I am not a Canon user but I applaud Canon for making a bold move like this, clearly these lenses have a happy following and they have their use at a budget
I just got this lens and I'm very happy with it. I was worried 800mm would be way too zoomed because I'm used to 400mm, but it's really not. It's perfect for the simple point and shoot photographing I do. I already got some really beautiful photos at the beach today. I had no trouble pointing at birds in the sky and auto focusing onto them. Easy to pack with me and lightweight it's really amazing. So glad I bought it after humming and hawing about it.
I sold my 100-400 L mk2 and 2x converter and bought this lens along with a very good monopod and still had change. I use this for situations where my 600mm f4 L &1.4x TC are too heavy or awkward or when mobility is required. On my R5 it produces great images and as I can push the iso on the R5 without too much of a problem I've yet to find it wanting. It has limitations but the focal length, IQ, weight and price make it a winner. For $900 it shouldn't be as good as it is. I was going to get the RF100-500L but this lens has made me reconsider that purchase. It's on hold indefinitely atm.
Great review Dustin. I have been using this lens for a while now. I have found it to be a great songbird and waterfowl lens when I need mobility. I also own both the canon 800 f5.6L and the 200-400 f4L w/1.4x. I have found the image quality of this lens to be shockingly good especially when compared to other lenses in the price bracket. The focus acquisition is definitely its biggest weakness for me compared to the much more expensive lenses. The f11 aperture although annoying at times has not been too much of a negative for my use, however I can always use one of my big lenses for low light. I think this lens is a really good option for people that want a long reach option to pair with a shorter and faster telephoto, but probably not as their only wildlife lens.
I’ve been shooting wildlife with the 800mm f/11 lens on a R6 for a while now. I can’t say enough how impressed I am. Birds in flight with animal detect, extremely good. Closer targets, with eye detect, takes your breath away. For me, wildlife like Bald Eagles are always far away. The 800mm is a good first step. But I push it even farther using a 1.4x Extender. And the results are still, very good. But for closeups of Bald Eagles in tree or diving for fish far away, I push the 800mm even more by setting the R6 in crop mode. Do the math 800mm x 1,4 Extender x 1.6 crop = 1,792 mm. And before you tell me about pixel count or image quality, again you have to try it to believe it. I’m getting some outstanding results at 1,792mm especially when using eye detect. A monopod also helps when dropping the shutter to 1/400 to keep the ISO low. I’ve been shooting wildlife since 1985. The 400mm F5.6 prime was great. The Canon 100-400 II with 1.4x Extender III at 896mm on a 1,6 crop body even better. This combination doubles your reach again. You will be amazed. Try it for yourself…
Thanks! I have a William Optic (Taiwan) 559mm f/6.9 apochromatic TELESCOPE which can be adapted with a 1.4x teleconverter to f/9.5 and RF mount. Manual focus, to be sure, but you saved me $900+taxes. I've looked at the history of Canon lens development and ALL these RF lenses have a 2nd or 3rd generation ahead of them in the next decade or two. A used, mint Canon 500mm f/4L IS USM cost me $3600, but I can slap a 2x EF II converter on it and get a 1000mm f/8 - f/32 AF lens that weighs a lot, but it can still capture auto racing's finest. Thanks! I was tempted, but your fantastic review helped me lots.
Very well done video with great in depth info! Your objectivity is refreshing and I am left with a feeling of someone who is a straight shooter with the good & not so good points. Thanks again.
This lens gives a very lot of people the chance entering the genres of wildlife photography, even some sports for an affordable price tag. Professional lenses for these jobs are quite a bit more heavy and do cost by far more. Thank you for this fair review.
Thks Dustin, great thorough review. I own the 800 and use it to take pictures of chamois in the French Alps. Its lightweight is a game changer when you have to climb up for 3 hours…
Yet another great review, Dustin. I adore the RF 800mm lens on my R & RA astro cameras, along with the 2x extender for filming the moon and especially getting great shots of Jupiter and Saturn. I love it. :)
@@DustinAbbottTWI Yes, it does take a bit more to get those planets bigger in the frame though. By recording onto the Atomos Ninja, you can record the 5x & 10x focusing zoom which takes it up to 16,000mm (but of course can't be recorded if doing this in-camera). That's a good range for these cameras to be able to see the bands around Jupiter along with the Great Red Spot, and the rings of Saturn. :)
Another excellent review with a lot of great information. Completely agree with your conclusions on this lens-if you play to its strengths it will deliver excellent results.
Excellent informative video. Totally agree with your analysis. I have this lens and as you stated it works great UNDER the right conditions. In terms of AF , it’s fine but the AF on the L rf lenses is in a different league. Overall I’m happy with the lens as long as you know it’s strengths and weaknesses
I’ve had this lens for 4 months now and taken thousands of images of birds and other wildlife. This review is spot on. This lens is the best deal in photography in my opinion.
I chose the main focal length as 100-400. I will use the 800f11 for targeting that the 400 can hardly do. I also thought about 500 and 600 but decided to choose 800f11 partly because the next price for small birds 5,600 is still not enough. For me, the ISO issue is not a concern when combined with the r5 and other software, the only thing I'm concerned about is the weather sealing issue. It's amazing how these new RF lenses are so small. I can carry both at the same time in my backpack wherever I go.
Thanks, Dustin. I'm a bird shooter and one of my favorite places to go is the Bosque del Apache for the liftoff. Early morning. So . . . f/11. It just won't work. $900 versus $12,000 given. If the lens doesn't work, price comparison isn't relevant. I appreciate your hard work.
Hi James, I take your point, though I think most photographers would agree that price is always relevant. It’s at least a data point you have to consider - what inconvenience are you willing to tolerate with a cheaper piece of gear because you can’t afford the far more expensive one.
@@DustinAbbottTWI You're right, of course. But I'm almost saddened by the decision Canon made to offer such a limited tool. Thanks for your analyses, often a good start for reviewing what I'm doing and why.
