I have the 800 F11 on the R7. It is challenging at times to frame your subject, and to put it in the focusing box, and I hear a lot of complains about it, but then I remind myself that until a couple of years ago I was shooting with the 7D mark ii, and focusing then was a much bigger challenge! Are we all getting lazy with the mirrorless autofocus doing such an amazing work of focusing and keeping focus on our subject? Are we gradually loosing the skills of actually putting a focus point (never mind the focusing box of the 800 F11 on the R7) on our subject? True, at F11 my ISO will be much higher than it used to be with the 7D ii and any lens I had, but nowadays with the better sensors ISO performance, and with noise reduction programs like DxO PureRAW, I can get much cleaner images even at higher ISO. For me, not getting any younger with time, the weight factor of the 800 F11-R7 combo is cardinal to be able to get around with a fantastic reach in my camera.
@@marcoj1970 yes, we are getting lazy, the 5d mark II was an amazing camera, and many photographers got stunning photos with it and a 400 5.6, nowdays we have the best af ever and there is people complaining that it is too difficult to frame the animal
@@D4ni3lS4nk3I had that setup. I got some good pics. Now I use the R5 and the 800 f11. It is a different thing. I get amazing pics and if I miss it’s me. Bird photo sales have slowed now so I’m glad I didn’t spend a fortune and catalog the Birds I’ve seen.
My R7 arrived about 2 weeks ago and I am more than satisfied. I mainly use it with the Canon EF 24-105 F4 or the Tamron 18-400mm. I have the Sigma 150-600mm too but its big and bulky. Ordered the RF 800mm today. And this video really helped.. The facts that its so small and compact definitely also played big factor for me
I have the same set R7 with RF 100-400 and RF 800 , its fun for the price, RF 800 does pose some challenges but I have learned to use that for a very specific time of the day and shots.
I have both of these lenses for years and R8 was a game changer because of larger AF box in the 800stm.(same asR6 ll) They give also very good results with 1,4 ext. ,specially 100-400 where sharpness at 560mm is amazing. Now I am getting my first ever RF 2,0 ext and its nice to try how it works. Thanks Jan ,fantastic review😊
Hi Jan, great vid as usual. From the perspective of an old bloke with a dodgy ticker, the size and weight of mirrorless systems are such that if I'm visiting a relatively small reserve (UK) with hides, I can carry both R7 + 100-400 and R6 with either the 800 or 600. Maybe a tad overboard, but in addition to the flexibility, it saves lens changes in the field. I do find the R6 a slightly better performer with the longer lenses but maybe that's just me and as you point out, the R7 gives that extra 1.6x. Birds in flight have always presented a problem for me anyway, and so I usually end up using the trusty old ef 400mm 5.6! All the best
I have a lifetime's collection of lenses, good lenses and yet since I purchased the RF 800 and put it onto my R6 my EF primes and zooms have stayed in the cabinet. This combination is BONZA!
I hear you. Got plenty myself but the 600/11 on my R7 is fun and the last few months the 100-400 is calling. The weight factor alone is a joy. I can leave my 2.8 lenses for the right job now
@@mvp_kryptonite I got the 600mm before having the 800mm. I photograph birds and I have to do so from a mobility scooter because I'm no longer ambulant. The 800 gets me shots that I otherwise would miss.
Try the R6 or R6 Mark ii in crop mode versus the R7 using the 800mm f/11. You loose the focusing square, and get the superior R6 autofocus. Love the R6 800mm with 1.4x extender in crop mode for wildlife, especially birds in flight. Works great!
On the other hand, the R6 Mark II in crop mode gives you 17 MP images instead of the R7’s 32.5 MP. It is OK, but you have to be more careful with your composition…
Just been in Namibia, using an R7+RF100-500 and R8 + RF 100-400 . The latter gave me overall better images and warmer (unedited Raws) colors, using a much cheaper lens !! . The R7 was less consistent with focus, and I got many more pictures not sharp : sometime focus was not perfectly on the point It was supposed to be , other times a soft image as if the camera had vibrations during the shots. last issue, Both cameras found and focus on bird eyes, but R7 was failing with big animals ( elephants, Leopards, , Orices etc, where it was basically focusing on the animal body , not on the eye, and often not on the head either. R8 was better in tis respect.
RF100-400 is great, it has a sweet spot 400@f9 where there is barely any difference in quality with 100-500 (only in depth of field really). 800 is noticeably less sharp and considerably slower to focus, has super noticeable vignetting but you can't beat its reach
@@UnluckyNewbiegenerally, stopping down a lens improves contrast and sharpness. Just be wary as stopping too far steps into the realm of diffraction and then you lose quality
Great comment again. :-) Just don't forget the RF F11 600mm too: a lot more a walk away lens than the same 800 mm . And as always: everybody forgets :-) : the EF 4.0 300 mm IS old lens: super versatile and super close focus. Greetings from the Netherlands.
Truth, I went for the 600/11 mainly because I thought it was more compact and I didn’t want to battle finding subjects. It’s good for that. I’m on the hunt for that OG 300/4 IS. I really like the 400/5.6 version and one can never have too many tools :)
Great video! I have the 100-400 mm with the R10 and I love that combo because it's so light weight. It's excellent for birds that are not too far away and macro's of dragonflies, damselflies etc.
I bought the RF100-400 and RF800 f/11, for my R50. I think the value of these lenses is HUGE. I took the 100-400 to a zoo, and got what I think are some great shots for my first time shooting.
I’ve just added the r7 as a second body to use with my 100-400. The lens is magic with my r5 and as a second camera when I’m using a larger prime the r7 is shaping up to be a capable and super fun combo. Love the videos jan. I’ve learnt a lot from you. Thank You.
A perfect illustration of the choices available to us photographers - Canon's strategy is well thought out and executed. Also delighted to hear about the bump in performance with the R6 II - just picked up one recently. All of this further diminishes the argument that Canon did themselves harm by not allowing third parties out of the gate. That's part of their strategy too, and they will let it happen when it makes sense to do so. Lastly, it's great to see a pro providing a balanced review of consumer grade hardware and recommending equipment that the average hobbyist can afford. Great video, Jan.
This is the best review I’ve ever seen about these two lenses. I own them both, and for the price they’re excellent options for a budget wildlife combo with the R7. You can photograph birds without camo or a hide. And the 100-400mm has very fast focus. I agree that the 800mm is hard to use for birds in flight. Thanks for this review! 👍👏
R10 with 100-400 good combo, now gone R10 to R7 with 100-400 and really pleased as a budget conscious photographer add in the 1.4 converter and can’t ask for more. Another enjoyable video, many thanks.
I just picked up both of these lenses yesterday to use with my R7. I got them both very lightly used, for the same price as a new 800 f/11. I couldn’t believe my luck! Really looking forward to getting out and putting them through their paces this week.
I use both of these lenses on my R8 and R10 and absolutely love them. A joy to shoot and excellent image quality along with class leading IS for slower shutter speeds/handholding
True, the only problem there is nothing in between that would cover people who don’t want to spend a fortune but still looking for more than these two lenses in the video can offer
@@csc-photo it’s a top lens indeed but it’s more than 3000EUR here in Europe….I find it soooo overpriced. If you consider this one in the video, the 100-400, it costs around 650Eur. I’m asking myself where does the almost 5 times price difference come from? That lens is simply not 5x better, but having no other option, many people opt for it. Anyway, I love Canon for many other reasons but it seems the other camera brands have more user friendly price and lens strategies at the moment.
@@gergok OMG ! Truer words have never been spoken ! And it freaking kills me. If you want a Canon 800mm lens, your choices are, the 800 F11, for $1000, Or the 800 F5.6 for $16,000 😮 Are you freaking kidding me !?
I often have the RF800 with me in the car, my main lens is the RF100-500mm but weather or light conditions allowing, the 800 is excellent for distant birds, this is using both R6 and now the R6ii great video Jan, nice to see a Canon one!
I have the R7/100-400 mm combo. Now, all I need to do is move to Australia. The US just doesn't have the variety of birds, at least in the east coast where I live.
