Canon RF 100-500 Pros and Cons

View Latest Canon RF Lens Deals At: B&H Photo

I'm on a waiting list for one. Here in the US, it seems the RF 800 and the RF 100-500 are hot items. I waited 3 weeks for the RF 800 and am now starting my third week for the RF 100-500.
 
I have just received the RF 100-500 and the lens is great from a build quality point of view, only managed to have a quick play with it and the thing I did notice is the speed and how ultra silent it is compared to the EF lenses.
 
I had a little play hanging out of an upstairs window snapping shots of birds landing on and around my bird feeders. The object of the exercise was to compare the EF100-400Mk2 with the RF100-500 which I have just bought. I can honestly say I didn't notice any difference in AF speed or in the noise the lens made on the naked lens. What I did notice is the stabilisation seemed better with the 100-500 but there again so did the weight. I haven't received my ordered RF1.4TC yet so it was a case of the naked 100-500 but I tried the 100-400 with both Mk3 EF 1.4 and 2.0x TC's. I was incredibly impressed with the AF with the 2.0x, it seemed to lock on to my subject quickly ( bearing in mind I couldn't AF at all other than in live view on the !DX2) and the focus points cover almost all of the screen too.
The proof of the pudding has to be in the final image and as you'd expect the naked lens will always be a sharper image than that with a 2x TC on but in fairness the shot of a Blue Tit at 100% crop looks reasonably good to me and maybe a smaller crop would compare well with the 1.4 TC's IQ at a similar size but then there is no advantage of having the 2.0x.
The problem with f11 is the shutter speed and ISO have to be compromised and to keep it down to ISO1600 my shutter speed was just 1/100th of a second. I was also shooting in the shade which doesn't help. Bigger the crop the more the noise shows but Topaz does a decent cover up.
At the end of the day though I purchased the 100-500 for the not insignificant 20%extra reach and a weight saving. On both counts I'm happy with my decision. How I'll get on with the 1.4TC attached remains to be seen but I'm optimistic about IQ. Fully extended it's the same reach I'm used to having with my EF500mm f4 which nearly always has the TC bolted on but then that's only f5.6. At F11 you need good light or make some tough choices on compromise.
Will I buy the hugely expensive RF 2.0x TC? We'll see. F14 really does push for good light and here in the UK we don't get that much !!
 

Attachments

  • _G7A9868-DeNoiseAI-denoise.jpg
    _G7A9868-DeNoiseAI-denoise.jpg
    287.2 KB · Views: 334
I have the RF 100 - 500 on my "To Get" list, so will be following along in this forum closely. So far I have to made do with the Rf 24-240, which I find surprisingly good image quality since it is a 10x zoom - very happy with that purchase so far.
 
The RF 100-500 really was a game changer for me! Compared to other compatible lenses, it is light and fast! The Animal Eye Focus setting along with the built-in image stabilization also add to its effectiveness.
 
Took my newly acquired 100-500 for a bit of testing to a local site where some Snow Buntings have been over wintering. Carrying the combination is a wonderful lightweight relief from my 500mm f4Mk2 with a DSLR, especially my now departed 1DX2. I have attached a Wimberley QR plate to create a better hand grip/carry handle at twice the length of the lens foot ( 4 inches in total) as I don't us the carry straps that either camera or lens come with.
Unfortunately my ordered RF 1.4TC didn't arrive in time for the shoot but it has now so I'll test the combination later. No doubt you will by now realise that if you attach the TC to the lens you have to first extend the barrel to 300mm otherwise the TC won't fit. You now have an effective 420-700mm lens so as long as you are happy with that all is fine, however one thing I hadn't considered is if you want to leave the TC attached and stow it away in your bag, or even have it hanging from your carry strap, with the lens hood attached it is considerably longer than it was before..an extra four inches long in fact. You might like to factor that in to your decision about a camera bag amongst other things.
One of the known problems of zoom lenses with extending external barrels is their weakness to taking in dust. The L class lens does it's best to prevent this I'm sure but my 100-400 shows slight evidence it inside the lens and no doubt in due course so will the 100-500. It doesn't show in the shots you take but it is there. Having the barrel permanently extended when you have the 1.4TC attached will increase the likelyhood of it collecting dirt and worse still, salt in the wrong environment. So beware, maybe taking a cloth to wipe it down before taking it apart might be a good idea, especially in maritime locations.
Anyway, here's my Snow Bunting on a rather dull day. ISO 800, 1/800th f7.1 at 500mm. An approximate 70% crop.
I have run the final image through Topaz but at ISO 800 there is no discernible difference to the final image.
 