Well, I have the 800mm f/11 on a Canon R6. The low light question is really not what you expect without actually trying it. For somewhat stationary targets, dropping the shutter speed down to 1/400 or lower really works well. But there’s also the ISO range of the R6. Surprisingly ISO ranges of 2,000-32,000 are extremely sharp compared to what I’ve seen in say the Canon 80D/90D. Yes, like most people, I’m not use to shooting at those ISO ranges, and even bring a Canon 100-400mm II for really bad low light days. But more and more, I rarely go with that second option. My recommendation for most is, try it for yourself. You will be amazed …
Just 2 questions: 1. If it's a fixed F11 lens, then what's the function of the focus limiter switch? Does it help in acquiring focus faster? 2. Can the lens be used with a speedbooster ? (not sure if this lens can be used with EF mounts though)
Fantastic in depth review 💚 One of my new go to photography & lens reviewers I'm over here binging videos trying to decide over the 150-600mm Contemporary, 60-600mm Sigma, Canon 400 5.6, Canon 100-400 ii, 800mm f11 rf, or a 2x converter on my Tamron 70-200 g2 for my Eos R5 😭 I've always been interested in trying out moon and bird photo. This seems like a great deal to get into those 💚
That's a good application for this lens. I remain partial to the Canon 100-400L II + 1.4x combo, too, as it is very good optically and adapts really well to the R5.
I'm sort of considering this lens. I say sort of because I have the Canon R7 which is APS-C, so such a tight aperture of F11 forcing me to hit up my ISO would be an issue. The price is hard to ignore it, and my only other consideration is the Sigma 150-600mm Contemporary at around the same price. But at F5-6.3, I want keep my ISO down, at the cost of the added 200mm and needing to adapt.
@@DustinAbbottTWI Well right now the longest I got is my Sigma 18-300 f5-6.3 and it does ok. And I would love the reach of the 150-600 (960mm at the top end). But the price difference between the Canon RF 600mm F11 vs the 800mm is nearly negligible. Unless the 600mm has another advantage over the 800 that I don't know about. But my main concern is the F11 aperture forcing me to use higher ISO on a camera that struggles at ISO 6400, I wonder if I should or shouldn't consider this lens over the Sigma 150-600mm and adapt it.
One plus of the RF 600 and 800mm F/11 lens that wasn’t mentioned in how lightweight they are. Older people that can no longer deal with the heavy super telephoto lenses may find these as a useable option.
One factor to consider is that it is an excellent wildlife lens when travelling. It is light and shortens down when not in use, so is easy to pack. Try getting one of those $15,000 f4 lenses into your airplane carry-on luggage! :-)
About the tripod foot, am I missing something? Couldn't you just attach the quick release plate of your tripod there on the lens instead of on the camera and thus attach the lens to the tripod?
I think the implication is that that really shouldn't be necessary and the lens ought to ship with at least a (detachable) arca plate, if not a full foot.
First of all, yes, that was an option; I just didn’t think of it! Secondly, there’s some obvious limitations to that approach, most notably if you want to shoot in portrait orientation. A rotating tripod collar is the standard on telephoto lenses for a reason.
I have to say.. the control ring was never a thing for me, i always used the wheels on the EOS RP. But on the RF 800 F11... i got used to use it A LOT... for fast ISO setting its very much needed to get more IQ out of slow moving wildlife images taken in between fast shots of flying birds for example. Especially on the EOS RP - the RF 800 F11 is just a charme hiking!
@@DustinAbbottTWI definately... my camera gear weights just 2kg (RF 800, RF 50mm 1.8, EOS RP) sometimes im taking with me my proper tripod which weights already 4kg alone so nearly 4x the weight of the RF 800 or very often a very small lightweight tripod which has less than 100gram. Im rarely using my EF lenses (Zooms, Macros, bigger aperture prime Lenses) anymore, just where i need anything under 50mm or in between 50 or 800, so where i want to get creative and not just birding/wildlife. But even a EF 28-135mm F4 IS USM + EF RF Adapter weights already more than the RF 800, so this "universal" zoom is already a bummer on the camera. To make clear how radically lightweight (and so also not really sturdy or dust/waterproof!) this lens is. Its anyways the RF 800s main strengh... light enough to dont be annoying in the backpack all day long, even ok to be prepared in your hand while hiking!
@@DustinAbbottTWI People always say fullframe is nothing for being portable or lightweight. Well - the RP is SUPER COMPACT and light (4xx gram) and many RF lenses are just awesome performing and nowadays more often than not class leading like the RF 35/50mm (super optical performance, even stabilizer in the RF 35mm and they make especially with the RP a super compact and lightweight "high performance" combo.) Same goes for the RF 800 F11.. its just a "super compact" supertele. But after having fun with it for a while now... i guess the RF 600 would be the more clever, versatile option if absolute range isnt everything you need/want. Nonetheless... the RF 800 is just too nice and IF you get a fast bird sharp in the frame... its just worth it, especially with the smaller birds where i have to crop even with the RF 800mm a lot!
Hi Tom, that’s not actually correct. Canon has an Animal Eye AF mode, but not a dedicated Bird Eye AF mode like Sony does on the Alpha 1. Fortunately Canon’s Animal Eye AF mode does a pretty good job with birds, too, which is the point I was making.
10:19 Just for curiosity, I have Nikon 1 NIKKOR VR 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 (189-810mm equiv.) I bought it long ago, but it's the sharpest zoom lens of all and it's smaller than 600m 2 or 3 times... Its image stabilisation is incredible. It gives more detailed moon pictures than in this review (with Nikon J5 20MP) Unfortunately Nikon stopped supporting 1 inch bodies, but they are my favs for wildlife...
Thanks for this Dustin. I have the Canon 100 - 400 and 1.4 TC. I am struggling a bit to decide if I would be better off to go to a 2x TC for reach for birds in flight, or this 800. Would appreciate any thoughts on this.