And likely not very nice image quality. Extenders on zoom lenses are always a bit of a compromise. You will also be wide open at F 13 and will need to stop down for extra sharpness
Hope you're feeling well I saw you were plugged in recently. I have that 800 F 11 along with an EF 600 f4 iii , 100 to 500 a bunch of other RF L lenses all the TC 's along with a couple R5s and I love the 800 on bright days with so little weight and in the right conditions I get excellent IQ and get a LOT of images I would never get with a big heavy rig.
Well, as tempting as all this sounds, I'll stick to my 90D + Sigma 150-600. It doesn't give me 1280mm, but "only" 960. Do I feel envious? No, because it gives me any focal length between 240 and 960 - I love zoom lenses! And if suddenly even 240mm is too long for a particular subject, I quickly grab my 70D with my 18-135 = 29-216mm. (That lens is not quite as sharp, but it will do in most situations). I try to avoid changing lenses in the wild which I think is sound policy.
Exactly my setup, although, over time, I have now added the 1.4x converter and the 600mm STM to the 800mm and the 100-400mm. I am now saving my pennies for an R8.
I'm late to this review, but wanted to thank you Jan for taking the time for this very helpful and informative video. This gives those among us who were considering less than top of the line gear that we might want to add to our bags, and you put the cost:benefit considerations in perspective very nicely. Your thoughts about the quality of the bodies (R7 and R6 II) with the 2 lenses were fun with lots of examples of subjects, types of shots, light considerations, etc. I would only like to suggest hearing your considerations or concerns regarding weather/rain with either lens and camera body. Thanks again!
Thank you Jan for another great review. I was watching this one for info on the RF 100mm to 400mm lens. It was very helpful. I just love the included video of the Gang-gang Cockatoos feeding in Hawthorn tree. The red berries and the green hawthorn leaves look so good along side the Gang-gangs feather colours. They have the most amazing personalities. Love them.♥
Great video, I use the 100-400 with my R7, but for more distance, I use the sigma 150-600, bigger and heavier but I can't get away from the f11 on the 800, plus the flexibility of distance, even with a .4 extender I don't need to go to F11.
Maybe this is very common to run into as a wildlife photographer, but I noticed how many flies were on you on minute 3:26 and your dedication to try to stay still to get the shot was amazing.
"Dotterel", what a great solution to the 'is it pronounced PLUGH-ver or PLOE-ver' debate! Also, your prosets and masterclass are awesome. Seriously elevated my photography. It's "ploe-ver" by the way.
I've been using the 800mm as a daily driver on my R6 for the past year. It replaced my Tamron 150-600mm G2 which I found unreliable due to the pulsing issue. With that said the 800mm f11 isn't completely immune to this issue either. There are certain occasions where I feel like there is a subtle pulsing, but mainly the AF seems to lose its grip of the eye/body of the bird. The AF square box is not a huge issue for me as it is similar to how I preferred using the central 9-point AF cluster on my older DSLRs, it's just a matter of trying to keep the objects in that box. The 100-400mm is great for the price but I find that on a full frame sensor there's not enough reach. I also find the colours and contrast quite funky which probably is meant to help the lens keep a good perception of clarity, though this is probably why the bokeh looks a bit busier. On the 100-400 I have a wider focus area but I find its AF is not necessarily better across the whole frame. Certainly quite good for gulls at the beach, pigeons in the city or ducks at the pond. It does however, have some inexplicable episodes of jumping out of focus which Duade Paton recently covered on the R7 and I feel like is present on the R6 as well. The 1.4x extender works quite well with the 100-400, I haven't tried the 600mm f11 but I find it is a good alternative if you want zoom and wider area AF (not full but much more than the small box). on the 800mm it is a bit more hit or miss but I do appreciate the extra reach as before I got the extender I still found myself using 1.6x crop mode (which basically downsizes it to a 7.8MP image)
Awesome ! :) I really enjoy all your videos, but for me, this is the most pertinent you have ever made :) I own the RF 800 F11, RF 600 F11, RF 100-400, and two R7's :) (now I'm kind of wondering if my back up camera should have been an R6 Mk II ?) Anyway, I owned the R5 for a year, and took a lot of really nice shots with it. Great camera ! But I always struggled for reach > even with the 800 F11.... So I sold it to buy a second R7 + the 600 F11 + the RF 100-400, and pretty much never looked back {except now maybe at the R6 Mk II ?} A few things I want to add... your right about the focusing box thing with the RF 600/800 F11, but I don't think you mentioned, that the box is substantially larger on a crop sensor camera, which was another reason I liked these lenses more on the R7, than the R5. Also, I must admit, I'm a lot more of a small, beautiful, colorful "perched birds" kind of guy, than a BIF guy, so that probably has a lot to do with why I like this camera / lens combo so much. Also, I "always" shoot with a tripod {the Kirk L bracket is a fantastic addition, which allows rotating to a vertical position} obviously NOT because the combo is too heavy. On the contrary, it's amazingly light, and easy to carry. But rather because, it allows me to slow the shutter way down when I have to, to keep my ISO lower. I shoot "as high" as ISO 3200.... but prefer to shoot at ISO 2000, even in low light, and this < is for my "safety shots". If my bird sticks around, I progressively shoot slower and slower, and just take LOTS of shots. Sometimes I might get down to as slow as 1/60th, and still get a few (or maybe only 1 :) ) buttery smooth shot, in very low light. In all honesty, "of course" I still dream about a super duper, Holy grail type of lens. But at the moment, such a lens is not even being produced by any manufacturer at any cost :( For a while I drooled over the Nikon PF 800 F6.3.... But honestly, that is probably still a bit heavier, and certainly more expensive than I'd really want to go > especially since I'd have to buy a Z8 or Z9 to go with it AND worse yet, Id be back to the smaller reach I got with my R5. I'd SO love to see a glorified "pumped up" version of the RF 800 F11.... maybe an F9.... only a bit heavier, FF focusing, a little weather sealing, and maybe in like the $3 K range.... But until then, I think I will just stick the RF 800 F11. Finally, its kind of funny how in conversations about this lens, you always hear > in good light... well in good light... Ha :) I wish :) I mean, regardless of the gear, "what photographer doesn't want good light" ? But for me, it seems like that happens about 10 or 20% of the time. Fortunately, I end up with shots I'm super happy with, with this lens, in terrible light, most of the time :) Sorry for the novel :) Fantastic video ! TYSM :) Edit: as for the MFD, Yea, pretty long at 19.6ft. I have actually used extension tubes to get it down to as little as 12.5ft with zero image degradation (just tubes, that add no glass to the combo) but I found that at 12.5 ft, with the equivalent of 1280mm, it was hard to fit a Hummingbird into the frame :) It was like an 800mm macro :) lol Nowadays in the field, I find it surprising how rarely I end up closer than 20ft to my subjects, and when I do, its usually possible just to take a step or two back :) Even with 1280mm, I find myself too far way more often, than too close :)
The R7 is an awesome camera, and even with the EF lenses it works great. I love it. And I recently traded my ef 70-300 IS II Nano USM lens with a new 100-400 rf lens, Also the RF 100-400 has nano USM focusing motors, not STM. It'll arrive in 2 days I guess and I can't wait to test it out. I have got so many good shots with the ef lens and even with my RF 200-800 lens, the ease of use of the light lens doesn't even compare. I think I'll rock with the 1.4 extender and the RF 100-400 so much more than I can with the 200-800 because it's so much lighter.
I have the R7 and the RF 100-400 mm lens and, after roughly a year, I realize most of my photos were taken with it instead of my other lenses (10-18 mm, 18-35 mm, 50 mm).
Thank you for good review ,I have both of these lenses ,i use them now with R8 which gives larger AF area with rf 800mm f11. Both of these lenses are very sharp and lightweight. I have been using them already for two years. RF 100-400mm gives surprisingly good results also with rf 1,4 extender -I have not yet tried 1,4ext with 800mm but I guess it will be good also...
The 800mm is fine if you live somewhere where the light is very bright and it doesn’t rain much. In the UK, it’s pretty much useless for 6 months of the year.
Enjoyed the video Jan. I use the RF800 with my R5 and agree the restricted auto focus area is a bit of a pain however you do get used to it. I'm hoping that Canon issue an R5 firmware update that will increase the auto focus area to make it similar to the R6 mk2. Any further news regarding a R5 firmware update?
