RF 800

[Pat]

looking for them to get back in stock...I am seeing some great images with it

 

[Lookyloo69]

Weight loss is getting more important to me by the day!! I still have the 500mm f4 Mk2 but I no longer want to carry it for long distances. I'm torn between having a punt on the 800mm which is fairly inexpensive or plumbing for the L quality of 100-500 which by the time you add a 1.4TC is considerably more expensive. looking at the rumoured RF lens roadmap there is nothing there that is going to entice me purely on my expected price they will be!

100-500 rf is 2699.00 and the 1.4 ext ... is 499 the 2.0 is 599. so yeah its pricey

 

[Dave Williams]

100-500 rf is 2699.00 and the 1.4 ext ... is 499 the 2.0 is 599. so yeah its pricey

And you are presumably talking US dollars... those prices are cheap compared to the UK!

PS It's handy to indicate what currency we are mentioning when we have an international forum!

 

[Dave Williams]

I chose the 100-500 and later purchased the 1.4TC so have the capacity to extend the reach from 500mm to 700mm. I'm impressed with the images it takes, very sharp so I wondered how it might perform with a 2x TC. I went along to a local camera shop's open day show where Canon had a rep and hands on opportunity to try some gear. They didn't have any TCs but they did have an RF800mm . 800 over 700 doesn't offer much gain but what if you stick a 1.4TC on it? 1120mm! That's longer than my 100-500 with a 2x although you loose even more light. Anyway I tried it and was so impressed I have ordered the lens. The IS was amazing it will be interesting to see how I get on with the AF in poor light but I have no doubts about the sharpness. it will do for me!

 

[RedCobra]

I put the RF 1.4ex on my RF 100-500 and was amazed at the results. Nets me 700mm @ f/10. Allows a zoom from 420-700 which helps with BIF. I may go for a RF 2ex next.

 

[Dave Williams]

I put the RF 1.4ex on my RF 100-500 and was amazed at the results. Nets me 700mm @ f/10. Allows a zoom from 420-700 which helps with BIF. I may go for a RF 2ex next.

That was my intention but then it was a case of the 1.4 is sharper than the 2x on the EF versions, the Canon rep seemed to think the RF models were similar but didn't have copies to try so I tried my own RF 1.4 on the RF 800 and was impressed. It works out a dearer option than buying the TC but you do get an extra 120mm of reach however f16 vs f14 but at that aperture I don't suppose it makes that much difference. It's an extremely low price so worth a punt I thought.

 

[Dave Williams]

Having previously purchased both the RF 100-500 and the RF1.4 TC I popped along to my local camera shop's open day and had a quick play with the RF 800, both with and without a TC. I was so impressed with this very quick trial I decided to order one online and from a grey importer. At £729 it's a bit of a snip, and despite the UK retail price having come down from £999 to £899 the grey saving was still huge.

I should point out that I have in the past owned a 600mmf4 Mk2 and still have my 500mm f4Mk 2 and when you compare the prices, the RF 800 offers an incredibly good opportunity to buy in to a super telephoto lens at a budget price. Many people will not have experienced this kind of reach and I don't think you'll be disappointed.
I have nothing but praise for the IQ. It's a very capable lens which takes a sharp image that most will be happy with.
When you consider the RF 600 f4 retails at around £13,500 it's an eye watering difference so there has to be a catch?
Yes and no in my opinion.
As long as you realise before you buy this lens that f11 will considerably reduce the light and therefore force you in to higher ISO and slower shutter speeds you are not going to be too disappointed.
There are other considerations too though. Focus point availability is reduced to about 25% of the screen but even that is actually very good when you think back that when you stuck a 2.0X. TC on and f4 lens you only had expanded centre point on a camera like the 7D2. It does make moving subjects more difficult to accurately focus on though.
Where the 800 does score for me though is where the subject is static.

• Canon EOS R5
• RF800mm F11 IS STM
• 800.0 mm
• ƒ/11
• 1/400 sec
• ISO 1600

This is the full frame shot of a Black-headed Gull and I'm more than happy with the near 100% crop I can achieve with my R5, in fact I could crop even further if I wanted to although you do start losing a bit of detail in doing so.