I would probably recommend getting this lens. I'm not a huge fan of 2x TCs and the hit they bring to image sharpness. Use the 100-400 + 1.4x TC to fill in before you get to 800
I keep going back and forth on this lens. I will never be able to spend the money on a "big white" of that focal length. Most of my shooting happens mid-day so i think i could manage the f/11 for the odd times i would want 800mm. I'm hoping to get an R5 soon so for the price, this might be a good pair for me. My current EOS r wouldn't work as well i think.
you could get an EF 100-400 II with a 1.4 or 2x and get a 560mm or 800 mm zoom. And when you don't need that max reach you have a lower f/. I used such a combo regularly on an R5 with descent results.
An R5 is a definite necessity for this lens. I'm pretty sure it was made with it in mind. The strengths of the R5 nearly perfectly slot in to the weaknesses of this lens, there not really another conclusion.
It’s definitely true that the EOS R isn’t going to work well for tracking action in burst regardless of what lens you attach. Purchasing the R5 is a great first step, and this lens definitely gives a reasonably priced option to pair with it.
@@DustinAbbottTWI The strengths of the R5 are very closely matched with the weaknesses of these lenses. Amazing autofocus to make up for an f11 aperture. Very very clean high ISO to make up that you will probably be using high ISOs. It's almost as if they made them to be matched in mind. Paired together I almost don't even notice half of the shortcomings of the 800 mm a lot of the times if I didn't have my 600F4 to tell me differently. Using this lens on an R5 I would compare favorably to using an older DSLR with an 800 5.6. And I did back in the day and I very much appreciate what this lens actually gives at the price it gives when paired with an R5.
Thank you for another good review. this lens is one that you look at and think yes I would like it but would I use it. then I got the RF100-500 which I love but after putting a X2 converter on it I found I may as well take the shot without the X2 and just crop in as the image was better, or at the least the same. but having that 800 ooh gets me thinking
A good review, but I do agree with some other good reviewers here on the internet that the F11 at 800mm with the modern camera's like the Canon R5 and modern software the high iso's are not that much of a issue anymore. I more and more belief this kind of comment is of an old era therefore. We are all getting old, me too being for decades a photographer. ;-) Grey hair etc. 🙂 Friendly greetings from the Netherlands, Onno Nugteren photographer and filmmaker.
Between the rf 100-400 + extender x2 and this . What would you choose ? . Using the rf 100 400 + extender always mounted, strapped to the neck with the standard strap , could bend ?
6:20 It would make sense to just screw an Arca Swiss plate on the lens so you can mount the lens on the tripod, right? (But I agree, Canon should have included that) Do you think the weight of the lens isn't putting too much strain on the lens mount?
Excellent info again! One question - is it impossible to use a tripod plate directly on the lens? It looks like the screw hole on the lens is far enough from the camera body to not cause any problems.
Have you tried using extension tubes on the lens to reduce the minimum focus distance? I'm curious how well that would work before I consider purchasing this lens.
@@DustinAbbottTWI I have used a total of 91mm tubes (one Meike set and one Commlite set) on my 600 f/11. I got decent photo stackable images of flower parts from 8-10 feet).
Some reactions. 1-Lacks eye focus like Sony - No just semantics. Canon calls it Animal Eye Focus. Your shots prove it's sharp. 2-For tripod use buy an Arca Swiss plate from RSS or Kirk Photo. Problem solved. 3-The close focusing issue solved with a 35mm 3rd party extension tube when in a tight bird blind. Have heard some hints an RF extension tube is coming from Canon . 3-BIGGEST deal - this is a blend of spotting scope/telescope and most of the features of photo lens. Hence fixed aperture & light weight. This is a ground breaking product with image stabilization and auto focus added added to light weight, long reach glass. Huge product for a walk about tool for naturalists. 4-Newer sensors on cameras much less prone to noise at high ISOs. 5-Not a single mention of DEFRACTIVE OPTICS - the science that makes this lens possible.
Hi Don, for your first point, that's basically the same point I make in the review. As for the others, you are suggesting third party solutions to solve the problems. That's fine, but my job is to honestly evaluate strengths and weaknesses, and just because something can be fixed via a third party solution doesn't mean that it isn't an issue for the lens itself. Buying a third party plate or extension tube isn't a solution that a lot of photographers want to have to invest in. I do mention the diffractive options in my text review, but I'm not sure that this is as major a thing as you make it out to be. Canon has been making DO lenses for more than 15 years at this point.
These lenses are absolutely bonkers, and I really think are the counterpoint to the idea that sensor sizes have anything to do with performance other than industry momentum and available lenses. This Canon lens trades blows with the Pana Leica 100-400 MFT, the Pana lens is a stop slower at 800mm equiv, but lighter and shorter, and a fair bit more expensive. I think these lenses prove that full frame =/= faster and wider with larger lenses, at least not when manufacturers choose so. If I was just shooting birds and wanted a lightweight kit, I'd go for a G9ii kit, but I think MFT has a lot of compromises for basically any other type of shooting (including video).
Dustin - maybe you've already written about it somewhere, but I couldn't find it - sorry. Can you describe the tripod configuration you used in this video? thank you Dustin - maybe you've already written about it somewhere, but I couldn't find it - sorry. Can you describe the tripod configuration you used in this video? thank you
Love the review. This lens may be more for the future when R bodies with the better ISO and autofocus fall to prices that amateur's will readily purchase. A new sub $1000 R body or a 7D replacement with RF mount would be ideal. I would like to see it tested with the RP for example as that's more likely what it would be pared with from a price to performance perspective. R5 and R6 users are more likely to have Big Whites with a TC to use and see less need to purchase this lens. Although I'm sure some will buy it for the portability and weight savings.
I own both a big white 600 f4 and this lens. It's so convenient to just always have on you and still produces absolutely jaw dropping pictures, though, like Dustin says, not on all scenarios.
