arms extended would be problematic if it wasn't for the shoulder strap or the ability to affix a Monopod to the lens foot. When photographing at the zoo or shooting wildlife in the open, you can easily lift the lens for brief periods but a Monopod makes this so much easier to nail the subjects and to hold the camera in front of you for long periods of time. 
.

EOS R6 + EF 100-400mmL II + EF 1.4x III Extender

.
Even without the Extender, this lens is a real gem all by itself. It's sharp, reliable and robust. If offers great performance with sharp images and extremely flattering bokeh.  I would advise using a UV Filter (77mm) on the front to seal the unit in dusty or moisture laden environments. A chap I know on Facebook scratched off some of the optical coatings by repeatedly scraping his plastic lens cap on the front element over months or even years.  Circular Polarizers don't seem to vignette at all on this lens and banding isn't an issue, although using really cheap (eg $5) UV filters is not recommended. The Image Stabilizer on this lens has quite a reputation for being extremely effective.
.
The EF 1.4x III has no negative impact on your image quality and the drop in AF speed (which is determined by a microprocessor inside the Extender) is not enough to be noticeable. It's still so fast that most other photographers don't notice it.  I was able to track the eyes of a young baboon after its older sibling grabbed it and ran off with it... which surprised me.  The only subject I had to manually focus on was the eye of a Green snake which you can see in the pictures I posted below.  I simply placed an AF reticule over the snake's eye and used the Auto Focus without the Eye-Detect active.
.
Microcontrast is excellent. Color rendering is excellent. Image quality was the same as the RF 100-500mmL lens when I used the two side by side shooting in the mountains when the new lens was released. I ended up cancelling my RF lens order although I'd buy one to replace my EF lens if it was damaged in future. I stuck with the EF 100-400mmL II lens because it offers me more light (via a wider aperture) when zooming out throughout the zoom range and this is sometimes useful for me when shooting in low light or with astrophotography. 
.
I use this combination of R6 + EF 100-400mmL II lens + EF 1.4x III Extender for surfing photography and especially wildlife. You also get a great closeup capability with this lens. The EOS R6 has fantastic low-light capability and uses the same AF system as the R5. I find that the noise from the R6 is usually only noticeable when shooting in low light with 100 ISO. In bright daylight 100 ISO is not an issue but it can produce grain in lower light environments. ISO 400 and ISO 800 are great for low noise. Even ISO 6400 can be very low noise on the R6.
.
Compared to the EOS R7 as an alternative?
I'd normally suggest an APS-C sensor for additional "zoom" with any long lens although shooting wildlife requires reliable critical focus.  But I haven't been overly impressed with the new EOS R7 and for tracking birds in flight there's been some issues raised recently.  I've used this very lens and Extender on the EOS M6 (APS-C) and was extremely pleased with the results, though I wasn't demanding Eye-Detect AF on that camera.  But the R7, despite having a much better AF system than my EOS M6, is not in the same ball park as the EOS R6 when it comes to reliable AF performance.  There's a few videos on YouTube that explain what others are seeing.  Hence, I'm not going to recommend it with this combo.  The EOS R7 has performance issues with both lowlight performance (probably due to the smaller APS-C sensor), noise (high ISO is often required at longer focal lengths and the resulting grain is inevitable) and it also has an issue with AF accuracy when tracking moving subjects whilst panning (causing the focus to jump back and forth between the background scenery and the subject). This is not an issue with the EOS R6. I'm only mentioning it because the performance is notably better coming from the large Full Frame sensor of the R6 which also makes good use of the sensor's real-estate with larger pixels.  The higher Dynamic Range and -6.5EV on the EOS R6 is also preferable and it gives you better performance on the long end of the zoom with an extender and even a filter. The larger, 'brighter' sensor on the EOS R6 will allow you to use higher shutter speeds with lower ISO settings with less noise and better overall performance.
.
A lot of people like to photograph the moon when they get a long lens and you can certainly see the craters on the moon with this lens + extender combo.  If Astro and Lunar photography are something that interest you, Full Frame isn't the ideal sensor size for this since the moon is still fairly small... and APS-C will give you more reach and will add another 1.6x "magnification" (via the sensor crop).  Using the 2x III Extender with this lens and an APS-C sensor will give you a lot more detail on the lunar surface.
.
EF 1.4x III compared to EF 2x III on the EOS R6
(Just in case you were wondering).  I use both but rarely use the EF 2x III Extender. The 1.4x III Extender is more flexible, easier to use, performs faster mechanically and offers better image quality due to the lower magnification compared to the EF 2x III Extender.  The 2x III also produces less contrast which, when added with a 75% speed reduction, will hamper use unless you are in a fairly bright location (beach, park or zoo on a sunny day).  If the subject is fairly close to you, the 2x III Extender will produce clean images with plenty of detail, even near macro closeups are possible.  But if the subject is farther away, especially quite a distance away, the EF 2x III produces "smoother" looking images in low light due to contrast (or lack thereof) and subjects a LONG way away may produce softening due to thermal fluctuations in the air.  This is not an issue with the EF 1.4x III Extender.
.
The samples below are from my own camera and were all shot in JPEG with additional tweaks as needed after downloading.  If this is a setup that meets your budget, it's a very good combination for wildlife, landscapes, action and sporting. 
.