I used those two lenses for months on my R7 and got decent pictures. I have also missed pictures with the 800mm when the birds flew too close. I recently got the 100-500 and it does focus quicker. It feels heavier than the 800mm though I am not sure that is the case. I will use it if I go out when there is good light but for weight reasons I am more apt to take the 100-400 and 100-500 with me, one on camera, the other in the bag and ready if needed.
Jan this video was very helpful. This solidifies my conclusion that the R6 mk II paired with the RF 100-400 and the 800 F 11 is all I require for good bird images at close to midrange telephotos. After all , I’ll leave the Long range Nat’l Geo shots to you. Thanks great video 😊 👏🏻🌈
G'Day Jan and thanks for the great content you put up. I've just got an R8 and the 70-200f4 which are a joy to use but, I need more reach( I shoot small birds) so the question to you is: do I go for this combo o just the 100-500mm (perhaps with teleconverter or crop factor when)? Cheers, Giuseppe
Thanks for this Jan, I chose the 600mm f11 to go with my R7 as I thought the 800mm might be too extreme. Your comments on the minimum focal length are interesting and I might investigate the 800mm further. I do find the 600mm very good for the wildlife photography that I do which is mainly for getting shots of bird for positive ID. The 600mm does this for me and if the limitations of f11 such as the depth of field are taken into account and backgrounds carefully selected, the results are good. The great thing about these lenses is the all day portability in my opinion. Cheers and thanks, hope you are doing well.
For me the only reason I would upgrade to a r6 mk2 from the r6 is the upgraded focus box. I wish a firmware update on r6 would do this. But a jump of only 4mp is the sticking point for me.
Great video Jan. I do love my RF 800mm with my R7 and R5. With it on the R7 the reach is really impressive, ISOs can get high but not really a problem with 3rd party noise reduction. Typically I run with the 800mm on the R7 and and 100-500mm on the R5 giving me a great combo for most wildlife and bird situations, in a very light and portable set up.
Great combo! I am looking at this combo for a while. I am just afraid that I will be limited to what I can do with this set up. Ideally is to rent this equipment for weekend to understand what else you can do with it, besides headshots 😅
@@jan_wegener Thanks. Sorry I was not specific enough in my comment. What I rather meant was would you recommend it even for a budget camera like the r100. Thanks for your time.
Hey Jan, really enjoying your videos -- great insights, to the point without any fluff! Can I ask a question -- I'm planning a wildlife trip that will take me into some heavy forest cover but can only realistically expect to bring one telephoto lens in addition to my Canon 24-70. I'm told to expect both longer distance and closer photo opportunities. Would you go with the 70-200 f/2.8 or the 100-500 f/4.5-7.1? In other words, wider aperture or longer focal length? I'll probably have an R5 with me. All advice welcome! Thanks.
Another Brilliant video, Could you possibly do an R8 vs R7 in the field comparison video, also I knew about the bird photography show episode, I just forgot about it
Decision, decision....I own a R5 with the RF 100-500, a few medium RF zooms and the RF 15-35 f/2.8 I purchased used in like new condition. I bought this set up when living in the state of MS where the vegetation and wildlife was much closer. I now reside in Wyoming with wide vistas and wildlife such as Antelope, Deer and birds are farther away when trying to photograph. I also dislike having to change on the quick the 100-500mm when spotting wildlife when shooting with the 15-35 for landscapes and sky images. Have been thinking of picking up a R6 II to use the 15-35 and the R5 for the 100-500mm for the cropping available and have both set ups at the ready. The R7 instead of the R6 along with the RF 800 looks interesting. The R6 looks like a better camera, quality wise but I would be giving up some distance not using the R7. I would then use the R5 for landscapes with the 15-35mm lens. A fun situation I find myself in.
Thanks Jan love my R7 for it’s reach,I have both the RF 100-400 and the 800 F 11, and enjoy them both, at my age 78 the weight is an important ingredient for me. I also have an R6 Mark II and an EF 100-400 F4.5-5.6 with a 1.4 extender I take out for specific shoots since the weight is very significant I use it with a carbon fiber monopod. The RF 100-4 is my favorite since it has about everything I want, price, sharp images and lightweight. Glad you did the video, we amateurs can’t really justify a RF 100-500. Happy with what I have and enjoy your presets and your great tips on editing.👀👀
Congrats on the video Jan. I feel like it was made for me as I have both lenses using them with the P6 and P6 Mark II. By the way, on the Mark II it covers almost the entire frame, which is great. I looked at many reviews for the RF 800mm including your review before I decided to buy it. To this day, I do not regret my choice. I think this lens, despite its limitations, is a great lens for the money it costs. I think the same about the RF 100-400mm, which is also great for macro photography.
I'm looking into switching from Canon DSLR to they're r system and some of they're lenses like the 100-400, 100-500, and 800 f/11 for wildlife photography. Trying to get over the cost of switching and what I should start with às a body/lens combo.🤔🤷😁
What would the R7 with the RF 100-400 be like for Fighter jet photography, I usually shoot with the G1 Tamron 150-600 but has big issues now with the R7, from one Aussie to another love your content
I don't think the focus points being limited to the center of the frame is *that* much of an issue. I can't remember when I ever used one of the points on the very edge of the frame of my own camera 🙂 But I also mostly take portraits of the animals at the zoo where I volunteer. So tracking isn't a big concern for me, not like the Z50 would be good at it, anyway 😅 A friend of mine recently picked up the RF 800 though and he really likes it! He's a lil older than me and heavy lenses are out of the question for him. The weight was especially surprising to me, the lens itself seems to weigh less than his R7! He uses it together with a 100-500 and he couldn't be happier.
Hi Jan, I need some advise. I've got the R6 as well as the RF100-400 but I miss some reach. I've read about the Sigma 150-600 which seems to be a good lens. Or would rather advise to get the 1.4 Rf tele converter? Looking forward to your opinion. My budget doesn't allow me to opt for a Canon 100-500 😉Greetz Ab
Dear Jan, Great video, and as a user of the R7 and RF800 I completely agree with everything you said. Question: I also use the EF 100-400, which offers good quality, but is also pretty heavy in the field. How would you guess it compares to the RF 100-400 on the R7? Cheers!
If you have EF -100-400 MK2 - it have great sharpness at 400mm F5.6. You will have better image stab and low weight from RF 100-400 vs better aperture F 5.6 of 100-400 MK2 If you have EF -100-400 MK1 - rf 100-400 will be much better in terms of sharpness for sure
this is really a nice lens too. I've only used mine a couple times, as my 800 stays glued on my R7 almost permanently :) I mostly got it to fill the gap between my 100-400 and my 800... kind of a "just in case" lens. Plus, I got a steal of a deal on it... Open box for $509 :)
I have the R7 with RF 100-400, took it on holiday to South Africa this year, also had a couple of days in Botswana & Zimbabwe and got some amazing images. High ISOs of 6400 clean up very nicely in Photoshop Beta. A fantastic purchase, obviously there is a lot of lens envy looking at the rich and the pros with expensive primes but for what is classed as a budget lens it certainly works for me.
Ah, you visited my home country 🇿🇦 Hope you had amazing time Botswana and Zimbabwe are magical as well When are you coming on safari to South Africa Jan? 😊
Hi Jan, great video and awesome birds, as usual ;-) When my old 70D had marched a year longer, I might have well ended up with this combo. I believe it offers great value for getting more engaged in wildlife. But my path went via the original R6 which was great but was painfully short on reach with my 100-400Lii. Seems like today the R7 and R6ii might be a compelling duo with these lenses, but before the R6ii was announced (by you ;-)) I swapped the R6 for the R5 .. and didn't regret it for one second !
The 100-400mm is amazing on the R6 MKII. I would like a little more reach though. In comparison with a rental sigma 150-600mm contemporary, the 100-400 is quicker at acquiring focus, less mass, it should be. The size and weight difference is substantial. I prefer the background blur of the f6.3 aperture but the f8 aperture on the 100-400 gives a kind of a painterly quality to the background, which looks pretty cool on a foresty background at golden hour. With the close focus distance it works pretty well as a macro lens. You can “punch in” with 1.6 crop in body but that takes you down to 9mp, you’d be cropping out the same amount of data in post anyway so I’m neutral on how useful that is. Great value if you purchase it on sale from the refurbished page at canon. I think the 800mm would be the sweet spot on a FF sensor, 600 doesn’t quite fill the frame with the smaller birds. Great information, Jan.
