Been watching your videos for a couple of years and just had to say that I love the way you show the original raw image and then the crop and edited version. Really helps a beginner like me see what’s possible
After your review, 'we would be bonkers' not to buy this lens. With this reach plus 45MP of the R5 we would be in birding heaven. That Little Eagle shot blew us away. Your processing is perfect, Duade. Really can't thank you enough for everything you do.
Thanks Joan, yes, it works very well on the R5 and makes those subject much bigger. It is not quite as sharp as the 100-500 in that range and is heavier but lots of fun for the small birds out there. Cheers, Duade
Yeah, its universal for birding with 200-800mm, but i would have rather preferred a 400-800 F5.6-7.1 or similar with the same weight or a 400-800 with constant F8 but like 400g less and even more focussed on sharpness and image quality. Anyways, it seems amazing if weight isnt a concern, as a RF 800 F11 and Sigma 150-600C user its pretty hard to decide if i should sell both for a single 200-800 or keep those lenses with their specific advantages (800 F11 weight/size and stabiliser for handheld only usage, Sigma faster aperture but big/heavy and tripod needed for smooth video)
I got the lens now since Dec 23rd on my R 5 and the resulsts are flabbergasting. Ideal for travelling abroad, no hassle with airlines ( United, Brexit Airways ) wanting you to to buy an extra ticket or your bulky 800mm lens case. The image quality is superb and handling is easy.
Duade I have never seen you quite so animated so initial testing signs are very promising! Wonderful background blur at f9 esp with the crop factor of the R7 factored in. The sharpness and detail were clearly evident as was the flexibility and relative ease of use of the lens. Some stunning shots including the bird silhouettes. Light in NZ during winter months would be an issue I guess. Looking forward to more detailed analysis to come from you as time allows and I really wonder where this leaves the 100-500 lens.
You reckon the light is bad in NZ you should try Northern Ireland lol I've been here 3 years and the light back home in New Zealand leaves this place for dead. However I have been using the 100-500 with the 1.4x converter on the R5. DXO pure raw becomes your best mate when you have to work with high F stops.
Thanks Mike, the 100-500 is in a class of its own to be honest, as a shorter zoom it cannot be beaten. It's only weakness is the reach and that is where the 200-800 shines. I will use both but the 100-500 will always be used for macro, landscape, large subjects, tame subjects etc. I will only use the 200-800 when reach is an issue. Cheers, Duade
Hi Mr Paton, I have a question. I don’t get lenses to often. They are after all expensive. Here in the United States, the rf 100-500 is only 200 dollars more then the rf 200-800. If I bought only 1 lens, what do you think would be my best bet.
Finally one of the videos i was waiting for. You and Jan are the main channels i look at to get input about new equipment. So far it looks very good this lens, so i believe that this will be my next lens. Looking very much forward to your full review on this. Wishing you a great week mate, with a lot of wonderful photos. Cheers, Bjoern
Thanks mate, good so far, the only other weakness I didnt mention as we have only really discovered the lack of coatings on the lens can lead to some fringing and blown whites in bright perches or lighting. I will be sure to show this in the review. Cheers, Duade
Duade, Thanks for presenting your excellent review video of the Canon RF200-800mm. A bunch of your USA followers have been awaiting your real life wildlife and evaluation of the 200-800mm. Eagerly awaiting the video from Jan Wegener. Best to you and yours.🦜
I'd be really interested to see a comparison between the R5 with the 200-800 and the R7 with the 100-500 because it's the same reach. F9 is very very dark for European dusks/dawns especially in winter.
Great review. For us photographers who already have RF 100-500mm, a shot for shot comparison of that lens with 1.4 teleconverter to the RF 200-800 would be really helpful. Looks like the this lens is significantly heavier than the RF 100-500.
Lens for lens, the RF 200-800 is heavier at 4.5 lb., compared to the RF 100-500's 3 lb. However, if you add a 1.4x to the 100-500 to have the same "reach", the difference will be a little more than 1 lb. (plus the 100-500 & 1.4x combo will be slightly dimmer at 800mm: f/10 rather than f/9).
@@alanm.4298 You're welcome 🙂. The extender does also extend the minimum focal length to 420 as it can't be attached unless the base lens is extended to 300mm first. So it's either 100-500 or 420-700 @f/10 with extender. Personally I find the 420 -700 range a bit of a bind as when larger birds approach I can't zoom back to (say) 300mm.