There are options to get canons 600, 500, 400mm lenses for alot less then 10k not everyone buys new or has to have IS and native RF versions. Ebay for example has 500 and 600 F4 options for 3k US. I know its still cost prohibitive at those prices, I just think more people who balk at several thousand dollar lenses will do the same at cameras that even on the used market start at $2500. I believe that numerically a much larger group of people buy sub $1500 cameras. So a large market for a long telephoto in the $1000 price range will logically come from the larger group of camera purchasers. It might directly compete with Sigma and Tamrons large EF glass more then anything especially if your regularly having to crop birds and other wild life at 600mm. In the group of high level enthusiasts certainly some of us will have multiple options for long lenses but that is not normal.
I don't know about that. The problem with smaller sensors is that you often have to shoot at higher ISOs to stop action, and the smaller sensors tend to not be as good at high ISOs. There's also the matter that you lose some of that subject isolation from a larger sensor, which can make images less special.
@@DustinAbbottTWI It is true that Higher ISO can be a problem; however, with DXO PL5, most of it goes away. I just don't see much point to this Canon lens.
It would be very difficult to use. First of all, the effective focal length after the crop would be 1280mm, so finding and framing your subject would hard. The lens is stabilized, so that would help once you acquire your subject. It would probably be easier to use for more still targets than trying to acquire birds in flight.
I have the 600 and the 800, and frankly, I have a really hard time getting sharp images. Can these lenses vary in quality/sharpness from one lens to another, or am I just expecting too much?
It's very hard to diagnose these type things over the internet, but if you have both lenses and are disappointed with both, it is statistically unlikely that you have bad copies of both. I would lean towards either a technique issue (too low of shutter speeds, for example), or just that maybe you are expecting too much.
@@DustinAbbottTWI - Thanks. I have gotten a few sharp images, mostly when I am closer to the subject. I think there are limitations to using these lenses that I have to learn to adapt to...
Thanks for the review! Canon should make a 3rd lens to this series. A "pro" model with the same diameter optics than this 800mm has but with 600mm focal length. This would give close to f/8 aperture. Could also have weather sealing and better tripod connector.
Unsolicited Mini Review… I’m a professional/paid photographer. If anyone wants my personal opinion: I rented both the 600mm and 800mm on separate weekends. Pros: • Both 600/800 produced crisp amazing IQ • Very hike/travels friendly • Cost Effective Cons • F11 made it tough to shoot early morning • R5 is amazing but I don’t suggest bumping iso to 3200+ you can definitely see the noise (pre-software tweak) • focusing distance is really far • limited focusing window Final thoughts: I preferred the 800mm because I often find I need reach. A Tc 1.4x or 2x is not recommended Would have loved a cost effective plastic 800mm F/8. Yea it would cost more, be larger and weigh more - but not $12,000 white prime. The RF 100-500mm was nearly as sharp as these primes and much faster focusing. But stops at 500mm and almost $1000 more than Sony’s 200-600 mehhh
📸 Thanks for another great video Dustin! 👍🏻☺👍🏻How would this lens compare to the likes of 150 -600 mm Tamron or Sigma lens, using the crop mode of the Canon R5 (In order to reach similar focal lenght) ? I guess the effective apperture would be equal or better than the Canon's ? + it would comes with better focal lenght and apperture range 🤔
I would say (in theory) that you are getting slightly better image quality, though you might get better results with the Sigma or Tamron for the simple reason that you can shoot with a faster shutter speed or lower ISO in many situations. Crop mode doesn’t change the amount of light reaching the sensor.
If you want to get a better 800mm lens than this you have to pay 12000 dollars. I don't know of any better (or equal) lens than this one. Works flawless and any limitations you have think of 12000 dollars L series!
I am not a Canon user but I applaud Canon for making a bold move like this, clearly these lenses have a happy following and they have their use at a budget
Agreed.
I just got this lens and I'm very happy with it. I was worried 800mm would be way too zoomed because I'm used to 400mm, but it's really not. It's perfect for the simple point and shoot photographing I do. I already got some really beautiful photos at the beach today. I had no trouble pointing at birds in the sky and auto focusing onto them. Easy to pack with me and lightweight it's really amazing. So glad I bought it after humming and hawing about it.
I'm glad you are enjoying it.
I sold my 100-400 L mk2 and 2x converter and bought this lens along with a very good monopod and still had change. I use this for situations where my 600mm f4 L &1.4x TC are too heavy or awkward or when mobility is required. On my R5 it produces great images and as I can push the iso on the R5 without too much of a problem I've yet to find it wanting. It has limitations but the focal length, IQ, weight and price make it a winner. For $900 it shouldn't be as good as it is. I was going to get the RF100-500L but this lens has made me reconsider that purchase. It's on hold indefinitely atm.
That's a great testimonial.
Great review Dustin. I have been using this lens for a while now. I have found it to be a great songbird and waterfowl lens when I need mobility. I also own both the canon 800 f5.6L and the 200-400 f4L w/1.4x. I have found the image quality of this lens to be shockingly good especially when compared to other lenses in the price bracket. The focus acquisition is definitely its biggest weakness for me compared to the much more expensive lenses. The f11 aperture although annoying at times has not been too much of a negative for my use, however I can always use one of my big lenses for low light. I think this lens is a really good option for people that want a long reach option to pair with a shorter and faster telephoto, but probably not as their only wildlife lens.
You're not the first to report having this lens in addition to a great white.
I’ve been shooting wildlife with the 800mm f/11 lens on a R6 for a while now.
I can’t say enough how impressed I am. Birds in flight with animal detect, extremely good.
Closer targets, with eye detect, takes your breath away.
For me, wildlife like Bald Eagles are always far away. The 800mm is a good first step.
But I push it even farther using a 1.4x Extender. And the results are still, very good.
But for closeups of Bald Eagles in tree or diving for fish far away, I push the 800mm even more by setting the R6 in crop mode.