You can buy r7 for longer reach - yes, it have terrible rolling shutter, but you will have 1280 mm 33 mp file - perfect for slow or sitting birds + 30 fps.
This is a great review into the lenses, Thankyou. However if i'm honest, I prefer your images to before their edited, The saturation is nice, but apart from that i find when the background looses it's softness.. it looks flat and too fake.
Another great video. Curious about your Lightroom presets. Can they be used with Lightroom Mobile on an iPad? For the last few years I am using the LightRoom & Photoshop apps on the iPad. They typically offer enough functionality for what I need, mostly cropping, lifting shadows, and blurring backgrounds. I do like your presets though.
Another awesome video. I have the RF 800 and have taken great photos with it. Nikon just came out with a reasonably priced 180-600mm lens. Have you heard whether Canon is thinking of doing something similar. I know they have the 100-500 mm lens but it's so high priced. That would be fantastic!
Hello Jan! I have 3 questions for you. First do you suggest going with the r10 and getting both the 100-400 and the 800mm or going with the r7 and buying only the 100-400 because my budget is very restricted? Second do you recomend to wait until nikon realeases a crop camera like the r10/r7 and combine it with the new 180-600? Do you think that nikon will release a z90 this year the next or after a lot of years? I ask you all these questions because I am only 14 years old, I dont have a lot of money [my budget is below 3000dollars] but I love wildlife and bird photography. Last but not least I think you are one of the best photographers and youtubers and your personal style is amazing!👍👍👍
I use the RF 100-400 and RF600. Great lenses, though I really wish Canon would release a semi-pro lens that around the £1k-£1500k mark. I also find the 100-500 a little disappointing for the price, f/7.1 is pretty slow and the TC only working from 300mm is a bit silly too. Great vid. 👍
Great video Jan! I'm shooting with the rf100-400mm daily and I'm looking forward to getting the rf800mm f11. I have the R7 and I also hope to get the R8 which would give me a similar experience as the R6ii I believe.
Thanks for a great video on an interesting topic. I own R10 and RF 100-400mm and I am just wandering how could I increase the reach a little bit. Would you recommend RF 800mm or RF 1.4x extender?
Hi Jan, thanks for great videos I have been using R6 and 800mm f11 in past two years and for what it is worth I got good pictures from it, but I feel I would need an upgrade specially higher megapixels. What is your suggestion? Should I move to R5 and 100-500, or there is a newer camera coming specifically for bird photography that is better?
3:24min gives me anxiety. trying to hold a cam steady taking shots while a million flies trying to get into my eyes. i would go nuts in about 5 seconds there. what i mean to say it: thanks for doing these reviews for us.
hello Jan! Thanks for video :). What is this shaking at 8 minute? Stabilization? I sometimes have similar issue on OM1 and 100-400 and not sure why :). Thanks!
I bought the RF800 and 1.4 converter, on the deal where the converter is half price, I have an R6 mk1, I love the RF800, I haven't really used it in anger, but wholly agree that it is a really fun lens giving good results, just taking it down to the beach where I live, got some of the best pic's I have taken of birds in flight and landing. As yet I find the 1.4 converter dissapointing on my setup, I probably need to work out a better way of using it, and it is a long focal length to hand hold (I haven't tried on a monopod) and losing the extra stop my initial images simply aren't as sharp and considering all of my other lenses are EF I cannot use it elsewhere :( as a direct comparison for the RF800, in good light, I believe I get far better results than my older 100-400 EF L f4.5-5.6 with a 2x converter.
Thanks for this great video Jan. I use a canon 90d with sigma 150-600mm c lens and now i'm thinking about moving to RF series. For body R6 mark2 and R7 is my consideration and for lens obvious choice is 100-500 but due to budget issue wondering if any of these two lenses that you covered can be a good alternative ? Also how about using a EF 100-400 IS2 on R6 -2 or R7 body with 1.4 ex ? I would love to hear your recommendation on this :)
I'v had the R7 and the RF 100-400 combo for a few months now, and it enables me to shoot things I could have only dreamed of with my old DSLR. On top of that it's super light, and the combined stabilization lets you shoot handheld with ease. That said though, the 100-400 jumps to f7.1 at 156mm, and f8 at 259mm, so basically f8 or slower always. Only the first 13mm are f5.6, which is laughable honestly :D In good light conditions this is not a problem, but if you go out in the early morning in not typically sunny countries, you'll be shooting at very high ISOs and will be relient on denoising for any kind of usable pictures. I wish there were something in the middle price wise between the RF 100-400, and something like the EF 100-400L II or the RF 100-500 that is faster than f8 and doesn't break the bank. But on a budget it's pretty much the perfect combo.
Great video as always, but that 800 mm f/11 lens on the R7 with its crop factor of 1.6, isn't that really a 1280 mm f/ 17.6 ??, just my understanding of how the crop factor works, please correct me if I'm wrong.
I asked that same question, but after switching from my R5 to my R7, I didn’t notice it being any slower whatsoever ? One would think going from F11 to F17 would be a big difference, and very noticeable in a negative way. But for myself, the R7 actually worked better, to the point that I sold the R5 for a second R7, for my back up camera. Btw, adding extension tubes to my RF 800 F11 was supposed to make it slower as well, but I didn’t see any difference with that either ?
![Stromae, Pomme - “Ma Meilleure Ennemie” (from Arcane Season 2) [Official Visualizer]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/1F3OGIFnW1k/mqdefault.jpg)
Another great video. As a self-taught bird photographer, I find these videos beyond helpful.
Great to hear!
Wait aren’t all bird photographers self-taught?
@@jeffbronson3696 Good point! But so far for me, it has just been me, my camera, and RUclips videos.
@@Parroting_Australia234 nothing like the School of RUclips 🙂👍
I have the 800 F11 on the R7. It is challenging at times to frame your subject, and to put it in the focusing box, and I hear a lot of complains about it, but then I remind myself that until a couple of years ago I was shooting with the 7D mark ii, and focusing then was a much bigger challenge! Are we all getting lazy with the mirrorless autofocus doing such an amazing work of focusing and keeping focus on our subject? Are we gradually loosing the skills of actually putting a focus point (never mind the focusing box of the 800 F11 on the R7) on our subject?
True, at F11 my ISO will be much higher than it used to be with the 7D ii and any lens I had, but nowadays with the better sensors ISO performance, and with noise reduction programs like DxO PureRAW, I can get much cleaner images even at higher ISO.
For me, not getting any younger with time, the weight factor of the 800 F11-R7 combo is cardinal to be able to get around with a fantastic reach in my camera.
@@marcoj1970 yes, we are getting lazy, the 5d mark II was an amazing camera, and many photographers got stunning photos with it and a 400 5.6, nowdays we have the best af ever and there is people complaining that it is too difficult to frame the animal
@@D4ni3lS4nk3I had that setup. I got some good pics. Now I use the R5 and the 800 f11. It is a different thing. I get amazing pics and if I miss it’s me. Bird photo sales have slowed now so I’m glad I didn’t spend a fortune and catalog the Birds I’ve seen.
My R7 arrived about 2 weeks ago and I am more than satisfied. I mainly use it with the Canon EF 24-105 F4 or the Tamron 18-400mm. I have the Sigma 150-600mm too but its big and bulky. Ordered the RF 800mm today. And this video really helped.. The facts that its so small and compact definitely also played big factor for me
I have the same set R7 with RF 100-400 and RF 800 , its fun for the price, RF 800 does pose some challenges but I have learned to use that for a very specific time of the day and shots.
I have both of these lenses for years and R8 was a game changer because of larger AF box in the 800stm.(same asR6 ll) They give also very good results with 1,4 ext. ,specially 100-400 where sharpness at 560mm is amazing. Now I am getting my first ever RF 2,0 ext and its nice to try how it works. Thanks Jan ,fantastic review😊
Hi Jan, great vid as usual. From the perspective of an old bloke with a dodgy ticker, the size and weight of mirrorless systems are such that if I'm visiting a relatively small reserve (UK) with hides, I can carry both R7 + 100-400 and R6 with either the 800 or 600. Maybe a tad overboard, but in addition to the flexibility, it saves lens changes in the field. I do find the R6 a slightly better performer with the longer lenses but maybe that's just me and as you point out, the R7 gives that extra 1.6x. Birds in flight have always presented a problem for me anyway, and so I usually end up using the trusty old ef 400mm 5.6! All the best
I have a lifetime's collection of lenses, good lenses and yet since I purchased the RF 800 and put it onto my R6 my EF primes and zooms have stayed in the cabinet. This combination is BONZA!