Prior to ordering this lens I practised with my 100-400L USM @f9 on My R5. No problems in typical daylight conditions. Now by November I hope to have one of my own! Thanks for your excellent videos and reviews Duade!
Very interested how this lens compares to the 100-500, both with and without a 1.4x teleconverter. Are there any compelling reasons for those who already own this combination to consider switching?
FWIW, I decided to go with the 100-500 because its lower weight makes it far easier to handhold, plus the 3 foot minimum focus distance makes it possible to shoot insects and other smaller subjects without changing lenses. Plus, the lower 100mm focal length is useful if I want to snap off a few portraits or landscapes. That may or may not be important to you, but those were the key differences that pointed me to the more expensive lens.
A very good question that I will try to answer in the review, I think owners of the 100-500 have the hardest choice to make. If I personally had to choose one lens it would be the 100-500 as it is just such a good lens for its focal length. Now if you have the funds available I will use both lenses, the 100-500 without TC is perfect for macro, landscape, big mammals, tame birds etc. But when I need reach I will go with the 200-800, I think that is more versatile than 420-700 f/10. Cheers, Duade
@@Duade Thanks Duade, I have the 100-500 with 1.4x and I am leaning towards adding the 200-800. I pretty much shoot my existing combo at max FL all the time with an R7, so there are advantages with the 200-800 I think. I bought the R7 to fill time while I await the R1, so it looks like 2024 is going to be expensive for me. Ah well. it's only money.
Thanks Russell, I think they are two different lenses for sure, I will use the 100-500 for that focal range as its very sharp and excellent for that. For reach I think the 200-800 has that advantage and you should be able to get wonderful shots. Yes, the R5II is also coming so an expensive year. Cheers, Duade@@RussellStewart
for all those concerned with background separation, just check a depth of field calculator. F/9 at 800mm gives less dof ( = more bokeh) than F/6.3 at 600mm. There is genuinely zero reason to worry about the bokeh just because it is an "F/9" lens. the 800mm make more than up for this. Here's some numbers if you're interested: At 10m distance, F/6.3 and 600mm has a dof of 10cm, while F/9 and 800mm has 8cm. This corresponds to the dof of F/5 at 600mm, so it's quite a bit better at dissolving backgrounds than the typical 600mm zooms.
Ahh but the key thing is that the 800mm will be a far tighter shot, to get the same framing you'll have to either zoom out or step back, both of which will reduce bokeh. So sure, for tight portraits it will be fine, but for more creative bird-small-in-frame shots (e.g. Ray Hennessey), the 600mm f6.3 will be much better and produce more blurred backgrounds with the same framing. So to claim there is 'no reason' to be worried about bokeh is incorrect.
@@willherondale6367Nonsense negative response. You'd only buy an 800mm lens if 600mm generally isn't enough, so your argument is moot for those who need 800mm.
@@willherondale6367 well it depends. if you're intending to crop (or would have needed to crop a 600mm picture to 800mm-ish), it'll be in your favour. And since the reach is the main strength of the lens. this adds perfectly to it.
600mm at f/8 isn't too bad considering that any of the f/6.3 600 zooms will be f/9 if you chuck a 1.4x TC on them to reach 800mm anyway. For those that know they need 800mm for their use, this lens is actually consistent with those other options and doesn't require swapping a TC on and off to get it. For me the f/6.3 zooms are already on the limit for the light levels here but for people in less dreary areas it looks like a good option 😄
Well I keep my Sigma at 600 f8 anyway, because it is soft at 6.3. If this Canon 200-800 solves the dreaded focus pulsing/hunting issues, gives a bit extra reach and is 30-40% less expensive than rf 100-500mm, it is a no brainer for me :)
Great comment and totally agree, if you need reach or use a TC on your 600 zoom then this lens fits that niche well. If light is an issue then this might not be the best choice. Cheers, Duade
Seems like a no brainer for FF shooters. For crop I reckon the 100-500 is still the better option, especially when you take the weight factor into account for longer wildlife treks.
100-500 F/4.5-7.1 + 1.6 crop factor = 160-800mm F/7.2-11,3. So you will lose 2/3 stops of noise capability and DoF on the long end against a FF + 200-800 combo.
