Canon RF 100-500 4.5 - 7.1

digital paradise wrote in post #19076117
It is quite possible I'll continue to shoot with the 100-400 II and see what comes out next year.

Same here. I tried the R and it was not for me. I'm also still pretty happy with my 5D4/7D2. So parting with my 100-400 II will be something I won't do for a long time. Also afraid what the RF will cost. I got a great deal from a member here for the 100-400 II and the pandemic has calmed my GAS down quite a bit.

gossamer88 wrote in post #19076129
Same here. I tried the R and it was not for me. I'm also still pretty happy with my 5D4/7D2. So parting with my 100-400 II will be something I won't do for a long time. Also afraid what the RF will cost. I got a great deal from a member here for the 100-400 II and the pandemic has calmed my GAS down quite a bit.

I sold my 5D4 last fall to get my foot in the R door. I still have my 7D2 but haven't touched it since then. I really like some of the benefits of mirrorless so I decided to pursue using it. My keeper rate went down but I always come home with something. I have been shooting BIF with the 100-400 II and 2X.

The real negative is the EVF wake up time. With a DSLR I could get the OVF to my eye and at least start to track the bird. Even if I press the BBF on the R before I raise the camera it is too slow. A second is a lifetime when a duck flies past you between 40 and 60 mph.

digital paradise wrote in post #19076132
The real negative is the EVF wake up time. With a DSLR I could get the OVF to my eye and at least start to track the bird. Even if I press the BBF on the R before I raise the camera it is too slow. A second is a lifetime when a duck flies past you between 40 and 60 mph.

.
Two of my friends have the Sony A7D4 and are not happy with it for ducks in flight, and they are using native mount Sony lenses.

So the one friend just gave up shooting DIF, and the other bought the Sony A9 for his DIF work.

A second truly is a lifetime, and if wake up time and AF speed and accuracy aren't world-class, serious BIF photographers won't want to be bothered with it.


.

Tom Reichner wrote in post #19076149
.
Two of my friends have the Sony A7D4 and are not happy with it for ducks in flight, and they are using native mount Sony lenses.

So the one friend just gave up shooting DIF, and the other bought the Sony A9 for his DIF work.

A second truly is a lifetime, and if wake up time and AF speed and accuracy aren't world-class, serious BIF photographers won't want to be bothered with it.

.

Thanks for the info.

Tom Reichner wrote in post #19071326
Some dude will post some cheap-lens close-ups of a deer or a bear or a bird on social media or even a site like this, and get tons of "likes" and praise from others, and I'll be looking at the image and thinking, "why do people like this so much ..... there are distracting elements in the background because of the small aperture, and the way the photographer positioned himself wasn't done with background optimization in mind." . It's like there are people who don't really know what they are doing, yet they are cheapening the market for those who do really know what they're doing, because what they do is "good enough" for other people who don't know or appreciate the difference..

Because when you offer critique on said image, the poster will not listen, will not take critique, and just wants "likes". They even go so far as to argue the merits of their image, and say how it's much better than you might think. How they don't adhere to the "standards" and their art transcends this, etc.

digital paradise wrote in post #19076117
It is quite possible I'll continue to shoot with the 100-400 II and see what comes out next year.

That's my plan for the foreseeable future. I plan on keeping my 7D2 for some time, which I use exclusively with my two telephoto lenses -- EF 100-400L II and EF 70-200L f/4 IS. So, I will continue to use the EF to RF adapter if/when I feel the need to use a telephoto on my EOS R. Buying a telephoto with a maximum aperture of f/11 doesn't interest me in the slightest. In fact, the entire rumored list of RF lenses to be introduced in 2020 leaves me underwhelmed. The only ones that even peak my interest slightly are the RF 50mm f/1.8 STM and RF 85mm f/2 macro -- but I am currently happy using my EF 50L on the EOS R, and I do not use my Sigma 105mm macro enough to really consider spending money on the Canon.

I would consider exchanging out my EF 16-35mmL f/4 IS if Canon offered an RF version just to get rid of the adapter, as I used that lens exclusively with my 5D3 (which I still need to sell) and now use exclusively with the EOS R. I would love the RF 50L, but it's price is too steep for me.

If the lens ends up being f/5.6 @ 400mm, in a sense it's basically a 100-400 with some additional reach tacked onto the end at the cost of aperture. Treat it like your 100-400, where the aperture "limitation" hasn't stopped anyone from creating excellent photos. If it ends up with similar performance (IQ and AF speed) and MFD as the 100-400II, and costs roughly the same, I believe this will be a great piece of kit if you're staying in the Canon system.

Who cares what Sony, Nikon and other manufacturers do, I get it, but it has to be said that for a while now Canon has been lacking a XXX-600 offering to compete with the Sony 200-600, Nikon 200-500, Sigma 60-600, Tamron 150-600, etc. because that's where it's at right now for affordable super-tele range lenses. 600mm at f/6.3 is gobs more useful than 500mm @f/7.1, especially if you're aiming to shoot birds/wildlife. Yet, Sony splits up their tele offerings w/ their 100-400 + 200-600, so maybe some of these Canon patents will come to fruition and they'll get out to 600 or 700.

