RF 800 vs. RF 600mm

I had to read that twice to see that #3 is a higher rating than #8, ie: 800mm is ranked higher than the 600mm, as the scale is #1 is best, 10 worst.

I'd have to agree with that. If the 600mm were faster aperture, I'd consider the choice more difficult, but given the fixed f/11 is both cases, I went straight for the 800mm.

As you have already put together, your more flexible zoom with a TC gets you right into 600mm territory. The amazing thing about the 800mm is you have a very lightweight lens that gets you right out there beyond any traditional focal length without even needing to mess with TCs. (And it barely costs more than the new RF TCs!)

Previously for me to get that range, I needed an 8 pound 500mm @ $8k with a $350.00 1.4x on, and I was still short by 100mm, or I needed to break out the 13 pound SIGMONSTER for 800mm natively.

Plus, don't you just feel better knowing your packing 800mm in your pocket?

CyberDyneSystems wrote in post #19315688
.
I had to read that twice to see that #3 is a higher rating than #8, ie: 800mm is ranked higher than the 600mm, as the scale is #1 is best, 10 worst.

I'd have to agree with that. If the 600mm were faster aperture, I'd consider the choice more difficult, but given the fixed f/11 is both cases, I went straight for the 800mm.
.

.
Yeah, if something is ranked as #1, that usually means it is the best. . I just extend that out to mean that the lower the number, the higher the ranking.


.

Tom Reichner wrote in post #19315689
.
Yeah, if something is ranked as #1, that usually means it is the best. . I just extend that out to mean that the lower the number, the higher the ranking.

.

lol, yes, I think it was the order in which you placed them in your text one above the other that threw me!

CyberDyneSystems wrote in post #19315690
.
lol, yes, I think it was the order in which you placed them in your text one above the other that threw me!
.

.
I just followed the order that Tony & Chelsea presented them in in their video. . Classic "countdown" style video, with the worst lens being reviewed first, gradually working their way up to the "winner" at the end of the video.

I can see how it could be confusing.


.

Thanks for the video. I was able to watch it and see some of the images. Leaning towards the RF800 and pairing it with the EF 100-400 on my 7DII for wildlife shoots

CyberDyneSystems wrote in post #19315688
I had to read that twice to see that #3 is a higher rating than #8, ie: 800mm is ranked higher than the 600mm, as the scale is #1 is best, 10 worst.

I'd have to agree with that. If the 600mm were faster aperture, I'd consider the choice more difficult, but given the fixed f/11 is both cases, I went straight for the 800mm.

As you have already put together, your more flexible zoom with a TC gets you right into 600mm territory. The amazing thing about the 800mm is you have a very lightweight lens that gets you right out there beyond any traditional focal length without even needing to mess with TCs. (And it barely costs more than the new RF TCs!)

Previously for me to get that range, I needed an 8 pound 500mm @ $8k with a $350.00 1.4x on, and I was still short by 100mm, or I needed to break out the 13 pound SIGMONSTER for 800mm natively.

Plus, don't you just feel better knowing your packing 800mm in your pocket?

On the R5, at least, the 800 also pairs really nicely with the RF 1.4TC as a low(er) cost, light and relatively compact 1120mm. it isn't smokin' fast at AF, but it *can*, with a little practice, keep up with slow/med speed IF shooting if you have some working distance to cover. Would never want to try Swallows, but anything that cruises around such that you can get some tracking time on them should be fine.

I have the 800mm and I really enjoy the lens. The size and weight are a great help to me as I age

I do find the AF really nice and the IS with the R5 is great. I do find the smaller focus square to be a little hard for BiF, I might get better with practice. Sure this lens has some limitations being a fixed f11 lens, but the lens is $900 and has some very nice features. I find the lens to be very sharp. I will eventually get the RF 1.4 TC, but right now I just think it is a little expensive.

I never even considered the 600mm. I already have ways to get to 600mm.

I really enjoy shooting my 800mm f11. I bought the lens understanding it is not a substitute for a $10K lens. If you buy the lens understand this lens is a specialty lens I think most people will enjoy the purchase.'

BTW, I have read in other forums people saying these are good lenses for beginners. I personally disagree, these lenses are great for what they do, but I think you need to have a good understanding of photography to get much out of a fixed f11 lens.

Does anyone use the RF 800 on the original R? I've been holding off thinking of just getting a 1.4x for my 100-400. I'm a little concern about the MFD with the 800 but it also seems most people use it on the R5/6.

I bought the RF 800/11 together with the R6 last year. The lens exceeding my expectations. I loved it so much that I decided to also get the RF 600/11 for birds in flight specifically as with 800mm your FOV is so small that it’s excruciatingly hard to track a bird or rather to find one in flight and lock onto it. BIF @600mm is way more doable. However, the 600/11 didn’t work out so well. It simply wasn’t anywhere near as good and sharp as the 800/11. I couldn’t get sharp shots of even perched birds and of the few hundred shots I took with the lens, none were really good.