I managed to pick up the lens the day it arrived so been using for a few weeks now. I also have zero regrets & find it glued to my R7. We all want a faster lens but none of us want the weight penalty that would come with it. l would rather dip out on a stop of light to have an extra 200mm so would take this over another 200/600 f5/6.3. I do still feel at least on R7 that the autofocus is not as fast or accurate as the 800mm prime F11 probably due to less glass to move around. Anyway l will happily replace my 800 f11 & Tamron 150/600 with this lens. These slower lenses from Canon are very useable you just have to learn the limitations & go with it.😊
Currently running a Tamron G2, is the autofocus improved? My g2 seems to hunt quite a lot. On the fence about upgrading right now not sure if I can justify the cost.
Great work as always Duade. I've been really enjoying mine. You make a great point about the missing manual focus ring. I haven't run into a situation in several outings where I've needed to bump the manual focus ring to help the camera out but I'm sure I will. I was surprised when I tried it with the 1.4x extender. It's a rockstar at f/13! LOL
Nice review. Thank you. Test chart shots I've seen show it's not L image quality unfortunately. The old 100-400 mk II is sharper across the board in the 200-400 focal range. Darn. If you need 600-800 range , this is your reasonably priced Canon offering.
I got mine already. Very happy with the image quality (on R6 and R7). I don't really notice much of a size/weight difference from the RF100-500, particular when it has an extender. It's really fun to go from 200 to 800. Yes, the tripod mount is a pain. Did very well on wetland birds. Am looking forward to trying it out on some shorebirds over Christmas holidays. I suspect there are going to be a lot of RF800 f/11 lens on the second hand market now (including mine)....
The ones who can't afford the RF200-800MM will be itching to get their hands on the RF800 f11 we trade in I guess. I've been really pleased with mine bar the lack of weather sealing. I can't wait to get mine and head up to the Farne Islands hopefully before we sell our house and move too far away to get there easily.
Excellent initial impressions review. In your final review, I'd like to know how the sharpness and focus speed of the RF 200-800 compares to the RF 100-500 bare lens and the RF 100-500 with the 1.4 teleconverter, at the same, shared focal lengths. Thank you.
Morning Duade, very interesting video , and some fantastic images you got, such wonderful diversity in wildlife. The lens looks great I must admit, I’m just worried that F9 is pushing that ISO up, we get a lot of bad light days here in the UK. However what other options is there for Canon shooters! Again Canon are pushing that compromise on us. Good to see you back with that sparkle Duade. Looking forward to hearing more about this lens. Gary
The 100-500 on an R7 would be a bit more light with the same reach. There's even a used EF 500 F4.5 on MPB that would give the same reach and a tonne more light on an R7 with EF-RF adapter. We have to get creative in the UK with our light situation! ha!
@@stephencooper5155 yeah unfortunately 😃 looking at the weather it’s poor for a while now. I use a 600 F11 and find you just end up pushing the ISO way too high for the stutter speeds you ideally want for BIF. Great when it’s nice and sunny. F9 is better but the 6.3 on the Sigma is better again, albeit you lose 200mm. It’s good to see Canon trying new things and modern cameras are much better with ISO. I’m going to watch a few more videos from this direction to see what the verdict is.
Thanks mate, yes, always a comprimise, I think for us in the lucky country with plenty of light it is not so much an issue, but in low light it will always push that ISO up. So it is a big trade off isnt it. Crop in on 600 6.3 or go up a stop of ISO at 800 f9, actually I will try that in the review, thanks for the idea. Cheers, Duade
Love your channel, thank you for the awesome content, I have to say that going from traditional DSLR to Mirrorless and using the RF lenses, worrying about sharpness has become a thing of the past
try zooming by pulling and pushing the barrel instead of the zoom ring. thats what i do and i can zoom faster. thats what many used to do on the ef 100-400 mk 1
Great shot on the Little Eagle. with good day light, f/9 is not a problem. I use my Sigma 150-600mm Contemporary lens with TC1.4, it comes f/9 and 850mm. I don't have issue to shoot 20fps with Nikon Z8, it might be the stack sensor can keep the 20fps without any delay. for low light, i won't use the TC1.4 or for really cloudy day. I will use Z70-200mm with 2 x TC to get 400mm at f/5.6.
