franbires wrote:
I am looking for some feedback as I am contemplating purchasing one of these lens, depending on my funds and availability. Currently, I have the R5 paired with the EF 100-400II. The reason I am thinking about this lens is I don’t have the reach for photographing eagles, ospreys and songbirds. In particular with songbirds, I’m finding myself cropping quite a bit while trying to get as close to my subjects as possible. Thank you in advance for your thoughts. Fran
Hi Fran,
FWIW, the EF 100-400mm II works very well with the EF 1.4X II or III teleconverter, which would get you a bit more "reach". The combo is 140-560mm, but you lose a stop of light, so will be at f/8 at the long end of the zoom. You can pick up one of those teleconverters for under $300 used.
I have the original EF 500mm f/4 lens and it's fairly large and heavy. About 8 lb. Mine lives on a tripod. I've taken very few hand held shots with it over the years. And, frankly, I now use the EF 100-400mm II a lot more often, with a 1.4X II when a little more reach is needed. The original 600mm is even bigger and heavier.
The $9000 EF 500mm f/4 "II" shed some weight, but is still 7 lb. The $13,000 EF 600mm f/4 "II" is actually ever so slightly lighter than the 500mm II. Of course, both of those would require an EF to RF adapter, as does your 100-400mm and the earlier EF 500 and 600. There isn't an RF 500mm f/4 yet. There is an RF 600mm f/4 (same $13,000 price tag), but it appears to just be the EF lens with a permanently attached EF to RF adapter... not a new design just for the R-series cameras.
The reason I'm suggesting alternatives is because there are rumors that with the next couple years Canon will be producing redesigned 300mm f/2.8, 400mm f/2.8, 500mm f/4, and 600mm f/4 lenses in RF mount... possibly using DO to help lighten them up considerably. It's all just smoke for now... but they already have 400mm, 800mm and 1200mm, so we know they are very serious about making some "big glass" for the R-series cameras.
Another option... spend $1500 for an R7. The APS-C camera is like having a built-in "free" 1.6X teleconverter. It puts 32.5MP on the subject, where using the APS-C crop with your R5 would turn it into a 19MP camera. The R7 with your adapted EF 100-400mm would "act like a 160-640mm", without the loss of any stops of light like you see with an actual teleconverter.
If budget allows (and it must if you are considering $9000+ lenses), also get the RF 100-500mm for use on the R7. $2900 and 3 lb., making it very hand holdable! On an R7 it will act like a 160-800mm would on full frame. Birders are loving this combo! There are various reviews on YouTube. I just watched a good thorough one by "Jan Wegener".... who also happens to use an R5. Another reviewer on YT is "Wild Alaska"... although his most recent is instead looking at the recently released, lightweight & compact, and relatively inexpensive RF 100-400mm instead ($650, 1.5 lb.)
Art Morris (Birds As Art) once said, "Birders never have
enough lens." In other words, there will ALWAYS be subjects that are just too far away, too small in the viewfinder. If you have a 400mm you'll wish at times you had a 500mm or 600mm... Then you get one of those... and wish you had an 800mm or 1200mm! All the while there are diminishing returns because with each step up to a longer lens you're shooting through more and more atmosphere, which isn't kind to image quality.
500mm + 1.4X (700mm) on APS-C (equiv. to 1120mm full frame)...