Do the math 800mm x 1,4 Extender x 1.6 crop = 1,792 mm. And before you tell me about pixel count or image quality, again you have to try it to believe it. I’m getting some outstanding results at 1,792mm especially when using eye detect. A monopod also helps when dropping the shutter to 1/400 to keep the ISO low. I’ve been shooting wildlife since 1985. The 400mm F5.6 prime was great. The Canon 100-400 II with 1.4x Extender III at 896mm on a 1,6 crop body even better. This combination doubles your reach again.
You will be amazed. Try it for yourself…
I'm really glade you are enjoying it.
Thanks! I have a William Optic (Taiwan) 559mm f/6.9 apochromatic TELESCOPE which can be adapted with a 1.4x teleconverter to f/9.5 and RF mount. Manual focus, to be sure, but you saved me $900+taxes. I've looked at the history of Canon lens development and ALL these RF lenses have a 2nd or 3rd generation ahead of them in the next decade or two. A used, mint Canon 500mm f/4L IS USM cost me $3600, but I can slap a 2x EF II converter on it and get a 1000mm f/8 - f/32 AF lens that weighs a lot, but it can still capture auto racing's finest. Thanks! I was tempted, but your fantastic review helped me lots.
My pleasure.
Very well done video with great in depth info! Your objectivity is refreshing and I am left with a feeling of someone who is a straight shooter with the good & not so good points. Thanks again.
Unfortunately some reviewers seem to be just apologists for the brand
This lens gives a very lot of people the chance entering the genres of wildlife photography, even some sports for an affordable price tag.
Professional lenses for these jobs are quite a bit more heavy and do cost by far more.
Thank you for this fair review.
My pleasure
Thks Dustin, great thorough review. I own the 800 and use it to take pictures of chamois in the French Alps. Its lightweight is a game changer when you have to climb up for 3 hours…
That’s exactly right, and it’s why this lens does make sense for some people.
Yet another great review, Dustin. I adore the RF 800mm lens on my R & RA astro cameras, along with the 2x extender for filming the moon and especially getting great shots of Jupiter and Saturn. I love it. :)
That’s a very interesting application.
@@DustinAbbottTWI Yes, it does take a bit more to get those planets bigger in the frame though. By recording onto the Atomos Ninja, you can record the 5x & 10x focusing zoom which takes it up to 16,000mm (but of course can't be recorded if doing this in-camera). That's a good range for these cameras to be able to see the bands around Jupiter along with the Great Red Spot, and the rings of Saturn. :)
Another excellent review with a lot of great information. Completely agree with your conclusions on this lens-if you play to its strengths it will deliver excellent results.
Thanks for the feedback.
Great review Dustin, spot on about this lens, it's a great birding lens.
Thanks for the kind feedback.
Excellent informative video. Totally agree with your analysis. I have this lens and as you stated it works great UNDER the right conditions. In terms of AF , it’s fine but the AF on the L rf lenses is in a different league. Overall I’m happy with the lens as long as you know it’s strengths and weaknesses
Exactly.
This is the best review of this lens I’ve seen.
I’ve had this lens for 4 months now and taken thousands of images of birds and other wildlife. This review is spot on. This lens is the best deal in photography in my opinion.
It is a very good value, for sure.
I think you can use the ballhead mount on the lenses tripod mount
That’s true, which I figured out AFTER releasing the video!
I chose the main focal length as 100-400. I will use the 800f11 for targeting that the 400 can hardly do. I also thought about 500 and 600 but decided to choose 800f11 partly because the next price for small birds 5,600 is still not enough. For me, the ISO issue is not a concern when combined with the r5 and other software, the only thing I'm concerned about is the weather sealing issue. It's amazing how these new RF lenses are so small. I can carry both at the same time in my backpack wherever I go.
That's a nice feeling.
I just bought one yesterday. I'm going to try it out this morning.
Hope you enjoy it!
Thanks, Dustin. I'm a bird shooter and one of my favorite places to go is the Bosque del Apache for the liftoff. Early morning. So . . . f/11. It just won't work. $900 versus $12,000 given. If the lens doesn't work, price comparison isn't relevant. I appreciate your hard work.
Hi James, I take your point, though I think most photographers would agree that price is always relevant. It’s at least a data point you have to consider - what inconvenience are you willing to tolerate with a cheaper piece of gear because you can’t afford the far more expensive one.
@@DustinAbbottTWI You're right, of course. But I'm almost saddened by the decision Canon made to offer such a limited tool. Thanks for your analyses, often a good start for reviewing what I'm doing and why.
Well, I have the 800mm f/11 on a Canon R6. The low light question is really not what you expect without actually trying it.
For somewhat stationary targets, dropping the shutter speed down to 1/400 or lower really works well. But there’s also the ISO range of the R6. Surprisingly ISO ranges of 2,000-32,000 are extremely sharp compared to what I’ve seen in say the Canon 80D/90D.
Yes, like most people, I’m not use to shooting at those ISO ranges, and even bring a Canon 100-400mm II for really bad low light days.
But more and more, I rarely go with that second option. My recommendation for most is, try it for yourself.
You will be amazed …
What an awesome review Dustin! I have this lens on order to pair with my R6. Thanks for your time and knowledge.
Glad to help!
Just 2 questions: 1. If it's a fixed F11 lens, then what's the function of the focus limiter switch? Does it help in acquiring focus faster? 2. Can the lens be used with a speedbooster ? (not sure if this lens can be used with EF mounts though)
Fantastic in depth review 💚 One of my new go to photography & lens reviewers
I'm over here binging videos trying to decide over the 150-600mm Contemporary, 60-600mm Sigma, Canon 400 5.6, Canon 100-400 ii, 800mm f11 rf, or a 2x converter on my Tamron 70-200 g2 for my Eos R5 😭
I've always been interested in trying out moon and bird photo. This seems like a great deal to get into those 💚
That's a good application for this lens. I remain partial to the Canon 100-400L II + 1.4x combo, too, as it is very good optically and adapts really well to the R5.