Hello!. Why you didnt use R7 for extra reach?
I hear you. Got plenty myself but the 600/11 on my R7 is fun and the last few months the 100-400 is calling. The weight factor alone is a joy. I can leave my 2.8 lenses for the right job now
@@mvp_kryptonite I got the 600mm before having the 800mm. I photograph birds and I have to do so from a mobility scooter because I'm no longer ambulant. The 800 gets me shots that I otherwise would miss.
@@UnluckyNewbie I may get do that. I still have a 7D2 which I reckon to be a nice birding camera.
@@michaelktori5178 r7 af on another lvl, and you can't use rf 800 with 7m2
Try the R6 or R6 Mark ii in crop mode versus the R7 using the 800mm f/11. You loose the focusing square, and get the superior R6 autofocus. Love the R6 800mm with 1.4x extender in crop mode for wildlife, especially birds in flight. Works great!
On the other hand, the R6 Mark II in crop mode gives you 17 MP images instead of the R7’s 32.5 MP. It is OK, but you have to be more careful with your composition…
Hi Jan, really enjoy your videos. I use the R7 with RF 100-400mm. A great combo, affordable and very good quality.
Just been in Namibia, using an R7+RF100-500 and R8 + RF 100-400 . The latter gave me overall better images and warmer (unedited Raws) colors, using a much cheaper lens !! . The R7 was less consistent with focus, and I got many more pictures not sharp : sometime focus was not perfectly on the point It was supposed to be , other times a soft image as if the camera had vibrations during the shots. last issue, Both cameras found and focus on bird eyes, but R7 was failing with big animals ( elephants, Leopards, , Orices etc, where it was basically focusing on the animal body , not on the eye, and often not on the head either. R8 was better in tis respect.
Yes the R8 AF is definitely better
RF100-400 is great, it has a sweet spot 400@f9 where there is barely any difference in quality with 100-500 (only in depth of field really). 800 is noticeably less sharp and considerably slower to focus, has super noticeable vignetting but you can't beat its reach
Do you need to close aperture to F9 to max sharpness? at 400MM RF 100-400?
It's a new info for me. I have R7 + Rf 100-400 but always use it on F8 max.
@@UnluckyNewbiegenerally, stopping down a lens improves contrast and sharpness. Just be wary as stopping too far steps into the realm of diffraction and then you lose quality
@@UnluckyNewbie yes, it does benefit from stopping down 1/3 stops (but not more)
@@foma. maybe for fullframe only ? Or you have R7?
Great comment again. :-) Just don't forget the RF F11 600mm too: a lot more a walk away lens than the same 800 mm . And as always: everybody forgets :-) : the EF 4.0 300 mm IS old lens: super versatile and super close focus. Greetings from the Netherlands.
Truth, I went for the 600/11 mainly because I thought it was more compact and I didn’t want to battle finding subjects. It’s good for that. I’m on the hunt for that OG 300/4 IS. I really like the 400/5.6 version and one can never have too many tools :)
Great video! I have the 100-400 mm with the R10 and I love that combo because it's so light weight. It's excellent for birds that are not too far away and macro's of dragonflies, damselflies etc.
Great to hear!
I bought the RF100-400 and RF800 f/11, for my R50. I think the value of these lenses is HUGE. I took the 100-400 to a zoo, and got what I think are some great shots for my first time shooting.
I’ve just added the r7 as a second body to use with my 100-400. The lens is magic with my r5 and as a second camera when I’m using a larger prime the r7 is shaping up to be a capable and super fun combo. Love the videos jan. I’ve learnt a lot from you. Thank You.
A perfect illustration of the choices available to us photographers - Canon's strategy is well thought out and executed. Also delighted to hear about the bump in performance with the R6 II - just picked up one recently. All of this further diminishes the argument that Canon did themselves harm by not allowing third parties out of the gate. That's part of their strategy too, and they will let it happen when it makes sense to do so. Lastly, it's great to see a pro providing a balanced review of consumer grade hardware and recommending equipment that the average hobbyist can afford. Great video, Jan.
Thank you 😀
This is the best review I’ve ever seen about these two lenses. I own them both, and for the price they’re excellent options for a budget wildlife combo with the R7. You can photograph birds without camo or a hide. And the 100-400mm has very fast focus. I agree that the 800mm is hard to use for birds in flight. Thanks for this review! 👍👏
Thank you :) Glad you enjoyed it
Great video Jan!
Glad you enjoyed it!
Today I was especially impressed by how close you could zoom into the ibis' head at that pond in the park.
R10 with 100-400 good combo, now gone R10 to R7 with 100-400 and really pleased as a budget conscious photographer add in the 1.4 converter and can’t ask for more. Another enjoyable video, many thanks.
Thanks for sharing
I just picked up both of these lenses yesterday to use with my R7. I got them both very lightly used, for the same price as a new 800 f/11. I couldn’t believe my luck! Really looking forward to getting out and putting them through their paces this week.
I use both of these lenses on my R8 and R10 and absolutely love them. A joy to shoot and excellent image quality along with class leading IS for slower shutter speeds/handholding
Awesome
Does the r8 has a bigger af area compared to the r10 when using the 800f11? Thanksi n advance!
I have to commend Canon for offering these entry-level super zooms, no one else is doing this right now.
True, the only problem there is nothing in between that would cover people who don’t want to spend a fortune but still looking for more than these two lenses in the video can offer
@@gergok 100-500? (I'm not in Canon so I may be off here)
@@csc-photo it’s a top lens indeed but it’s more than 3000EUR here in Europe….I find it soooo overpriced. If you consider this one in the video, the 100-400, it costs around 650Eur. I’m asking myself where does the almost 5 times price difference come from? That lens is simply not 5x better, but having no other option, many people opt for it. Anyway, I love Canon for many other reasons but it seems the other camera brands have more user friendly price and lens strategies at the moment.
@@gergok OMG ! Truer words have never been spoken ! And it freaking kills me. If you want a Canon 800mm lens, your choices are, the 800 F11, for $1000, Or the 800 F5.6 for $16,000 😮 Are you freaking kidding me !?
Yes they just need to fill in the gaps a bit
I often have the RF800 with me in the car, my main lens is the RF100-500mm but weather or light conditions allowing, the 800 is excellent for distant birds, this is using both R6 and now the R6ii great video Jan, nice to see a Canon one!
Good choice! Haha yes, will keep it mixed up when it comes to brands
That photo at 7:38 is insanely awesome! Any time you can put blue sky behind a subject that is on the ground, you have a special opportunity.
I have the R7/100-400 mm combo. Now, all I need to do is move to Australia. The US just doesn't have the variety of birds, at least in the east coast where I live.
I was thinking about the 180-600 Nikon with a 2x extender and crop mode gets you to something like 2000+ mm for about ~$2200 usd.
And likely not very nice image quality. Extenders on zoom lenses are always a bit of a compromise. You will also be wide open at F 13 and will need to stop down for extra sharpness
Superb work at 6.41 - using yellow BG
Hope you're feeling well I saw you were plugged in recently. I have that 800 F 11 along with an EF 600 f4 iii , 100 to 500 a bunch of other RF L lenses all the TC 's along with a couple R5s and I love the 800 on bright days with so little weight and in the right conditions I get excellent IQ and get a LOT of images I would never get with a big heavy rig.
Thanks, doing ok, but struggling a bit still.
Yes, the size and weight make the 800 very compelling
Got them both and they are both excellent for the price point and perhaps the best combo for the R7 for those on a budget
Well, as tempting as all this sounds, I'll stick to my 90D + Sigma 150-600. It doesn't give me 1280mm, but "only" 960. Do I feel envious? No, because it gives me any focal length between 240 and 960 - I love zoom lenses! And if suddenly even 240mm is too long for a particular subject, I quickly grab my 70D with my 18-135 = 29-216mm. (That lens is not quite as sharp, but it will do in most situations). I try to avoid changing lenses in the wild which I think is sound policy.