I tried again the next day, better weather, better light. It did perform a bit better but then the camera began to lockup. Again and again and again to the point that I could shoot anymore. I returned the lens.

I am sure the lockups were just an anomaly, especially since months later I also had lockups @600mm with my EF 300/4L with the 2x TC, so maybe my R6 has a bit of a problem with that focal length and it probably wasn’t the lens at all. Plus I have not seen others reporting this but that still leaves the fact that the lens gave me soft-ish images, even in fairly decent light.

Tommydigi wrote in post #19316424
.
I'm a little concern about the MFD with the 800 ...
.

.
That super far away MFD is a concern, and I don't think there's much that you can practically do about it.

One thing I will note is that in my experience with other telephoto lenses, is that the addition of extension tubes does not help very much when used with long focal lengths.

Put a typical 25mm extension tube on a 50mm lens and it significantly reduces your MFD and dramatically increases your magnification ratio. . It essentially turns your "normal" 50mm lens into a macro lens. . Put the same extension tube on a 400mm lens and it doesn't make much of a difference at all ... like, not even a 25% reduction in MFD.

So I don't think that the use of extension tubes would really be all that helpful with the 800mm lens. . A super long MFD like the 800mm has is something that you pretty much just have to live with. . Well, at least that's what my experience has been.

.

so in a way the 1.4 on my 7d with the 100-400 will actually be a similar field of view? Actually a bit longer ( 896 with the crop factor ) While I know there are some trade offs I get the zoom, weather seal, and closer MFD.

Tommydigi wrote in post #19316454
.
so in a way the 1.4 on my 7d with the 100-400 will actually be a similar field of view? Actually a bit longer ( 896 with the crop factor ) While I know there are some trade offs I get the zoom, weather seal, and closer MFD.
.

.
Good point!

I love that the addition of a 1.4x or 2x extender does NOT increase the MFD of a lens! . Hence, extenders are so much more effective than extension tubes when used with supertelephopto primes.


.

I have the 600mm and the 800mm. Also have 100-400 ver 2 and the 600 f4 ver 2. The 600 f11 photos look similar to the 100-400 + 1.4x TC. The 600 f11 weight is much easier to handle. The 100-400+ has much better MFD. The 600 is great if you’re walking around birding. The 100-400 is better if you want to photograph butterflies, dragonflies and birds during a walk.
The 600mm f4 + 1.4x TC has a similar field of view to the 800 f11. The 800 image is surprisingly good. The 600+ Is superb, of course. I handhold the 600+ frequently but the 800 f11 is MUCH easier to hold. MUCH easier to buy too.
If I’m walking in brushy areas, the 600 f11 is good. In open areas, the 800 is a better choice. A friend is having trouble handling the weight of the 100-400, she keeps wanting to borrow my 600 f11. I was at Conowingo dam recently and used the 800. That worked great on the eagles. I also walked down the trail where I found a Winter Wren in the shade. R5 set to ISO 6400, shutter speed at 1/200. I was able to get some decent images.
If you want absolute top-notch IQ, get the fast lenses. If you want good images with limited budget, either F11 lens will work. Canon needs to release an R camera with good autofocus at a ‘rebel’ price.

jmckayak wrote in post #19316469
.
Canon needs to release an R camera with good autofocus at a ‘rebel’ price.
.

.
I very much agree! . Until they do that, there is absolutely ZERO chance that I will buy either the 600mm f11 or the 800mm f11. . Once they do release an R camera at a Rebel price, there is a 100% chance that I buy the 800mm f11.


.

Tom Reichner wrote in post #19316451
.
That super far away MFD is a concern, and I don't think there's much that you can practically do about it.

One thing I will note is that in my experience with other telephoto lenses, is that the addition of extension tubes does not help very much when used with long focal lengths.

Put a typical 25mm extension tube on a 50mm lens and it significantly reduces your MFD and dramatically increases your magnification ratio. . It essentially turns your "normal" 50mm lens into a macro lens. . Put the same extension tube on a 400mm lens and it doesn't make much of a difference at all ... like, not even a 25% reduction in MFD.

So I don't think that the use of extension tubes would really be all that helpful with the 800mm lens. . A super long MFD like the 800mm has is something that you pretty much just have to live with. . Well, at least that's what my experience has been.

.

I think a 20' MFD is problematic in some situations but not in others. I think with most wildlife situations, you are likely more than 20' away (less than the space between the 40 and 50 yard markers on a football field). But with small birds, or kids in a school event, etc, you might be a bit closer maybe.