I'm sort of considering this lens. I say sort of because I have the Canon R7 which is APS-C, so such a tight aperture of F11 forcing me to hit up my ISO would be an issue. The price is hard to ignore it, and my only other consideration is the Sigma 150-600mm Contemporary at around the same price. But at F5-6.3, I want keep my ISO down, at the cost of the added 200mm and needing to adapt.
It is a tough call. That’s a very long lens on your R7 (almost 1300mm), so I wonder how many situations you’ll be able to use the lens in?
@@DustinAbbottTWI
Well right now the longest I got is my Sigma 18-300 f5-6.3 and it does ok. And I would love the reach of the 150-600 (960mm at the top end). But the price difference between the Canon RF 600mm F11 vs the 800mm is nearly negligible. Unless the 600mm has another advantage over the 800 that I don't know about. But my main concern is the F11 aperture forcing me to use higher ISO on a camera that struggles at ISO 6400, I wonder if I should or shouldn't consider this lens over the Sigma 150-600mm and adapt it.
One plus of the RF 600 and 800mm F/11 lens that wasn’t mentioned in how lightweight they are. Older people that can no longer deal with the heavy super telephoto lenses may find these as a useable option.
There's no question they are lightweight.
One factor to consider is that it is an excellent wildlife lens when travelling. It is light and shortens down when not in use, so is easy to pack.
Try getting one of those $15,000 f4 lenses into your airplane carry-on luggage! :-)
Exactly.
About the tripod foot, am I missing something? Couldn't you just attach the quick release plate of your tripod there on the lens instead of on the camera and thus attach the lens to the tripod?
I think the implication is that that really shouldn't be necessary and the lens ought to ship with at least a (detachable) arca plate, if not a full foot.
First of all, yes, that was an option; I just didn’t think of it! Secondly, there’s some obvious limitations to that approach, most notably if you want to shoot in portrait orientation. A rotating tripod collar is the standard on telephoto lenses for a reason.
I have to say.. the control ring was never a thing for me, i always used the wheels on the EOS RP.
But on the RF 800 F11... i got used to use it A LOT... for fast ISO setting its very much needed to get more IQ out of slow moving wildlife images taken in between fast shots of flying birds for example.
Especially on the EOS RP - the RF 800 F11 is just a charme hiking!
Sounds like fun!
@@DustinAbbottTWI definately... my camera gear weights just 2kg (RF 800, RF 50mm 1.8, EOS RP)
sometimes im taking with me my proper tripod which weights already 4kg alone so nearly 4x the weight of the RF 800 or very often a very small lightweight tripod which has less than 100gram.
Im rarely using my EF lenses (Zooms, Macros, bigger aperture prime Lenses) anymore, just where i need anything under 50mm or in between 50 or 800, so where i want to get creative and not just birding/wildlife.
But even a EF 28-135mm F4 IS USM + EF RF Adapter weights already more than the RF 800, so this "universal" zoom is already a bummer on the camera. To make clear how radically lightweight (and so also not really sturdy or dust/waterproof!) this lens is.
Its anyways the RF 800s main strengh... light enough to dont be annoying in the backpack all day long, even ok to be prepared in your hand while hiking!
@@DustinAbbottTWI People always say fullframe is nothing for being portable or lightweight.
Well - the RP is SUPER COMPACT and light (4xx gram) and many RF lenses are just awesome performing and nowadays more often than not class leading like the RF 35/50mm (super optical performance, even stabilizer in the RF 35mm and they make especially with the RP a super compact and lightweight "high performance" combo.)
Same goes for the RF 800 F11.. its just a "super compact" supertele.
But after having fun with it for a while now... i guess the RF 600 would be the more clever, versatile option if absolute range isnt everything you need/want.
Nonetheless... the RF 800 is just too nice and IF you get a fast bird sharp in the frame... its just worth it, especially with the smaller birds where i have to crop even with the RF 800mm a lot!
another great video
The R5 and R6 do have bird eye tracking, that's why it tracked the eye of the seagull (if you set up the camera correctly).
Animal eye AF is correct.
Hi Tom, that’s not actually correct. Canon has an Animal Eye AF mode, but not a dedicated Bird Eye AF mode like Sony does on the Alpha 1. Fortunately Canon’s Animal Eye AF mode does a pretty good job with birds, too, which is the point I was making.
Overall, I thought this review was overly critical. This lens is a great asset for long range photography for enthusiasts.
Care to be precise in the ways it was overly critical? Did I report something inaccurately?
10:19 Just for curiosity, I have Nikon 1 NIKKOR VR 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 (189-810mm equiv.) I bought it long ago, but it's the sharpest zoom lens of all and it's smaller than 600m 2 or 3 times... Its image stabilisation is incredible.
It gives more detailed moon pictures than in this review (with Nikon J5 20MP) Unfortunately Nikon stopped supporting 1 inch bodies, but they are my favs for wildlife...
Interesting
Sony needs this
Perhaps, though the 200-600 G lens is probably the best of its kind.
Thanks for this Dustin. I have the Canon 100 - 400 and 1.4 TC. I am struggling a bit to decide if I would be better off to go to a 2x TC for reach for birds in flight, or this 800. Would appreciate any thoughts on this.
I would probably recommend getting this lens. I'm not a huge fan of 2x TCs and the hit they bring to image sharpness. Use the 100-400 + 1.4x TC to fill in before you get to 800
I keep going back and forth on this lens. I will never be able to spend the money on a "big white" of that focal length. Most of my shooting happens mid-day so i think i could manage the f/11 for the odd times i would want 800mm. I'm hoping to get an R5 soon so for the price, this might be a good pair for me. My current EOS r wouldn't work as well i think.
you could get an EF 100-400 II with a 1.4 or 2x and get a 560mm or 800 mm zoom. And when you don't need that max reach you have a lower f/. I used such a combo regularly on an R5 with descent results.
An R5 is a definite necessity for this lens. I'm pretty sure it was made with it in mind. The strengths of the R5 nearly perfectly slot in to the weaknesses of this lens, there not really another conclusion.
