Extenders RF extender or RF 600/800 primes?

[guydunnuk]

So would it be better to just buy the RF600/800 or get a 1.4 or 2X Extender to pair with the 100-500? How good are the RF extenders? Thoughts?

 

[marktroxel]

I've had my R5 and 100-500 for a few weeks now (coming from Nikon D500 and 200-500 lens). I have very limited experience with the 1.4x extender so take this with a grain of salt. I rented the 1.4x extender and the RF 100-500 for 2 days before buying my R5. In that limited time, as long as I had enough time to find the subject and for the camera to focus, I didn't notice any significant slowing of AF or loss of IQ when I had the extender on vs. when I didn't. For me, it was just getting used to quickly getting the flying bird into frame given to the 700mm reach....I just need more practice with that. I've not tried the 2x extender.

The RF 100-500 is a very good lens. I haven't tried the 600 or 800 yet. I think it ultimately depends on how often you want/need to be able to zoom in/out and how often you're in good light. In case you don't already know, because of the lens design, you have to extend the 100-500 beyond 300mm to be able to attach an extender. So with a 1.4 extender, the lens becomes a 420-700mm zoom f/8-10 lens (or with the 2x extender, a 600-1000mm f/11-14 lens).

Also, consider your style of shooting. I tend to walk/hike and shoot what I see, so I usually like a lighter system. The 600 and 800mm is lighter, but the 100-500 isn't too bad either for weight. I carried my R5 and 100-500 for almost 4 hours on Monday slung over my shoulder while walking through hilly terrain on packed snow/ice and the weight didn't bother me. If you're concerned about weight, then the 600 or 800 mm may be the better option assuming you shoot in locations with good light and don't find yourself needing to zoom. I will say, though, that these cameras have quite good high iso capability and you can recover quite a lot in post.

I've gone back and forth about this and still am not sure. I ended up purchasing both. The 1.4 extender will be here this week. My camera store said the 800mm lens will be on backorder for a while so I may end up cancelling the 800mm if I like the extender enough. There are many locations that I go to that I need the ability to zoom so I may just stick with the 1.4x extender on the 100-500.

Not sure I helped or just gave you a more circular argument, but misery loves company and I'm right there with you!

 

[guydunnuk]

I've had my R5 and 100-500 for a few weeks now (coming from Nikon D500 and 200-500 lens). I have very limited experience with the 1.4x extender so take this with a grain of salt. I rented the 1.4x extender and the RF 100-500 for 2 days before buying my R5. In that limited time, as long as I had enough time to find the subject and for the camera to focus, I didn't notice any significant slowing of AF or loss of IQ when I had the extender on vs. when I didn't. For me, it was just getting used to quickly getting the flying bird into frame given to the 700mm reach....I just need more practice with that. I've not tried the 2x extender.

The RF 100-500 is a very good lens. I haven't tried the 600 or 800 yet. I think it ultimately depends on how often you want/need to be able to zoom in/out and how often you're in good light. In case you don't already know, because of the lens design, you have to extend the 100-500 beyond 300mm to be able to attach an extender. So with a 1.4 extender, the lens becomes a 420-700mm zoom f/8-10 lens (or with the 2x extender, a 600-1000mm f/11-14 lens).

Also, consider your style of shooting. I tend to walk/hike and shoot what I see, so I usually like a lighter system. The 600 and 800mm is lighter, but the 100-500 isn't too bad either for weight. I carried my R5 and 100-500 for almost 4 hours on Monday slung over my shoulder while walking through hilly terrain on packed snow/ice and the weight didn't bother me. If you're concerned about weight, then the 600 or 800 mm may be the better option assuming you shoot in locations with good light and don't find yourself needing to zoom. I will say, though, that these cameras have quite good high iso capability and you can recover quite a lot in post.

I've gone back and forth about this and still am not sure. I ended up purchasing both. The 1.4 extender will be here this week. My camera store said the 800mm lens will be on backorder for a while so I may end up cancelling the 800mm if I like the extender enough. There are many locations that I go to that I need the ability to zoom so I may just stick with the 1.4x extender on the 100-500.

Not sure I helped or just gave you a more circular argument, but misery loves company and I'm right there with you!

Thanks for the reply, yes it's one of those age old questions, would I get the use out of the 600/800mm or more use with using the extenders? I think either option is a good one with regards to weight as I have carried around a big 600mm F4 prime and that after a day is pretty uncomfortable, so any of these combinations is going to be a lot better in that respect.