The 600 and 800 DO f/11 lenses though... um.... I'm sure they'll be nice and compact, but f/11 is severely limiting unless you're shooting in bright, midday light, which is rarely the case when capturing birds or wildlife. Forget about Golden Hour, the high ISO noise will be ridiculous. "well, the R5 sensor may have better high ISO performance"... just no.

Here's how I'd play it for the RF line:

80-400 f/4.5-5.6 - $2100
200-700 f/7.1 - $2600
600 f/6.3 DO - $3500
800 f/8 DO - $4200

And then offer the usual 300/400/500/600 f/2.8 and f/4 lenses, increasing in price from $7000.

Ultimate wildlife/birding + sports spread, you'd essentially have 4 "consumer grade" super tele lenses that would offer unique capabilities or features without fear of obsoleting another lens in the line. Not only that, each are compelling enough that you'd have people buying more than one of them. A 200-700 would silence the Sony/Sigma zooms, and the DO lenses would take care of the Nikon 500 PF, while at the same time protecting Canon's super-tele f/4 line. The market is there for these sorts of lenses, just do it already, Canon.

As a Nikon 500 PF shooter, I'd come back to Canon in a heartbeat if the even remotely tried to compete in this arena (an 800mm f/8 DO on FF would be absolutely perfect), but f/11 is just not realistic. I hope the f/11 is incorrect, and they pull a last second switcheroo and make it f/8.

The 600 DO 6.3 for that price would be appealing to me.

IDK, those prices are seem pretty "wishful" IMO.

gossamer88 wrote in post #19076508
IDK, those prices are seem pretty "wishful" IMO.

Right on.. these were just WAGs. The 100-400 and 200-700 are priced to compete with the comparable Sony offerings, and the DOs go against the Nikon 500PF. I can see them being higher though.

It's hard to tell where pricing will be anymore, especially when considering the ongoing camera market contraction + global economic crash. Everything is going up in cost, unfortunately. To be competitive, ideally they'll need have to have something in the same ball park as the Sony 200-600 and Nikon 500PF in order to keep them in reach of hobbyists/normal consumers, while also pricing them well under the f/4 great white range.

One has to consider what this lens or any RF lens can do for you. Is the 7.1 worth it for this. Will it significantly outperform the R5 with 100-400 II and adapter.

HIGH-CAPACITY & HIGH-SPEED DATA TRANSMISSION

Data Transmission through 12 pin Electrodes

A 12 pin connection between the camera and lens means communication at a higher speed with larger amounts of data transfer, enabling incredibly fast AF, high IS and image optimization. It’s a system designed to expedite operations that’s ready for future expansions.
Canon EOS R 12 PIN CONNECTION

https://www.canon.ca …atures/EOS-R/EOS-R-System

digital paradise wrote in post #19076514
One has to consider what this lens or any RF lens can do for you. Is the 7.1 worth it for this. Will it significantly outperform the R5 with 100-400 II and adapter.

HIGH-CAPACITY & HIGH-SPEED DATA TRANSMISSION

Data Transmission through 12 pin Electrodes

A 12 pin connection between the camera and lens means communication at a higher speed with larger amounts of data transfer, enabling incredibly fast AF, high IS and image optimization. It’s a system designed to expedite operations that’s ready for future expansions.
Canon EOS R 12 PIN CONNECTION

https://www.canon.ca …atures/EOS-R/EOS-R-System

I tried to tier them as such that if you were getting more reach w/ TCs, the next lens up would be just a little bit faster that it would make you think "if I'm shooting w/ the TC all of the time, I might as well step up to the next, more expensive lens" Devious, but smart, because you want people to be split on which to buy, and hopefully end up getting both.

MatthewK wrote in post #19076516
I tried to tier them as such that if you were getting more reach w/ TCs, the next lens up would be just a little bit faster that it would make you think "if I'm shooting w/ the TC all of the time, I might as well step up to the next, more expensive lens" Devious, but smart, because you want people to be split on which to buy, and hopefully end up getting both.

Only time will tell.

MatthewK wrote in post #19076512
Right on.. these were just WAGs. The 100-400 and 200-700 are priced to compete with the comparable Sony offerings, and the DOs go against the Nikon 500PF. I can see them being higher though.

It's hard to tell where pricing will be anymore, especially when considering the ongoing camera market contraction + global economic crash. Everything is going up in cost, unfortunately. To be competitive, ideally they'll need have to have something in the same ball park as the Sony 200-600 and Nikon 500PF in order to keep them in reach of hobbyists/normal consumers, while also pricing them well under the f/4 great white range.

LOL I had to google WAGs...You still using Canon gear?

gossamer88 wrote in post #19076520
LOL I had to google WAGs...You still using Canon gear?

Yes sir, we have the R + RF 35 f/1.8, RF 24-70, RF 70-200, and my EF 50L. My wife has mostly commandeered that kit for her product/lifestyle marketing photography, and I shoot my Fuji for puttering around the house, but when it's time to get the polished shot, the Canon always gets the nod. It's almost effortless using the R, the results from this kit are phenomenal.