It’s definitely true that the EOS R isn’t going to work well for tracking action in burst regardless of what lens you attach. Purchasing the R5 is a great first step, and this lens definitely gives a reasonably priced option to pair with it.
@@DustinAbbottTWI The strengths of the R5 are very closely matched with the weaknesses of these lenses. Amazing autofocus to make up for an f11 aperture. Very very clean high ISO to make up that you will probably be using high ISOs. It's almost as if they made them to be matched in mind. Paired together I almost don't even notice half of the shortcomings of the 800 mm a lot of the times if I didn't have my 600F4 to tell me differently. Using this lens on an R5 I would compare favorably to using an older DSLR with an 800 5.6. And I did back in the day and I very much appreciate what this lens actually gives at the price it gives when paired with an R5.
Thank you for another good review. this lens is one that you look at and think yes I would like it but would I use it. then I got the RF100-500 which I love but after putting a X2 converter on it I found I may as well take the shot without the X2 and just crop in as the image was better, or at the least the same. but having that 800 ooh gets me thinking
I'm not a fan of 2X TCs - they almost always involve too much compromise. I'm mostly a limit of 1.4x kind of guy
@@DustinAbbottTWI ok I'll try one of them thanks
A good review, but I do agree with some other good reviewers here on the internet that the F11 at 800mm with the modern camera's like the Canon R5 and modern software the high iso's are not that much of a issue anymore.
I more and more belief this kind of comment is of an old era therefore.
We are all getting old, me too being for decades a photographer. ;-)
Grey hair etc. 🙂
Friendly greetings from the Netherlands, Onno Nugteren photographer and filmmaker.
Between the rf 100-400 + extender x2 and this . What would you choose ? . Using the rf 100 400 + extender always mounted, strapped to the neck with the standard strap , could bend ?
I would go with this lens. You'll end up with a maximum aperture of F16 with the zoom combo on the telephoto end and pretty soft image quality.
Great review. Thank you. May I ask what tripod you use in the video?
The table tripod: bhpho.to/3vL8YWy
6:20 It would make sense to just screw an Arca Swiss plate on the lens so you can mount the lens on the tripod, right? (But I agree, Canon should have included that)
Do you think the weight of the lens isn't putting too much strain on the lens mount?
That would the logical approach, though you would want to choose a plate that didn't interfere too much in the ergonomics of how you grip the lens.
I thought the tripod mount screw would fit that mounting point on the lens
You’re probably right; I just didn’t think of it!
Excellent info again! One question - is it impossible to use a tripod plate directly on the lens? It looks like the screw hole on the lens is far enough from the camera body to not cause any problems.
I believe it is possible...I just didn't think to do so.
I just picked up a lens collar shoe from ishoot for $39.it works really well
I don't understand why you screwed the tripod plate into the camera body and not the lens. It fits the lens too!
Hi Rich, I always have a QR plate mounted on my camera, and just didn't think to switch it to the lens. That will work, though with limitations.
Hi, it was great. I just have a question. I have a Canon 90D camera. Can I use this lens?
unfortunately no. It is only for the RF (mirrorless) mount
Have you tried using extension tubes on the lens to reduce the minimum focus distance? I'm curious how well that would work before I consider purchasing this lens.
I haven't tested that.
@@DustinAbbottTWI I have used a total of 91mm tubes (one Meike set and one Commlite set) on my 600 f/11. I got decent photo stackable images of flower parts from 8-10 feet).
Some reactions. 1-Lacks eye focus like Sony - No just semantics. Canon calls it Animal Eye Focus. Your shots prove it's sharp. 2-For tripod use buy an Arca Swiss plate from RSS or Kirk Photo. Problem solved. 3-The close focusing issue solved with a 35mm 3rd party extension tube when in a tight bird blind. Have heard some hints an RF extension tube is coming from Canon . 3-BIGGEST deal - this is a blend of spotting scope/telescope and most of the features of photo lens. Hence fixed aperture & light weight. This is a ground breaking product with image stabilization and auto focus added added to light weight, long reach glass. Huge product for a walk about tool for naturalists. 4-Newer sensors on cameras much less prone to noise at high ISOs. 5-Not a single mention of DEFRACTIVE OPTICS - the science that makes this lens possible.
Hi Don, for your first point, that's basically the same point I make in the review. As for the others, you are suggesting third party solutions to solve the problems. That's fine, but my job is to honestly evaluate strengths and weaknesses, and just because something can be fixed via a third party solution doesn't mean that it isn't an issue for the lens itself. Buying a third party plate or extension tube isn't a solution that a lot of photographers want to have to invest in. I do mention the diffractive options in my text review, but I'm not sure that this is as major a thing as you make it out to be. Canon has been making DO lenses for more than 15 years at this point.
likely sharper then my 100-400i with 2x iii teleconverter at F11.. take this add a RF 2X and you have 1600mm. awesome
I suspect that’s true about using the 2x TC. As for the 1600mm - I would not expect AF and would expect some serious image degradation
Works great with the 1.4x. I can capture the rings of saturn handheld
These lenses are absolutely bonkers, and I really think are the counterpoint to the idea that sensor sizes have anything to do with performance other than industry momentum and available lenses. This Canon lens trades blows with the Pana Leica 100-400 MFT, the Pana lens is a stop slower at 800mm equiv, but lighter and shorter, and a fair bit more expensive. I think these lenses prove that full frame =/= faster and wider with larger lenses, at least not when manufacturers choose so. If I was just shooting birds and wanted a lightweight kit, I'd go for a G9ii kit, but I think MFT has a lot of compromises for basically any other type of shooting (including video).
That's fair.