Exactly my setup, although, over time, I have now added the 1.4x converter and the 600mm STM to the 800mm and the 100-400mm. I am now saving my pennies for an R8.
Thanks Jan 😊
Another fantastic review/overview.
My pleasure!
Just picked up the 800 f/11 (used) at a bargain after watching these videos. So very helpful!!
I'm late to this review, but wanted to thank you Jan for taking the time for this very helpful and informative video. This gives those among us who were considering less than top of the line gear that we might want to add to our bags, and you put the cost:benefit considerations in perspective very nicely. Your thoughts about the quality of the bodies (R7 and R6 II) with the 2 lenses were fun with lots of examples of subjects, types of shots, light considerations, etc. I would only like to suggest hearing your considerations or concerns regarding weather/rain with either lens and camera body. Thanks again!
Glad I could help
Thank you Jan for another great review. I was watching this one for info on the RF 100mm to 400mm lens. It was very helpful.
I just love the included video of the Gang-gang Cockatoos feeding in Hawthorn tree. The red berries and the green hawthorn leaves look so good along side the Gang-gangs feather colours. They have the most amazing personalities. Love them.♥
Great video, I use the 100-400 with my R7, but for more distance, I use the sigma 150-600, bigger and heavier but I can't get away from the f11 on the 800, plus the flexibility of distance, even with a .4 extender I don't need to go to F11.
Maybe this is very common to run into as a wildlife photographer, but I noticed how many flies were on you on minute 3:26 and your dedication to try to stay still to get the shot was amazing.
For Australia that was very light on flies :D
"Dotterel", what a great solution to the 'is it pronounced PLUGH-ver or PLOE-ver' debate! Also, your prosets and masterclass are awesome. Seriously elevated my photography. It's "ploe-ver" by the way.
Hehe! Great to hear 😀
I've been using the 800mm as a daily driver on my R6 for the past year. It replaced my Tamron 150-600mm G2 which I found unreliable due to the pulsing issue. With that said the 800mm f11 isn't completely immune to this issue either. There are certain occasions where I feel like there is a subtle pulsing, but mainly the AF seems to lose its grip of the eye/body of the bird. The AF square box is not a huge issue for me as it is similar to how I preferred using the central 9-point AF cluster on my older DSLRs, it's just a matter of trying to keep the objects in that box.
The 100-400mm is great for the price but I find that on a full frame sensor there's not enough reach. I also find the colours and contrast quite funky which probably is meant to help the lens keep a good perception of clarity, though this is probably why the bokeh looks a bit busier. On the 100-400 I have a wider focus area but I find its AF is not necessarily better across the whole frame. Certainly quite good for gulls at the beach, pigeons in the city or ducks at the pond. It does however, have some inexplicable episodes of jumping out of focus which Duade Paton recently covered on the R7 and I feel like is present on the R6 as well.
The 1.4x extender works quite well with the 100-400, I haven't tried the 600mm f11 but I find it is a good alternative if you want zoom and wider area AF (not full but much more than the small box). on the 800mm it is a bit more hit or miss but I do appreciate the extra reach as before I got the extender I still found myself using 1.6x crop mode (which basically downsizes it to a 7.8MP image)
Awesome ! :) I really enjoy all your videos, but for me, this is the most pertinent you have ever made :) I own the RF 800 F11, RF 600 F11, RF 100-400, and two R7's :) (now I'm kind of wondering if my back up camera should have been an R6 Mk II ?) Anyway, I owned the R5 for a year, and took a lot of really nice shots with it. Great camera ! But I always struggled for reach > even with the 800 F11.... So I sold it to buy a second R7 + the 600 F11 + the RF 100-400, and pretty much never looked back {except now maybe at the R6 Mk II ?}
A few things I want to add... your right about the focusing box thing with the RF 600/800 F11, but I don't think you mentioned, that the box is substantially larger on a crop sensor camera, which was another reason I liked these lenses more on the R7, than the R5. Also, I must admit, I'm a lot more of a small, beautiful, colorful "perched birds" kind of guy, than a BIF guy, so that probably has a lot to do with why I like this camera / lens combo so much.
Also, I "always" shoot with a tripod {the Kirk L bracket is a fantastic addition, which allows rotating to a vertical position} obviously NOT because the combo is too heavy. On the contrary, it's amazingly light, and easy to carry. But rather because, it allows me to slow the shutter way down when I have to, to keep my ISO lower. I shoot "as high" as ISO 3200.... but prefer to shoot at ISO 2000, even in low light, and this < is for my "safety shots". If my bird sticks around, I progressively shoot slower and slower, and just take LOTS of shots. Sometimes I might get down to as slow as 1/60th, and still get a few (or maybe only 1 :) ) buttery smooth shot, in very low light.
In all honesty, "of course" I still dream about a super duper, Holy grail type of lens. But at the moment, such a lens is not even being produced by any manufacturer at any cost :( For a while I drooled over the Nikon PF 800 F6.3.... But honestly, that is probably still a bit heavier, and certainly more expensive than I'd really want to go > especially since I'd have to buy a Z8 or Z9 to go with it AND worse yet, Id be back to the smaller reach I got with my R5.
I'd SO love to see a glorified "pumped up" version of the RF 800 F11.... maybe an F9.... only a bit heavier, FF focusing, a little weather sealing, and maybe in like the $3 K range.... But until then, I think I will just stick the RF 800 F11.
Finally, its kind of funny how in conversations about this lens, you always hear > in good light... well in good light... Ha :) I wish :) I mean, regardless of the gear, "what photographer doesn't want good light" ? But for me, it seems like that happens about 10 or 20% of the time. Fortunately, I end up with shots I'm super happy with, with this lens, in terrible light, most of the time :)
Sorry for the novel :)
Fantastic video ! TYSM :)
Edit: as for the MFD, Yea, pretty long at 19.6ft. I have actually used extension tubes to get it down to as little as 12.5ft with zero image degradation (just tubes, that add no glass to the combo) but I found that at 12.5 ft, with the equivalent of 1280mm, it was hard to fit a Hummingbird into the frame :) It was like an 800mm macro :) lol Nowadays in the field, I find it surprising how rarely I end up closer than 20ft to my subjects, and when I do, its usually possible just to take a step or two back :) Even with 1280mm, I find myself too far way more often, than too close :)
Thanks for sharing the great insights into your set up!
The R7 is an awesome camera, and even with the EF lenses it works great. I love it. And I recently traded my ef 70-300 IS II Nano USM lens with a new 100-400 rf lens, Also the RF 100-400 has nano USM focusing motors, not STM. It'll arrive in 2 days I guess and I can't wait to test it out. I have got so many good shots with the ef lens and even with my RF 200-800 lens, the ease of use of the light lens doesn't even compare. I think I'll rock with the 1.4 extender and the RF 100-400 so much more than I can with the 200-800 because it's so much lighter.
I have the R7 and the RF 100-400 mm lens and, after roughly a year, I realize most of my photos were taken with it instead of my other lenses (10-18 mm, 18-35 mm, 50 mm).
Hi Jan! I use the combo R6+800/11+100-500.
After seeing your inspiring photos, I got carried away shooting birds :)
Hehe nice!
Planning to buy a R7, thank you for your explanations on lens combination and prices...
My pleasure 😊
Thank you for good review ,I have both of these lenses ,i use them now with R8 which gives larger AF area with rf 800mm f11. Both of these lenses are very sharp and lightweight. I have been using them already for two years. RF 100-400mm gives surprisingly good results also with rf 1,4 extender -I have not yet tried 1,4ext with 800mm but I guess it will be good also...
Love the video! Thank you! Would you upgrade from the EF 400mm f/5.6 to the RF 100-400?
There’s advantages of the prime but not having IS is a big loss on the 400. So you’d definitely upgrade a lot there
@@jan_wegener thank you so much for the advice!
The 800mm is fine if you live somewhere where the light is very bright and it doesn’t rain much. In the UK, it’s pretty much useless for 6 months of the year.