Not sure why I'm watching this, as I'm not in the market for an 800mm lense, neither do I own a Canon😂. But I absolutely loved this video, your passion for wildlife photography is clear! Best wishes from Leicestershire, UK
I got mine on the 14th. So far I like it. Since it is winter here in the Puget Sound Area of Washington State, USA, I have been able to shoot in low light. In fact, this time of the year with only 8 hours of daylight, it is my only option. 😂 This has allowed me to see what my limitations are. I have been testing how low of a shutter speed I can hand hold, 1/60 at 800mm on my R5 still looks good. The R5 handles ISO fine and I have shot at ISO 5000 without a problem. I haven't tried it with my R7 yet. You are correct, the collar doesn't come off. In reviewing the pre-production, one reviewer thought that was a good thing since it wouldn't accidentally come off and cause you to drop the lens. I thought that was a bit of a stretch but since I don't ever take the collar off on my lenses that I can, it doesn't bother me. Unless you are willing to spend a lot more money you aren't going to get 800mm of reach with a faster aperture.
Yep, totally agree, maybe one day Canon will send me the pre production lenses and I would be more than happy to share my honest real world experience with them. Cheers, Duade
The review is honest and the photos are good example of what the lens can do. Versatility is what you are buying...200 to 800mm, easy of use and etc. I will stick to my 100 to 500 and my 1.4 converter for now.
I don't think there is any other reviewer who does the review like you Duade higligting all the pros and cons and if they are important. Thank you for that.
You made an excellent choice with that lens! Its quality is truly impressive and I'm confident you'll keep loving it for a long time. Enjoy capturing those stunning shots!
Great primer Duade... you have me riding with you on this wave of excitement! I am definitely inching closer to wanting one of these to pair up with my R5 vs using my R7 + 100-500. Sharpness and details at 800 look impressive... i wholly agree, getting more reach is addictive! Will your next review get me committed? Will i want the 200-800 over my 100-500+1.4x? I can't wait for your follow-up segment to find out! Awesome and quality presentation... You and Jan have us on the edge of our seats! Thank you mate!!
Thanks Winston, Jans review is incoming and he talks about a few things we discovered after my first impressions which are worth thinking about. My review will take a bit longer as I need to compare it with lots of lenses etc. But so far I am enjoying it. The RF100-500 is by far the most amazing lens in that range and I will continue to use it. But it is annoying to use the 1.4 on that lens so I suspect I will use them both. The 200-800 for when I need reach and the 100-500 for macro, landscape, up close, tame subjects etc. Cheers, Duade
Thanks Duade! Take your time! Give us time to soak up Jan's review before moving on to yours! A lot of us are delighted to see you and Jan tag team and providing different perspectives!
My main shooting times are blue to golden hour here where I live, rarely am I out past a couple hours after sunrise, my 600 F/4 prime can struggle at these time frames, so I'm sure an f9 just wouldn't work. For those that can't seem to get out of bed to make that type of lighting, then this 2-8 F/9 would be handy as you wouldn't have the weight of the prime. The image quality looks decent for the price range of this lens. - I look forward to a more comprehensive review.
G'day I agee re the primes, there is no comparison to the fast primes, they will always have that massive advantage. This lens is more of a secondary lens when you cannot be bothered with the weight or size of the prime. You can have this next to you in the car or when scouting in the bush etc. Or of course if you cannot afford a big prime. It is no replacement that is for sure. Cheers, Duade
Such a vitamin injection of Happy Duade, much appreciated for me that just now have a wonky wisdom tooth that choose this time of year to act out. It needs to be drawn, well before the Aussie trip, that's for sure!😬 Not looking forward to that, at all, but after the deed is done: big relief. I'm looking forward for more videos on the 200-800 testing and comparings, both from you and Jan! I bet you're gonna test it together with the f11 as well. I'm *almost* sure I'm going to buy it, but the shipping seems to be slow and uncertain. Canon clearly didn't think it would be a "best seller", so too few has been manufactured. We'll see if it's available before end of August-24... It won't replace my beloved 100-500, of that I'm totally sure, but maybe(probably?) the 800/11. I don't know! That one is so much lighter and have no big foot to annoy me forever and ever! And it's sharp, as well, only thing is the f11 but that's the way it's built. Wouldn't be as light and cheap if it was faster. The min focus range is a bummer as well, but I guess the same reasons applies. The new zoom has very good min focus distances, which is a large bonus, even at 800 mm. As you see: I'm waffling, very undecided. I can afford to be, no cow on the ice, it's still unavaialble here in Sweden. I might get it before the Aussie trip, or I might not. I'd prefer to get it before the trip, but won't die without it.