Dustin - maybe you've already written about it somewhere, but I couldn't find it - sorry. Can you describe the tripod configuration you used in this video? thank you Dustin - maybe you've already written about it somewhere, but I couldn't find it - sorry. Can you describe the tripod configuration you used in this video? thank you
Love the review. This lens may be more for the future when R bodies with the better ISO and autofocus fall to prices that amateur's will readily purchase. A new sub $1000 R body or a 7D replacement with RF mount would be ideal. I would like to see it tested with the RP for example as that's more likely what it would be pared with from a price to performance perspective. R5 and R6 users are more likely to have Big Whites with a TC to use and see less need to purchase this lens. Although I'm sure some will buy it for the portability and weight savings.
I own both a big white 600 f4 and this lens. It's so convenient to just always have on you and still produces absolutely jaw dropping pictures, though, like Dustin says, not on all scenarios.
I’m not sure that R5 and R6 users are “more likely” to have big whites - that’s a big leap from a $2500-3500 camera to a 10K+ lens!
There are options to get canons 600, 500, 400mm lenses for alot less then 10k not everyone buys new or has to have IS and native RF versions. Ebay for example has 500 and 600 F4 options for 3k US. I know its still cost prohibitive at those prices, I just think more people who balk at several thousand dollar lenses will do the same at cameras that even on the used market start at $2500. I believe that numerically a much larger group of people buy sub $1500 cameras. So a large market for a long telephoto in the $1000 price range will logically come from the larger group of camera purchasers. It might directly compete with Sigma and Tamrons large EF glass more then anything especially if your regularly having to crop birds and other wild life at 600mm. In the group of high level enthusiasts certainly some of us will have multiple options for long lenses but that is not normal.
It would seem better to go with a smaller sensor in this case. Heck, even a FZ300 gets decent quality at 600mm FOVs.
I don't know about that. The problem with smaller sensors is that you often have to shoot at higher ISOs to stop action, and the smaller sensors tend to not be as good at high ISOs. There's also the matter that you lose some of that subject isolation from a larger sensor, which can make images less special.
@@DustinAbbottTWI It is true that Higher ISO can be a problem; however, with DXO PL5, most of it goes away. I just don't see much point to this Canon lens.
Hi .. how would this RF800 lens work with the canon R50 mirror less camera for wildlife ??
It would be very difficult to use. First of all, the effective focal length after the crop would be 1280mm, so finding and framing your subject would hard. The lens is stabilized, so that would help once you acquire your subject. It would probably be easier to use for more still targets than trying to acquire birds in flight.
@@DustinAbbottTWI thanks for your kind reply.
Then how about the RF600 lens f11 with the canon R50 ??
The same principles are true to a lesser extent. They aren't easy lenses to use, but I would definitely go with the 600mm over the 800mm on crop.
Does the Tamron 150-600 G2 lens hood (also 95mm) fit onto this one?
I honestly have no idea. I didn't have both lenses at the same time and wouldn't have thought to even try if I had.
I have the 600 and the 800, and frankly, I have a really hard time getting sharp images. Can these lenses vary in quality/sharpness from one lens to another, or am I just expecting too much?
It's very hard to diagnose these type things over the internet, but if you have both lenses and are disappointed with both, it is statistically unlikely that you have bad copies of both. I would lean towards either a technique issue (too low of shutter speeds, for example), or just that maybe you are expecting too much.
@@DustinAbbottTWI - Thanks. I have gotten a few sharp images, mostly when I am closer to the subject. I think there are limitations to using these lenses that I have to learn to adapt to...
Thanks for the review! Canon should make a 3rd lens to this series. A "pro" model with the same diameter optics than this 800mm has but with 600mm focal length. This would give close to f/8 aperture. Could also have weather sealing and better tripod connector.
I could see a 600mm F8 lens with a price tag somewhere around $1500-2000 being successful.
Unsolicited Mini Review… I’m a professional/paid photographer. If anyone wants my personal opinion:
I rented both the 600mm and 800mm on separate weekends.
Pros:
• Both 600/800 produced crisp amazing IQ
• Very hike/travels friendly
• Cost Effective
Cons
• F11 made it tough to shoot early morning
• R5 is amazing but I don’t suggest bumping iso to 3200+ you can definitely see the noise (pre-software tweak)
• focusing distance is really far
• limited focusing window
Final thoughts:
I preferred the 800mm because I often find I need reach.
A Tc 1.4x or 2x is not recommended
Would have loved a cost effective plastic 800mm F/8. Yea it would cost more, be larger and weigh more - but not $12,000 white prime.
The RF 100-500mm was nearly as sharp as these primes and much faster focusing. But stops at 500mm and almost $1000 more than Sony’s 200-600 mehhh
That’s a good synopsis, I would say, and agrees with my observations.
@@DustinAbbottTWI thanks a lot for taking the time. Love love love your reviews man. Take care!🙏🏽
Do you think your position on the globe and the recent forest fires are impacting ISO?
No I don’t. There’s little impact where I live, and I’m fairly professional at evaluating lighting at this stage in my career.
would you be interested in attending a livestream as my facebook group would be really interested in having you on.?
📸 Thanks for another great video Dustin! 👍🏻☺👍🏻How would this lens compare to the likes of 150 -600 mm Tamron or Sigma lens, using the crop mode of the Canon R5 (In order to reach similar focal lenght) ? I guess the effective apperture would be equal or better than the Canon's ? + it would comes with better focal lenght and apperture range 🤔
I would say (in theory) that you are getting slightly better image quality, though you might get better results with the Sigma or Tamron for the simple reason that you can shoot with a faster shutter speed or lower ISO in many situations. Crop mode doesn’t change the amount of light reaching the sensor.
@@DustinAbbottTWI Ok, I am not that crazy then 😉 Thanks for the quick feedback! 👍🏻
If you want to get a better 800mm lens than this you have to pay 12000 dollars. I don't know of any better (or equal) lens than this one. Works flawless and any limitations you have think of 12000 dollars L series!
That's pretty much true!
Ouch! Gear is expensive these days, for sure.
🤮no thanks
Of course. As I said, this lens is not for everyone.
Vvvv
Ffffff
?????