Enjoyed the video Jan. I use the RF800 with my R5 and agree the restricted auto focus area is a bit of a pain however you do get used to it. I'm hoping that Canon issue an R5 firmware update that will increase the auto focus area to make it similar to the R6 mk2. Any further news regarding a R5 firmware update?
I used those two lenses for months on my R7 and got decent pictures. I have also missed pictures with the 800mm when the birds flew too close. I recently got the 100-500 and it does focus quicker. It feels heavier than the 800mm though I am not sure that is the case. I will use it if I go out when there is good light but for weight reasons I am more apt to take the 100-400 and 100-500 with me, one on camera, the other in the bag and ready if needed.
Jan this video was very helpful. This solidifies my conclusion that the R6 mk II paired with the RF 100-400 and the 800 F 11 is all I require for good bird images at close to midrange telephotos. After all , I’ll leave the Long range Nat’l Geo shots to you. Thanks great video 😊 👏🏻🌈
Thank you!
G'Day Jan and thanks for the great content you put up. I've just got an R8 and the 70-200f4 which are a joy to use but, I need more reach( I shoot small birds) so the question to you is: do I go for this combo o just the 100-500mm (perhaps with teleconverter or crop factor when)?
Cheers,
Giuseppe
Depends on your budget
Thanks for this Jan, I chose the 600mm f11 to go with my R7 as I thought the 800mm might be too extreme. Your comments on the minimum focal length are interesting and I might investigate the 800mm further. I do find the 600mm very good for the wildlife photography that I do which is mainly for getting shots of bird for positive ID. The 600mm does this for me and if the limitations of f11 such as the depth of field are taken into account and backgrounds carefully selected, the results are good. The great thing about these lenses is the all day portability in my opinion. Cheers and thanks, hope you are doing well.
Yes, portability is amazing with them
For me the only reason I would upgrade to a r6 mk2 from the r6 is the upgraded focus box. I wish a firmware update on r6 would do this. But a jump of only 4mp is the sticking point for me.
I wish this too. The small box makes it like shooting through a toilet roll holder
Unlikely they’d upgrade it cause it’s a whole different AF system but would be great
Great video Jan. I do love my RF 800mm with my R7 and R5. With it on the R7 the reach is really impressive, ISOs can get high but not really a problem with 3rd party noise reduction. Typically I run with the 800mm on the R7 and and 100-500mm on the R5 giving me a great combo for most wildlife and bird situations, in a very light and portable set up.
Very nice!
Great combo!
I am looking at this combo for a while.
I am just afraid that I will be limited to what I can do with this set up.
Ideally is to rent this equipment for weekend to understand what else you can do with it, besides headshots 😅
Depends on what you want to do with it. For me, it is "limited" to exactly what I do, 95+% of the time :)
Hi I loved the video and was wondering I have the r100. Note I am not a professional. Would the 100-400 still work for it?
It works on any R series body, so yes
@@jan_wegener Thanks. Sorry I was not specific enough in my comment. What I rather meant was would you recommend it even for a budget camera like the r100.
Thanks for your time.
it would be one of the cheapest decent quality zooms available @@Sad_VoBo
@@jan_wegener Thank you very much. Love the channel. Subscribing :)
Hey Jan, really enjoying your videos -- great insights, to the point without any fluff! Can I ask a question -- I'm planning a wildlife trip that will take me into some heavy forest cover but can only realistically expect to bring one telephoto lens in addition to my Canon 24-70. I'm told to expect both longer distance and closer photo opportunities. Would you go with the 70-200 f/2.8 or the 100-500 f/4.5-7.1? In other words, wider aperture or longer focal length? I'll probably have an R5 with me. All advice welcome! Thanks.
Another Brilliant video, Could you possibly do an R8 vs R7 in the field comparison video, also I knew about the bird photography show episode, I just forgot about it
We did a bird photography show episode about it a little while ago
Decision, decision....I own a R5 with the RF 100-500, a few medium RF zooms and the RF 15-35 f/2.8 I purchased used in like new condition. I bought this set up when living in the state of MS where the vegetation and wildlife was much closer. I now reside in Wyoming with wide vistas and wildlife such as Antelope, Deer and birds are farther away when trying to photograph. I also dislike having to change on the quick the 100-500mm when spotting wildlife when shooting with the 15-35 for landscapes and sky images. Have been thinking of picking up a R6 II to use the 15-35 and the R5 for the 100-500mm for the cropping available and have both set ups at the ready. The R7 instead of the R6 along with the RF 800 looks interesting. The R6 looks like a better camera, quality wise but I would be giving up some distance not using the R7. I would then use the R5 for landscapes with the 15-35mm lens. A fun situation I find myself in.
Thanks Jan love my R7 for it’s reach,I have both the RF 100-400 and the 800 F 11, and enjoy them both, at my age 78 the weight is an important ingredient for me. I also have an R6 Mark II and an EF 100-400 F4.5-5.6 with a 1.4 extender I take out for specific shoots since the weight is very significant I use it with a carbon fiber monopod. The RF 100-4 is my favorite since it has about everything I want, price, sharp images and lightweight. Glad you did the video, we amateurs can’t really justify a RF 100-500. Happy with what I have and enjoy your presets and your great tips on editing.👀👀
Thanks you! Happy to help. Weight is definitely great with these
It would be interesting to see your review of OM-1 and 300mm or 150-400mm
Congrats on the video Jan. I feel like it was made for me as I have both lenses using them with the P6 and P6 Mark II. By the way, on the Mark II it covers almost the entire frame, which is great. I looked at many reviews for the RF 800mm including your review before I decided to buy it. To this day, I do not regret my choice. I think this lens, despite its limitations, is a great lens for the money it costs. I think the same about the RF 100-400mm, which is also great for macro photography.
Thanks for sharing!
I'm looking into switching from Canon DSLR to they're r system and some of they're lenses like the 100-400, 100-500, and 800 f/11 for wildlife photography. Trying to get over the cost of switching and what I should start with às a body/lens combo.🤔🤷😁
Bought one and whole set filters from Kase, maybe good choice for my travel.
What would the R7 with the RF 100-400 be like for Fighter jet photography, I usually shoot with the G1 Tamron 150-600 but has big issues now with the R7, from one Aussie to another love your content
I don't think the focus points being limited to the center of the frame is *that* much of an issue. I can't remember when I ever used one of the points on the very edge of the frame of my own camera 🙂 But I also mostly take portraits of the animals at the zoo where I volunteer. So tracking isn't a big concern for me, not like the Z50 would be good at it, anyway 😅
A friend of mine recently picked up the RF 800 though and he really likes it! He's a lil older than me and heavy lenses are out of the question for him. The weight was especially surprising to me, the lens itself seems to weigh less than his R7!
He uses it together with a 100-500 and he couldn't be happier.
Hi Jan, I need some advise. I've got the R6 as well as the RF100-400 but I miss some reach. I've read about the Sigma 150-600 which seems to be a good lens. Or would rather advise to get the 1.4 Rf tele converter? Looking forward to your opinion. My budget doesn't allow me to opt for a Canon 100-500 😉Greetz Ab
Dear Jan,
Great video, and as a user of the R7 and RF800 I completely agree with everything you said. Question: I also use the EF 100-400, which offers good quality, but is also pretty heavy in the field. How would you guess it compares to the RF 100-400 on the R7? Cheers!
If you have EF -100-400 MK2 - it have great sharpness at 400mm F5.6. You will have better image stab and low weight from RF 100-400 vs better aperture F 5.6 of 100-400 MK2
If you have EF -100-400 MK1 - rf 100-400 will be much better in terms of sharpness for sure
Thanks! Yes, depends which version of the 100-400 you have.
Great review Jan, maybe the 600mm RF is a better choice for some of us.
this is really a nice lens too. I've only used mine a couple times, as my 800 stays glued on my R7 almost permanently :) I mostly got it to fill the gap between my 100-400 and my 800... kind of a "just in case" lens. Plus, I got a steal of a deal on it... Open box for $509 :)
Certainly a great video again, thanks a lot. What is the monitor on you R7, please?
I have the R7 with RF 100-400, took it on holiday to South Africa this year, also had a couple of days in Botswana & Zimbabwe and got some amazing images. High ISOs of 6400 clean
up very nicely in Photoshop Beta. A fantastic purchase, obviously there is a lot of lens envy looking at the rich and the pros with expensive primes but for what is classed as a budget lens it certainly works for me.
