Canon RF 100-500 L f 4.5-7.1
Aug 27, 2022 10:43:55 #
Hey guys - I'm thinking about investing in this lens for my son's football games, and for English Show Jumping. Does anyone have this lens? I would love to hear your opinions of it (since it is not cheap). I already have the 70-200 2.8, but looking for a little more reach. Thanks for your time
Aug 27, 2022 11:05:00 #
What camera? The lens is a fine investment, but do you already have the megapixels to just crop the 200mm results?
Aug 28, 2022 06:27:46 #
I have both of those lens with the R5. The 100 - 500 is an incredible lens, it is light, easy to manipulate and very sharp. But Chg Canon is correct in that with the R5 you can crop to achieve a very satisfactory result for most shots.
Aug 28, 2022 07:24:13 #
Yes, I do and I love it. No complains. Very sharp photos. Using now for 2 years.lens and camera Went through the dust and heavy rain but did not stop working.
Aug 28, 2022 09:08:02 #
I have the 100-500 and am very happy with the results using it extensively for wildlife, insects on flowers, sunsets.
Aug 28, 2022 09:16:14 #
whitehall
Loc: Canada
Is the 100-400 (ii) and R 5 a reasonable alternative? It is backwards compatible whereas the 100-500!is not.
Aug 28, 2022 09:22:54 #
whitehall wrote:
Is the 100-400 (ii) and R 5 a reasonable alternative? It is backwards compatible whereas the 100-500!is not.
In my opinion it is. It is also very good on the R5 if used with a 1.4 III extender.
Aug 28, 2022 09:40:03 #
dbrugger25
Loc: Raleigh, NC
I have the EF 100-400 and the 1.4 extender and also the RF 100-500.
I think the RF 100-500 is a better lens. It was designed to be completely compatible with the R system. It is lighter in weight. I think it focuses faster and a little sharper.
I think the RF 100-500 is a better lens. It was designed to be completely compatible with the R system. It is lighter in weight. I think it focuses faster and a little sharper.
Aug 28, 2022 09:53:32 #
recb wrote:
In my opinion it is. It is also very good on the R5 if used with a 1.4 III extender.
The 100-400 iii along with a 1.4 iii on my R5 is the combination I use. Aside from an occasional GAS attack, I haven’t seen the need to change. Hmm, except for the lightness factor…. and reported focusing speed.
Aug 28, 2022 10:59:53 #
dbrugger25
Loc: Raleigh, NC
You need to see adirect comparison of the results to appreciate the superiority of the RF 100-500 compared with the EF 100-400 with or without the 1.4 extender.
I have the RF 100-500 and the RF 1.4 extender. I don't like that combination for sports photography because of the limited zoom range. I also have the newest version EF 100-400 and both the 1.4 and 2.0 extenders, latest version.
I do apprciate the full zoom range of the EF system. I use these EF combinations on the 5DMK4 and the R5. Except for the zoom limitations imposed by the RF extender, I consider the RF 100-500 to be superior in all respects.
I have the RF 100-500 and the RF 1.4 extender. I don't like that combination for sports photography because of the limited zoom range. I also have the newest version EF 100-400 and both the 1.4 and 2.0 extenders, latest version.
I do apprciate the full zoom range of the EF system. I use these EF combinations on the 5DMK4 and the R5. Except for the zoom limitations imposed by the RF extender, I consider the RF 100-500 to be superior in all respects.
Aug 28, 2022 12:22:17 #
Aug 28, 2022 12:48:15 #
whitehall wrote:
Is the 100-400 (ii) and R 5 a reasonable alternative? It is backwards compatible whereas the 100-500!is not.
I replaced my 100-400 II with the 100-500 a few months ago. I debated the change for a long time. If you shoot anything that moves, the 100-500 is much better. Tracking and eye detect is amazing with this lens. The AF performance is quite a bit better as well. I used the 100-400 for years and used it a lot. I almost felt guilty replacing it. For some reason, the AF didn't seem to benefit as much from the R5 as others of my EF lenses. However, it is a costly upgrade so not an easy decision.
Aug 28, 2022 13:52:51 #
An inexpensive thing to try is buying a 2x telextender for use with your 70-200mm. At f/5.6, you'll have the same speed as the 100-500 but not quite the reach. Focusing would probably not be a problem with the new cameras. If it doesn't work for you, you won't be out much money.
Aug 28, 2022 13:58:40 #
Grimaldi wrote:
An inexpensive thing to try is buying a 2x telextender for use with your 70-200mm. At f/5.6, you'll have the same speed as the 100-500 but not quite the reach. Focusing would probably not be a problem with the new cameras. If it doesn't work for you, you won't be out much money.
The extender does not work on the 70 to 200 because of location of the first lens element. I assume the 2x will be similarly restricted.
Aug 28, 2022 14:00:55 #
AFPhoto wrote:
The extender does not work on the 70 to 200 because of location of the first lens element. I assume the 2x will be similarly restricted.
The various RF 70-200 zooms are not compatible with Canon RF extenders, neither the RF 1.4 nor RF 2.0. Canon got wise on how to force more RF lenses out the door, rather than just more RF extenders.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.