Ed Atts

I am considering the purchase of the canon R7 AND 100 TO 500 r lens. Are any UHH members using this combination and what is their opinion of this combination? I have used a Canon 7D 2 and the canon 100 to 400 since 2014. It will be used almost exclusively for wildlife photography.
Thanks for any replies.

robertjerl Loc: Corona, California

I have the R7 and RF 100-500L, and the 7DII +EF100-400L.
The old set is still great, and the new set is great with a few modern additions and that extra 100mm for birds etc.

Here are some samples. All are hand held and at 78 I am not a human tripod, if I ever was, so there is a bit of motion blur.
#1 close up of dried leaf on trail in park, hand held while sitting on mobility scooter: R7, RF100-500@300, 1/2500, f/6.3, ISO3200 about 4' distance
#2 Gull drying wings after coming up from a dive, hand held and standing shooting over shrubbery: R7, RF100-500@150, 1/2000, f/6.3, ISO3200 about 25yard distance
#3 Squirrel dining on sunflower seeds from bird feeder: R7, RF100-500@500, 1/1000. f/7.1, ISO1000 aprx 35' distance

I Was Green Once, And Young

(Download)

Flap, Flap; Dry, Dry; Just In Case I Gotta Fly

(Download)

Shirly, Making Sure the Sunflower Seeds Don't Go Stale

(Download)

Zooman 1

I use the R7 with both the RF 100-400mm and the RF100-500mm. I also use it with the RF 600mm F-11 and 800mm f-11. I like using it most of the time instead of the R5. I prefer the R7 over the R5 because it is lighter.

Just my preferences.

bkwaters

After post-processing is the IQ of the 100-500 noticeably better than the 100-400? Just curious as to your personal opinion?

mikegreenwald Loc: Illinois

Lovely photos all.
I’ve had my 100-500 for a couple of years now, and in trips to both Antarctica, the polar North, and elsewhere, it has performed flawlessly. I’ve been using it on my R5 - formerly had a 100-400 for several Canon DSLRs, also a very good lens. You can’t go wrong with either. I’m 88, rarely use a tripod, but lean heavily on high ISO and fast shutter speeds. That frequently requires denoise in pp if I’m printing large.

MountainDave

I replaced my EF 100-400L II with the 100-500 20 months ago. I agonized over the switch for some time before making the plunge. My only regret was not doing it sooner. The 100-500 is better in every way, especially AF precision and tracking. Plus you get another 100mm and lose a 1 lb. of weight. I use a R5.

Check out reviews online of this lens on various camera bodies. There are reports the R7 AF lacks some consistency.

bkwaters

I was asking about RF 100-400 vs RF 100-500.

MountainDave

I was answering the OP, not you!

bkwaters

Got it. I was confused because you didn't quote a reply. Sorry.

robertjerl Loc: Corona, California

Since the RF 100-400 is non L and the 100-500 is an L the 100-500 wins on image quality while the 100-400 wins on size and weight for walking around. It does come very close to the IQ of the 100-500. So it depends on how much of a sharpness freak you are because as the saying goes, "Close only counts in horseshoes and hand grenades!"

Architect1776 Loc: In my mind

Sounds good if budget allows.
I got the R7 and kept my 100-400mm L MII and have been very happy with it. It is a bit larger in aperture and works wonderfully and sharp and fast with the 2X III on it giving 200-800mm.
Something to consider.

cmceagle

I have the exact same scenario as you. Initially the 100-400 with adapter worked great on the R7. I got the 100-500 and it is now my walk around setup. For me, the biggest issue has been transitioning to the R7 with the electronic viewfinder and figuring out the best combination of autofocus setup with the three custom dial positions (C1,C2,C3, spot focus, small area focus , wide area focus, eye detect on or eye detect off). The viewfinder doesn't turn on until brought to eye level. Some fast action nature shots, like a Sora running across the boardwalk, the bird is half way across the boardwalk before the viewfinder is active. In those situations, the 7DII with optical viewfinder is superior with a 50% improvement in capture. As far as autofocus, if you are set up with a BIF setting and full view focus points, a detailed background, and a solitary image like Red-winged Blackbird at 25 years, the R7 will not focus on the mid-range image. You need to switch to spot focusing. Since both cameras have a cropped sensor, I don't think the extra 100 mm with the 100-500 makes that much of a difference (I have the 200-800 on backorder and that may be a noticeable difference). I got into the R7 for the frame rate and the eye detect. Even though the 7DII is superior in some situations, I am staying with the R7 in order to gain the same proficiency that I had with the 7DII. In the end, both setups work great. The transition was a little greater than anticipated but it does keep the door open for the newer lens like the 200-800.

MtManMD Loc: Beaverton, Oregon

I have and actively use both the R5 and R7 bodies, and the 100-500mm lens is my lens used the most.

First, the 100-500mm lens is universally known as an outstanding lens. The ONLY drawback is that if you use an extender with it, you cannot use the entire zoom range. Otherwise, it works well with an extender.

As for the R7 body, you will find about half of users love it and take great photos (like Robert), and the other half pull their hair out trying to get a good photo from it. Review an active forum that is focused on the R7, like the Facebook "Canon EOS R7" group. You'll find many great photos posted from happy users, and many frustrated users who are struggling with it. Unfortunately, I've fallen into the second half and rarely use the R7. I just updated firmware and did a full camera reset as some have done to improve the performance. Waiting for several inches of ice to melt so I can get outside and test it.

BTW, if I took the same photo with the R5 and R7 (assuming I got lucky and the R7 photo was in focus and sharp), I would choose the R5 photo every time even if I needed to crop it. I've slowly morphed from an APS-C photographer to a full frame photographer over time. There are great choices in lens today, like the 100-500mm, that will get you close to your subject without the need for a cropped sensor.

Architect1776 Loc: In my mind

Ps I fall into the camp that the R7 is absolutely amazing and works perfectly with AF.
Absolutely sharp and detailed photos that my DSLRs couldn't even hope to match.
My wife as a novice immediately noticed a huge improvement in sharp photos every time.
I say user error if you fail to get a sharp hyper fast focus with Canon lenses.
Remember, the R7 is equal to a FF 80 mp camera so a modicum of skill is needed.