 

[marktroxel]

Wow! I can't imagine carrying/handholding a big f4 lens for an entire day! Like you said, I don't think you can go wrong with either...for me, it will likely come down to needing to be able to zoom out for closer subjects.

 

[KWilles]

It is much easier for the 100-500 lens to lock focus on a flying bird even with the 1.4 extender (handheld) than it is to find the bird with the 800 without the extender. I use the 800, and if I want to, add the 1.4 extender to a perched subject. Where I live, it is perfect to put the 800 on a tripod with either extender and keep it focused on an eagle nest while waiting for an adult to return with food.

 

[freespiritman]

So would it be better to just buy the RF600/800 or get a 1.4 or 2X Extender to pair with the 100-500? How good are the RF extenders? Thoughts?

I just bought the 1.4 extender yesterday and so far I am pleased with the results. I too considered the 800 F/11. But, I think the image quality is just as good, and F10 instead of F11, and focus to 3 Ft instead of 20ft, a lot lighter, and takes much less room in bags and I can crop for the other 100mm. And can full frame focus instead of just in the middle.

 

[Genessi]

Thanks for the reply, yes it's one of those age old questions, would I get the use out of the 600/800mm or more use with using the extenders? I think either option is a good one with regards to weight as I have carried around a big 600mm F4 prime and that after a day is pretty uncomfortable, so any of these combinations is going to be a lot better in that respect.

I bought the 600mm and enjoyed it but really wanted the 100-500. Been very lucky! I returned the 600mm and bit the bullet. Got the zoom. Even though I am probably zoomed all the way most of the time, I like the zoom!! The 600mm was a nice 100mm more.

 

[Genessi]

What's the difference between the 1.4 extender and just using the crop of the R5

 

[TonyB]

What's the difference between the 1.4 extender and just using the crop of the R5

45 megapixel images. The crop mode crops the image on the sensor. The 1.4 extender “crops” the image through magnification in the lens so you’re still getting 45MP images on the card. Which to use is personal preference and condition based.

I’ve have the 100-500 with the 1.4x and the results have been the best zoom/extender combo I’ve seen to date, with good light. Most of the osprey and other bird photos I’ve posted have been taken with that combo. The AF is fast, doesn’t hunt and the images are tack sharp. The size of the 100-500 is very easy to travel with and the extender provides that extra reach when you need it, but you need the right light. If you want a prime and money was no object, I would say grab a 400mm f/2.8, the 1.4 and 2x extenders and call it a day, but my Powerball ticket hasn’t set me up for that kind of purchase yet. One day.

I also have the 800mm f/11 and I hardly use it. It’s decent and I’ve gotten great images with it but I always grab the 100-500 and 1.4x. So it’s up for sale. If anyone’s interested, I’m open to reasonable offers.

 

[Chris Summers]

After shooting with my 800mm f/11 for the past 2 months I would be hesitant to try it with a tele extender as the 1.4x would be f/22 and the 2x puts it at f/32!

My other tele-zoom is the Tamron 150-600mm G2 lens and I own the Tamron tele extender made for that line of lenses and use it occasionally and overall have decent results. As an example here is a shot taken with my Canon R and the zoom lens at 600 mm with the 1.4 TC that makes it effectively an 840mm lens. Exposure was 1/1600 sec at f/9 and ISO 1600. This was also cropped substantially in Lightroom and also finished in Topaz Photo AI to decrease noise and add some sharpening. Shooting with the 800 mm f/11 and a TC would make it a 1120 mm focal length but at f/22 I can only guess that the ISO would be just about maxed out and quite noisy.

 

[Jake Shoots Birds]

Actually the 800mm f11 becomes a 1120mm f15, but yeah, it's still an issue - though you can do it in good light.

I've been shooting with the 100-500mm w/ 1.4x TC this week and while you're at 700mm on the long end I would put the image quality above that of the 800mm f11, and not just by a little bit. I have the 800mm and shoot a lot of small birds and I find the feather detail to be better with the zoom+TC than I do with the 800mm. And while the aperture is still not as small as I'd like I can still shoot at less than f11. If you have the 100-500mm I would invest in the TC. If you don't, then you have to make the determination on how much more you want to spend to get a little better.

Not for nothing, but the other option is the R7 which turns the 100-500mm into a 160-800mm at f7.1 on the long end with no loss of quality. There are limitations to the sensor and buffer, but depending on what you're shooting if reach is all you want this gives it to you without loss of quality or MP's (compared to cropped mode on the R5).