• Canon EOS R5
• RF800mm F11 IS STM
• 800.0 mm
• ƒ/11
• 1/400 sec
• ISO 1600

This isn't an award winning shot but for the money and for someone who has been limited to 400mm it's ground breaking in my opinion.

The lens is extremely light, again I'm comparing Canon's big whites, and so is very portable but on that note I would also mention the lens comes without a lens foot or any where to attach a strap other than a screw hole similar in size to the one you have on a camera body. I use it to attach my Black Rapid strap which is OK but for me not ideal as it's a bit awkward as the lens is quite long when extended which it has to be to use it.
I was surprised that the lens comes with no instruction on how to use it.Not a big deal but I still found myself wondering what to do. The camera tells you the lens is not ready but the only indication on the lens is a lock>unlock ring. It's actually quite clever when you realise its a push pull operation and the lens collapses down in to a more manageable size for portability.
One other point is that the lens doesn't come with a lens hood which again would reduce available light so perhaps you don't need one but as I like to stand my lenses on the floor on their hoods, I can't do so as there is a risk of scratching the glass. Mind you as the lens is so light and narrow, it's probably a bad idea to even try as the weight of the camera body might make it inclined to easily fall over if brushed against.

The other consideration , particularly if you are not used to long reach and narrow aperture is finding your subject in the frame but that, with a bit of practice, isn't too difficult.

Would I recommend this lens?
Absolutely. It's a bit of a bargain
BUT
I have to say, if you have the budget to push for the 100-500 and a 1.4TC that's the way to go. You have potential for 700mm at f10 but have all the focus points available to use and possibly a tad faster AF speed too.
Should I have bought one?
If I'm honest I'm not sure. I have gained some extra reach even without using a TC but if I'm carrying both lenses I'm losing portability. Maybe an RF 2.0xTC would have been a better option on the 100-500. there again I need to try again with the 1.4TC on the 800mm when I have the chance in good light.That gives an incredible 1140mm reach in a hand holdable lightweight package for not much more than £1k.

 

[TonyB]

I have the 100-500, 1.4x and the 800mm RF lenses and I enjoy the extra reach with the 800. I’ve always wanted to get into the super-tele ranges without having to sell body parts on the black market to do it. While these lenses do have limitations, they are only as limited as the person using it.

Here’s a shot I took with the 800mm from an early morning walk through the Orlando Wetlands Park in Central Florida. It was early and the sun had not yet cooked off the early morning fog and mist.



I took this image to Photoshop, and with some inspiration from a friend, it became something I really like. The copy on my iPad is too large to post but you can see it here https://www.firstlight.photo/Landscapes/i-wRVRG2B

 

[Dave Williams]

While these lenses do have limitations, they are only as limited as the person using it.

Your shot of the tree is very nice but it's big and hasn't moved in a while and the fine detail that so many want in their shots isn't necessary for this image. In my opinion the photographer is limited because of the lens but I agree, it's a great buy for the money and for selected uses but limited use can be said about the most expensive pieces of glass too. Nothing to do with the photographers ability, all to do with horses for courses.

 

[RedCobra]

Interesting to hear of your experience Brian, and thanks for letting us know. There are two issues that come to mind 1) The longer the lens the narrower the field of view so trying to find the subject is more difficult 2) getting the camera to lock focus on the bird which is going to be quite small in the frame I guess and not a lot of contrast.
All the photographs I have seen using the 800mm have been perched birds from what I recall although some togs must have taken flight shots too anyway I decided that I would go for the 100-500 because of it's versatility, it's "L" class build and the shots I have seen posted which look to be top notch. I haven't ordered a TC yet but will decide in due course.

I added the 1.4ex to my 100-500, so 700mm at f/10.0, and it is a stellar performer. Heck I have trouble keeping BIF in the VF at 500mm, at 700 it's even harder. But, at least I can zoom back to 420mm to find the critter, then zoom out to 700mm.

 

[Dave Williams]

I added the 1.4ex to my 100-500, so 700mm at f/10.0, and it is a stellar performer. Heck I have trouble keeping BIF in the VF at 500mm, at 700 it's even harder. But, at least I can zoom back to 420mm to find the critter, then zoom out to 700mm.

I agree with all you are saying but the thread was about the RF 800f11, and the pros and cons.