At the end of the day they are tools and I imagine pros use them too! Main thing is you had a blast
Ah, you visited my home country 🇿🇦
Hope you had amazing time
Botswana and Zimbabwe are magical as well
When are you coming on safari to South Africa Jan? 😊
Hi Jan, great video and awesome birds, as usual ;-) When my old 70D had marched a year longer, I might have well ended up with this combo. I believe it offers great value for getting more engaged in wildlife. But my path went via the original R6 which was great but was painfully short on reach with my 100-400Lii. Seems like today the R7 and R6ii might be a compelling duo with these lenses, but before the R6ii was announced (by you ;-)) I swapped the R6 for the R5 .. and didn't regret it for one second !
thanks for sharing!
I enjoy your videos very much want them to go on longer and not end
Thank you! :)
Hello Jan! Does the r8 has the bigger af area like the r6mkii (with the 800f11)? Love your work!
Yes
Really good video as always, Jan
Thank you very much!
The 100-400mm is amazing on the R6 MKII. I would like a little more reach though. In comparison with a rental sigma 150-600mm contemporary, the 100-400 is quicker at acquiring focus, less mass, it should be. The size and weight difference is substantial. I prefer the background blur of the f6.3 aperture but the f8 aperture on the 100-400 gives a kind of a painterly quality to the background, which looks pretty cool on a foresty background at golden hour. With the close focus distance it works pretty well as a macro lens. You can “punch in” with 1.6 crop in body but that takes you down to 9mp, you’d be cropping out the same amount of data in post anyway so I’m neutral on how useful that is. Great value if you purchase it on sale from the refurbished page at canon. I think the 800mm would be the sweet spot on a FF sensor, 600 doesn’t quite fill the frame with the smaller birds. Great information, Jan.
You can buy r7 for longer reach - yes, it have terrible rolling shutter, but you will have 1280 mm 33 mp file - perfect for slow or sitting birds + 30 fps.
This is a great review into the lenses, Thankyou.
However if i'm honest, I prefer your images to before their edited, The saturation is nice, but apart from that i find when the background looses it's softness.. it looks flat and too fake.
Another great video. Curious about your Lightroom presets. Can they be used with Lightroom Mobile on an iPad? For the last few years I am using the LightRoom & Photoshop apps on the iPad. They typically offer enough functionality for what I need, mostly cropping, lifting shadows, and blurring backgrounds. I do like your presets though.
Another awesome video. I have the RF 800 and have taken great photos with it. Nikon just came out with a reasonably priced 180-600mm lens. Have you heard whether Canon is thinking of doing something similar. I know they have the 100-500 mm lens but it's so high priced. That would be fantastic!
I wish I could say yes but I doubt it
Hello Jan! I have 3 questions for you. First do you suggest going with the r10 and getting both the 100-400 and the 800mm or going with the r7 and buying only the 100-400 because my budget is very restricted? Second do you recomend to wait until nikon realeases a crop camera like the r10/r7 and combine it with the new 180-600? Do you think that nikon will release a z90 this year the next or after a lot of years? I ask you all these questions because I am only 14 years old, I dont have a lot of money [my budget is below 3000dollars] but I love wildlife and bird photography. Last but not least I think you are one of the best photographers and youtubers and your personal style is amazing!👍👍👍
I use the RF 100-400 and RF600. Great lenses, though I really wish Canon would release a semi-pro lens that around the £1k-£1500k mark. I also find the 100-500 a little disappointing for the price, f/7.1 is pretty slow and the TC only working from 300mm is a bit silly too. Great vid. 👍
It has its short comings, but for me it’s one of the best lenses ever made
Great video Jan! I'm shooting with the rf100-400mm daily and I'm looking forward to getting the rf800mm f11. I have the R7 and I also hope to get the R8 which would give me a similar experience as the R6ii I believe.
I think it would
would this be good for planes and trains?
Great video jan, do you think is it worth to replace Nikon d500+200 500 combo with this canon 2 lens one?
Very good. Thanks for making this.
My pleasure!
Thanks for a great video on an interesting topic. I own R10 and RF 100-400mm and I am just wandering how could I increase the reach a little bit. Would you recommend RF 800mm or RF 1.4x extender?
Hi Jan, thanks for great videos
I have been using R6 and 800mm f11 in past two years and for what it is worth I got good pictures from it, but I feel I would need an upgrade specially higher megapixels.
What is your suggestion? Should I move to R5 and 100-500, or there is a newer camera coming specifically for bird photography that is better?
3:24min gives me anxiety. trying to hold a cam steady taking shots while a million flies trying to get into my eyes. i would go nuts in about 5 seconds there. what i mean to say it: thanks for doing these reviews for us.
The flies are not fun!
hello Jan! Thanks for video :). What is this shaking at 8 minute? Stabilization? I sometimes have similar issue on OM1 and 100-400 and not sure why :). Thanks!
I bought the RF800 and 1.4 converter, on the deal where the converter is half price, I have an R6 mk1, I love the RF800, I haven't really used it in anger, but wholly agree that it is a really fun lens giving good results, just taking it down to the beach where I live, got some of the best pic's I have taken of birds in flight and landing. As yet I find the 1.4 converter dissapointing on my setup, I probably need to work out a better way of using it, and it is a long focal length to hand hold (I haven't tried on a monopod) and losing the extra stop my initial images simply aren't as sharp and considering all of my other lenses are EF I cannot use it elsewhere :( as a direct comparison for the RF800, in good light, I believe I get far better results than my older 100-400 EF L f4.5-5.6 with a 2x converter.
The converter on it is challenging also because it's like F16 wide open
Thanks for this great video Jan. I use a canon 90d with sigma 150-600mm c lens and now i'm thinking about moving to RF series. For body R6 mark2 and R7 is my consideration and for lens obvious choice is 100-500 but due to budget issue wondering if any of these two lenses that you covered can be a good alternative ? Also how about using a EF 100-400 IS2 on R6 -2 or R7 body with 1.4 ex ? I would love to hear your recommendation on this :)
how does the backrond look like?
Check out the sample images
I'v had the R7 and the RF 100-400 combo for a few months now, and it enables me to shoot things I could have only dreamed of with my old DSLR. On top of that it's super light, and the combined stabilization lets you shoot handheld with ease.
That said though, the 100-400 jumps to f7.1 at 156mm, and f8 at 259mm, so basically f8 or slower always. Only the first 13mm are f5.6, which is laughable honestly :D In good light conditions this is not a problem, but if you go out in the early morning in not typically sunny countries, you'll be shooting at very high ISOs and will be relient on denoising for any kind of usable pictures.
I wish there were something in the middle price wise between the RF 100-400, and something like the EF 100-400L II or the RF 100-500 that is faster than f8 and doesn't break the bank. But on a budget it's pretty much the perfect combo.
At least we can use high ISOs with ease these days
@@jan_wegener That is very true!
Interesting as always, Jan. I'm wondering if I should keep my 400mm f5.6L with my R5 or go for a 600mm f11 or the RF 100-400. What do you say?
The image stabilisation with the new lenses will be significantly better
I have R6 mk 2. Planning for a Masai Mara Safari trip. Is the RF 100 400 is enough to take nice video footages of the animals?
Great video as always, but that 800 mm f/11 lens on the R7 with its crop factor of 1.6, isn't that really a 1280 mm f/ 17.6 ??, just my understanding of how the crop factor works, please correct me if I'm wrong.
I guess it may be the equivalent to that
I asked that same question, but after switching from my R5 to my R7, I didn’t notice it being any slower whatsoever ? One would think going from F11 to F17 would be a big difference, and very noticeable in a negative way. But for myself, the R7 actually worked better, to the point that I sold the R5 for a second R7, for my back up camera.
Btw, adding extension tubes to my RF 800 F11 was supposed to make it slower as well, but I didn’t see any difference with that either ?
Hello, Jan.
My Canon 100-400mm f5.6-8 is not so sharp on my Canon R7. Where is the problem ?
Holger
Excellent Review! 😎⚡️🙌
Glad you liked it!
Hello Jan, how close (in meters) i have to be from a bird like a robin, to fill the frame using a 400mm lens?
Maybe 3m
@@jan_wegener that's very close