EOS R6 + EF 100-400mmL II + EF 1.4x III Extender + UV + CPL filters

EOS R6 + EF 100-400mmL II + EF 1.4x III Extender (partially cropped for detail)

EOS R6 + EF 100-400mmL II + EF 1.4x III Extender + UV + CPL filters (wild rabbit)

EOS R6 + EF 100-400mmL II + EF 1.4x III Extender + UV + CPL filters

EOS R6 + EF 100-400mmL II + EF 1.4x III Extender + UV + CPL filters

EOS R6 + EF 100-400mmL II + EF 1.4x III Extender + UV + CPL filters

EOS R6 + EF 100-400mmL II + EF 1.4x III Extender + UV filter

EOS R6 + EF 100-400mmL II + EF 1.4x III Extender + UV + CPL filters

EOS R6 + EF 100-400mmL II + EF 1.4x III Extender + UV + CPL filters

I have a few more images on hand - as I was limited to 10 in the reply earlier.
.
I'm using Eye-Detect AF in each of those with critters although nothing particularly challenging with moving subjects in these examples. The Lunar Eclipse was taken earlier this last week. Note that lunar details tend to look smeared when there's no crater shadows on the surface of the moon. In this instance I ran some noise-reduction that smoothed out the image more than would be ideal - but I just wanted the bold colors.  I took the Extender off to get the rest of my shots that evening.
.
Some of these photographs were taken at several local parks near my home where there's a lot of local birds and others were taken a local zoo. Again, I shot these in JPEG which allows for a bit of automatic in-camera image processing and the R6 does a fairly good job in this regard. I'm sure RAW shooters might squeeze a bit more out of their images.
.

.EOS R6 + EF 100-400mmL II + EF 1.4x III Extender + ND + CPL filter

.EOS R6 + EF 100-400mmL II + EF 1.4x III Extender + ND + CPL filter

.EOS R6 + EF 100-400mmL II + EF 1.4x III Extender + ND + CPL filter

.EOS R6 + EF 100-400mmL II + EF 1.4x III Extender + ND + CPL filter

.EOS R6 + EF 100-400mmL II + EF 1.4x III Extender + tripod

.EOS R6 + EF 100-400mmL II + EF 1.4x III Extender + ND + CPL filter

.EOS R6 + EF 100-400mmL II + EF 1.4x III Extender + ND + CPL filter

.EOS R6 + EF 100-400mmL II + EF 1.4x III Extender + ND + CPL filter

.EOS R6 + EF 100-400mmL II + EF 1.4x III Extender + ND + CPL filter

.EOS R6 + EF 100-400mmL II + EF 1.4x III Extender + ND + CPL filter

Distinctly Average wrote:

First of all, great write up and shots with the R6. I especially like the snake.

Thanks! I had to take the circular polarizer off for that shot because it was indoors inside a dark undercover display but in an illuminated tank.  So reflections weren't a problem and the CPL filter was going to cut down on light too much... but the Eye-Detect couldn't spot the eyes on the snake and there was a queue of people trying to squeeze in there with me.  With other reptiles I've had no problem.  Even the eye of a tiny skink were easily tracked repeated when I was in the mountains and that eyeball had to be just 1.5mm wide.  Same camera and lens of course.

AF issues on the R7 are not something I have experienced. I have used an R5 quite a bit and the R7 is as good most of the time. I’ve not had the lack of consistency some are reporting nor any issues with BIF or dragons in flight etc. I saw similar videos and comments online about the 7D, 7D2, 80D, 90D etc. In fact, when the R6 appeared there were videos showing AF problems with that too. I feel it is always the way when any new camera is released. A lot of it I put down to familiarity with a new camera. Plenty just don’t seem to give new cameras enough time. Having said that, the rolling shutter on the R7 really is an issue and I wonder if what some are seeing as AF issues are in fact distortion caused by the rolling shutter.

.
In this instance it's not something I deal with myself - but since I had considered buying an R7 recently I keep an eye out for posts on this recent camera. I'm on a few R-series groups on Facebook and a number of members recently (last week) posted examples of issues they were having with the EOS R7's AF and they posted links to their own web pages plus recent YouTube videos. Some are professionals and use this camera especially for the APS-C crop. I kept one of the links from a Photographer who said he wasn't going to be using his R7 for any critical photography as a result of recent misfocus issues. I'm always mindful that most problems tend to be 'user error related' but this one is compelling...
.
"Why the EOS-R7 won't be coming on Safari again"
"Sequence showing Canon R7 focus failure at a critical moment"
https://duncangroenewald.com/pages/galleryView.html?dataFile=blogs/blog-2022-11-01.json
.
Others have experienced the same. I'm not a birder so this isn't something I deal with often. The rolling shutter issue is of course a known problem for any camera with slow sensor readout so it's going to be a problem for any of us shooting fast moving subjects with Electronic Shutter instead of Mechanical Shutter.  Fortunately I'm only occasionally using ES for sporting and try to be mindful of which drive mode to be using.
.
I definitely agree that people don't tend to give a lot of modern cameras the time to learn them properly.  I am often surprised by the number of people who buy new cameras with features they don't quite understand, don't read their manuals and then jump online to complain about something that could be resolved with just a little online lurking or spending more time ironing out any bugs.  Perhaps they panic? I still see people asking about R6 AF issues they might have and I've stopped replying for two reasons... one is that someone else can do it... and the other is that I know the R6 AF sytem needs to be primed with the correct settings before you can extract maximum results from it.  But again, a simple YouTube video can often show people how to set up their gear these days.
.
On the flip side, I'm becoming a little less confident with Canon lately.  Some of their mechanical designs are flawed (QC and Ergonomics related) and they do seem to be dropping the ball a bit these days with marketing.  Have a look at that link above and let me know what your thoughts are because more than a few experienced and even professional wildlife photographers were making the same arguments online recently.  He distinctly stated that the AF would switch repeatedly between the bird's eye and the washed out background - which seems unusual to me considering the shots.  The ones that came out certainly looked sharp enough but the number of keepers was certainly low.

A few more sooc jpeg. images. Taken a few minutes ago. Downloaded to phone via wifi. Then posted here. All manual, auto iso using eye detect handheld.