Attachments

  • _G7A0037-DeNoiseAI-denoise (1).jpg
    _G7A0037-DeNoiseAI-denoise (1).jpg
    509.3 KB · Views: 374
I am considering getting the RF 100-500 for sport and concert photography. I'd like to do some wildlife too. Could you guys share your opinion and hightlight the pros and cons of the lens? Thanks
i just acquired mine ... i tend to shoot live bands in dark venues ... the lens is a bit slower but according to Canon rep the gyro axis in camera will help... it clains 5 stops ... we will find out ... over all the lens is nicely built ... seems faster than my 100-400mm vs one ... i'll bring extra batteries to the show
 
Still waiting for my 100-500 to arrive and am pining a lot on this lens being as good as has been reported by many users.
 
I haven't got the lens but I have toyed with the idea but that's as far as I have gone so far. I have the EF 100-400 Mk2 which seems to work extremely well even with the 1.4TC attached. It will AF with the 2.0X but I haven't had an opportunity to really test it.
The reason to change to the 100-500 would be purely a question of the 20% extra reach and would make a lightweight alternative to my 500mm f4 as a walk about lens although I'm not too sure I would be looking at an RF 2x TC when it's already f10 using the 1.4 when fully extended. That's not the only problem though! Stick a 1.4 TC on the 100-500 and you have to lock in to 420-700mm whereas a 1.4 on the EF gives you a range of 140-560mm at f8 at the long end. Much depends on your subject matter. For some wildlife and most birds, 420 minimum isn't a problem, it would probably be extended at 700mm most of the time anyway but for larger animals that are close by you would need to take the TC off so the reach advantge over the 100-400 plus TC is lost.The 100-400 with the TC attached makes an equally good African safari lens in my opinion.
Then there's the light factor. Depending on where you are shooting and conditions but I can't see f7.1 being the best for indoor use. An RF f2.8 70-200 lens might be a better alternative.
Finally there is the price consideration of course. Depending on your circumstances is it worth changing to RF lenses if you have an EF one that meets the criteria? I think it would cost me in the region of £2000 ($2800) to replace the 100-400 with the 100-500 plus TC. It might be a long time before RF lenses appear on the used market so you have to buy new. Personally I wouldn't buy a new EF lens now but it's worth looking at the used market and maybe getting better value and a wider choice to suit your needs?
The only other advantage of the 100-500 is the extra image stabilisation perhaps.
https://www.digitalcameraworld.com/...s-of-stabilization-on-the-canon-eos-r5-and-r6 maybe this article will help
 

View Latest Canon RF Lens Deals At: B&H Photo

Latest reviews

  • Zoom Canon RF 70-200mm F2.8L IS USM
    5.00 star(s)
    Fast, sharp, and lightweight! A great lens
    This is my main workhorse of a lens and I love it. It's very light weight (only around 2.3 lbs) lens. I've been able to hand-hold it for an event...
    • Crysania
  • Canon EOS R6 Mark II
    5.00 star(s)
    Fantastic sport camera
    This camera is FANTASTIC. I'm a dog sports shooter, so very fast indoor action with a lot of obstacles to shoot in and around. This camera does a...
    • Crysania
  • Zoom Canon RF 24-240mm F4-6.3 IS USM
    4.00 star(s)
    A good lens for what it does, with it's drawbacks
    I have had this lens since it came out and it is my lightweight go to lens for walking around in the city and using my infrared-converted camera...
    • Hali

New in the marketplace

Back
Top