Zooman 1

I have it and am very pleased with it. I also have the RF 100-400mm, not the same quality, but a fine lens, less expensive, lighter (why I have it) and produces good results. You might consider it.

goldstar46 Loc: Tampa, Fl

=======================================================
Tommi...

You have written: "I already have the 70-200 2.8, but looking for a little more reach."

An accurate answer would have to depend on the working distance from the camera to the subject (which only you would know) and your expectation regarding overall results given the shooting assignment.

If you are comparing what you have (70-200mm) with what you expect at the same distance with your newer lens... That also is a judgment call on your part with regards to the 'impact' imposed upon you because you have to crop... Here again, only you know what amount of 'degradation' you are willing to accept with regards to the finished product and/or just how large you intend to make your final products.

Personally, I believe your choice should really hinge on the 'cash outlay' which is required for the second lens and is the extra cost 'justified' because of any expected additional revenue you will get from sales...... or if the extra cost is 'justified' because you get the more personal satisfaction of having a better overall image because you have the second lens...

One thing which you can not say is... Taking images with a "cropped" 200mm lens is going to be as good or better than taking images with a "non-cropped" 100-500mm lens. ~~ They won't... It is like comparing apples to oranges.

Personally, the only time I have used the "Crop" feature of my Canon R5, has been just a very small number of occasions when I want to "learn about" it or to just "experiment" with it... I know that there can be some good instances when its use does have benefits... but, for me, I have not found the need to use crop mode.

To me, the question to you is: Is the final product of a "Cropped Lens" going to make you as happy, as having a final product that was shot with a "Non-Cropped Lens" and......... is the extra money worth it?

As for me..... I own both of the above lenses under discussion, and I know that if I have a need for a "longer reach" as you have stated, my "Lens of Choice" will always be the RF 100-500mm.

In closing, it is your decision to make. Consider, you renting or borrowing, the RF 100-500mm and give it a try. If you are a Canon CPS group with either Gold or Platinum status, they will send you a loaner to try out ... which is what I did. BTW, I very much like both lenses... As with any artist, one must consider the 'task at hand' and then choose the 'right tool' for the task.

I wish you the best in your decision and photo adventures ahead.

Cheers
George L. Veazey

###

TommiRulz Loc: Corpus Christi, TX

Very good information !!! Thank You so much !!

TommiRulz Loc: Corpus Christi, TX

Hi - everyone, THANKS for all the great advice, I read everyone's comments, and I appreciate you taking the time!! I have the R5 and R7, and I'm looking to build onto my RF lens collection with something that I can take to football games and horse shows. Thanks again for all your information!!

TommiRulz Loc: Corpus Christi, TX

I have the R5 and R7, so sometimes yes - but sometimes the arenas are still too big.