G'day Pia, sorry to hear about your tooth, I had all of mine removed as a teenager as they were growing sideways, very painful indeed. Yes, it is tough for existing 100-500 owners. That lens is just sublime at that range and I will always reach for that lens for up close work, or tame subjects etc. But if reach is an issue the 200-800 is great, but it is big and heavy compared to the f11 prime. But you do get full AF coverage, 200-800 range, slightly faster at f9 and of course the 3.3m mfd. Jans review is not far away. Cheers, Duade
Yes, good so far, a few interesting things that I will mention in the review, it appears the lack of coatings maybe leading to less dynamic range and some ghosting on whites in bright parts which I will discuss in more detail. Cheers, Duade
G,Day, great vid, love the pics you've taken with the lens, shows how far I still need to progress, for me living in the uk and not as a rule not having such good light makes the f9 a bit disappointing, however I'll get my birding skills to a much higher level before I make my final decision as it maybe a tripod etc maybe the answer to have the extra reach, I look forward to seeing what you think when you have had it for a while.
Thank you for your detailed review. I have been birding with R5 or R3 and EF600F4 in Japan. I wanted to use a lighter telephoto lens, so I bought a Z8 + Z800mmF6.3 in January this year. However, I am frustrated with the AF of the Z8. If I had seen your review earlier, I would have bought the RF200-800mm.
Duade, from what I have seen so far in other videos 100-500 + x1.4 is sharper than 200-800 is that what you find? I currently shoot R7 with 100-400is ii. I am thinking about upgrading to an RF lens. I like the flexibility and ease of transportability of the 100-500 + x1.4 what would you choose with the R7?
The RF100-500 is a sharper better lens without doubt being an L series lens. The only downside is its a bit annoying with a 1.4 as you cannot retract the lens meaning you have to take it off every time before putting in your bag, you can't just leave it attached. But as an all around lens the 100-500 is more versatile. I personally will use both but if I had to choose just one I would go with the 100-500. But in Australia at least it is $2000 more expensive with the converter so cost is always a consideration. It really comes down to your circumstances and if you think reach is more important I guess. Cheers, Duade
Your prelim, independent review (well done) is great news and very encouraging. Thanks for sharing so quickly, and some great images too! Loved the raptor photo. I've been hoping for a Canon lens like this for several years now, and jealous of Sony and Nikon users. I really fell in love with that 800mm focal length after using the RF 800f11 prime but that fixed focal length really limits composition at times, and this 2-8 lens will be faster with its max f9 aperture. The 2-8 flexibility and reach is well worth the small amount of added hand hold weight IMO. I'm not bothered by the max f9 aperture either -- nearly equivalent to a 600mm f6.3 lens with a 1.4 teleconverter added. I'm quite excited that Canon has provided a zoom lens out to 800mm, rather than designing a zoom to 600mm that would require a teleconverter to put on and off in order to reach that long focal length required for some shots. Those that need both reach and speed in a zoom can look forward to Canon's 2-5 f4, albeit at a predictable, (shocking) steep price. I look forward to your final review, and Jan's, and have been holding off on purchasing this lens until the 2 of you had a chance to review it. Kind regards.
Thanks mate, yes, promising so far and I like it compared to the 800 f11, it is not an L lens and we have both noticed a few things that will be covered in the review, one very interesting observation regarding bright whites and dynamic range possibly due to the lack of coatings on the glass. Cheers, Duade
Another great video, Duade. You can talk specs all day, but the evident joy in your voice is all you really need to know. What more could you ask for than having this lens bring you so much fun? For my preferred style of photos, though, I’m not convinced this lens is for me, as I tend to shoot very early or very late in the day, so my go-to lens is still the 400 f2.8. Happy holidays, Duade.
