Great video! The images came out crystal clear - I plan on getting a 100-400 in the future. Don't want to be negative but want to offer some constructive feedback - please use higher quality audio in the background music of your still shots. The audio you used peaks and is not a pleasant experience.
Hi, great video. I was thinking it would be more worth it. I have a Canon R10 and I want a telephoto lens for animals. I automatically thought of the RF 100-400mm. Native and with high focusing speed in addition to the low price (in my case 600 euros). On the other hand, there is the option of the sigma 150-600 contemporary, with a higher price (800 euros) + adapter (70-100 euros). What do you think is more worth it, losing those important mm in bird photography or the focusing speed in addition to perhaps other problems you have for not being Native?
Sorry for replying late. I would say that 400mm is a bit short for birding. I haven't used the Sigma 150-600 so I can't really comment on it. I did have the Tamron 150-600 G2 and found its VC didn't work well with the R5's IBIS. But the R10 lacks IBIS, so you don't have that impediment. I would check for other users' experience.
Great comparison video. Even though the birds were not agreeable, you got some amazing landscape shots. We thought the doves were too close to call on sharpness.
The 100-400 is $649. The 100-500 is $2699 (current discount at B&H). I use both the R5 and R6. The 100-500 is a little sharper, a 1/2 stop faster, obviously longer, and it's better weather sealed. But it's hard to justify that price.
@@David_Quinn1995 Yes. I love the image sharpness of the 100-500. But if the 100-400 were available two years ago, I might have bought it. Except it's slow, and slower still with the extender you need to shoot birds with. It'd be a hard decision.
@@JohnDrummondPhoto The RF100-400 has become my go to lens for everything since it arrived. Unless I plan on making serious prints, or shooting in heavy rain, my "L's" will be staying home from now on. I've been waiting for over 4 months for B&H to ship my RF200-800 and now wonder if I actually need it. Note- Since the RF200-800 introduction there are real deals now for 100-500's used.
![BLACK BAG - Official Trailer [HD] - Only in Theaters March 14](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/Du0Xp8WX_7I/mqdefault.jpg)
For the flowery image, I really liked the shot with the split between the flowers in the foreground and the reflection in the midground.
Thanks. That's my favorite too.
thanks i think im gonna get the 100-400mm because i dont have that kinda money to spend right now. great vid thanks!
Great video! The images came out crystal clear - I plan on getting a 100-400 in the future.
Don't want to be negative but want to offer some constructive feedback - please use higher quality audio in the background music of your still shots. The audio you used peaks and is not a pleasant experience.
You're right. The audio peaking was pretty bad. Just turning down the volume of my playback device helped a bit, but yeah. Thanks for watching!
Yes!! gear head in me is loving this subject. thank you.
And I thank you.
thanks John. Just shows.....you can enjoy the cheaper lenses just as much as the expensive ones. \I prefered the f16 flower tree water landscape pics
Nice video. Thanks for sharing & big like
Thank you!
Hi, great video. I was thinking it would be more worth it. I have a Canon R10 and I want a telephoto lens for animals.
I automatically thought of the RF 100-400mm. Native and with high focusing speed in addition to the low price (in my case 600 euros).
On the other hand, there is the option of the sigma 150-600 contemporary, with a higher price (800 euros) + adapter (70-100 euros). What do you think is more worth it, losing those important mm in bird photography or the focusing speed in addition to perhaps other problems you have for not being Native?
Sorry for replying late. I would say that 400mm is a bit short for birding. I haven't used the Sigma 150-600 so I can't really comment on it. I did have the Tamron 150-600 G2 and found its VC didn't work well with the R5's IBIS. But the R10 lacks IBIS, so you don't have that impediment. I would check for other users' experience.
Great comparison video. Even though the birds were not agreeable, you got some amazing landscape shots. We thought the doves were too close to call on sharpness.
Thanks for watching! Yeah, it's pretty close between them in sharpness. Pixel peeping is overrated.
What is the price difference? Which Canon camera do you use?
The 100-400 is $649. The 100-500 is $2699 (current discount at B&H). I use both the R5 and R6. The 100-500 is a little sharper, a 1/2 stop faster, obviously longer, and it's better weather sealed. But it's hard to justify that price.
@@JohnDrummondPhoto wow $700 for the 100-400 that almost nullifies the justification for the 100-500
@@David_Quinn1995 Yes. I love the image sharpness of the 100-500. But if the 100-400 were available two years ago, I might have bought it. Except it's slow, and slower still with the extender you need to shoot birds with. It'd be a hard decision.
@@JohnDrummondPhoto The RF100-400 has become my go to lens for everything since it arrived. Unless I plan on making serious prints, or shooting in heavy rain, my "L's" will be staying home from now on. I've been waiting for over 4 months for B&H to ship my RF200-800 and now wonder if I actually need it. Note- Since the RF200-800 introduction there are real deals now for 100-500's used.
Great job John! You've inspired me to switch to Canon... Which is where I started by journey. trading for an R8.
@@jameskurzynski2386 that's a great camera, especially for the money.
Nice video John. Where were you?
Alley Pond Park & Alley Pond Environmental Center, both in Queens.
I think the landscape photos are just amazing given that you did not use tripod or anything but they came out really well! Kudos 🎉
Why, thank you!
At my age when I bend down and lean forward I usally throw my back out if I stay in this position for awhile. Cheers!
nice
Great and light 100-400
It's very good. I need to use it more.
@@JohnDrummondPhoto thank you, nice review