Thanks mate, yes, not a replacement for the fast primes in terms of IQ, it is just a fun alternative lens that will make plenty of people happy. I am just glad we now have lots of options on RF for wildlife. Cheers, Duade
Awesome a great 1st impression video looking forward to some comparison combinations up against the 100-500 on r7 then 100-500 on r6ii with 1.4tc against the 200-800 on r6ii aswell with the ultimate question 🙋♂️ should we upgrade the rf100-500 to the 200-800 as this is just solely my wildlife set up I have the old ef 100 &200 mm f2.8 lenses for everything else 👍👍👍👍
Nice review as always! I'm surprised that you consider ISO 1600 to be high! I think most of us are now using good noise reduction software, so on a FF camera like the R5, ISO 12800 is no issue, on a crop like the R7, ISO 6400 is my maximum default. Keep in mind that if you crop your shot, your subject will actually get more light in most cases at 800mm focal length at f/9, than the 100-500 at 500mm at f/7.1 due to the larger entrance pupil diameter of the lens. I agree that the zoom throw should be shorter, that is an issue on the RF 100-500 as well. While the tripod collar is not removable, I would suggest turning it 180 degrees and use it as a handle. I have another similar lens (another brand) and was disappointed that the collar was not removable, but since turning it upwards, I now realize that I would not have removed it even if I could. It is much easier to lift and carry the lens using the collar, and keeps pressure off the mount when you hold the camera/lens combo. Looking forward to your full review and I hope you have some comparisons between this lens and the RF 100-500 with 1.4x TC, since many of us already have that combination.
How would cropping get you more light ? F/8 is F/8 no matter what sensor size is behind. F/9 at 800mm is 2/3 stops slower than 500mm F/7.1 no matter what. However if you crop the 500mm to get a 800mm equivalent, then you will get the same illumination of the sensor (so you'll still have the exact same ISO, speed and aperture settings), but you'll be using less sensor area (exactly 2,36 times less, as it is a 1,6 times crop) which will make the noise more noticeable (exactly 2,56 times more noticeable) and give you less background blur. So you would use your 500mm F/7.1 as a 800mm F/11,3 equivalent. Emphasis on the "equivalent" as the light output/area of the lens will still be the same, but you will be using your sensor at only 39% of its noise and DoF capability, so an image taken with this setup (with the 1.6 crop) at, for example, 1000ISO, F/7.1, 1/400th will look exactly the same as an image taken with all the area of your sensor at 2500ISO, F/11,3 1/400th with a real 800mm lens. But it has nothing to do with the physical characteristics of the lens. And in this case, if you really need the 800mm reach, it is much better to use the 800mm F/9 than the 500mm F/7.1 cropped to 800mm eq., because you will have about 2/3 stops more bokeh and noise capability.
As a Canon user for over twenty-five years, it is simply astonishing that they still don't provided the Arca Swiss mount on their lenses. Can machining a couple slots and hard anodizing aluminum really be that big a cost factor on a lens?
Comparison shots please showing focus speed\accuracy between R7 with the 100-500 vs the R6\R8 with the 200-800. I can't afford both lenses, need to pick the correct one for wildlife!
Picked mine up a few days ago. I had a cloudy badly overcast day the next day when I took it out using the R7. It struggled pretty hard with birds in flight with AF at 800mm, granted I was only able to shoot white seagulls with a bad over cast background so I expected that limitation. I know it will perform much better in good light after seeing lots of different post now on the sharpness of the lens. Think it will work much better on my R6MII. For sure is a long throw but I feel it is manageable at least for my uses. Would like to see what AF settings you found to work the best in an upcoming video of the lens if that is something that could be worked in. Pretty stoked about the purchase so far, just wish there were more birds around my area to shoot at the present. Local camera store received 2 lenses in on release date, I got lens #2. Look forward to your review of the lens. Thanks you sir.
I am ready for a R7 Mark II !!!! - would like better auto focus, full sized controls and body size like the R5 & 6, NEED a battery grip for my bigger hands
@@donh4907 You're not the only one. Duade has called them out over the AF issues which I'm sure they could fix with a FW update as Nikon have just done but they won't, they'll make us pay for the R7 ii....💵💵😥
Congrats on getting the lens, looks like lots of people are on the waiting list. Yes, I struggled also with overcast BIF, just not enough light really and lifting shadows means loads of noise. Still working on the best settings for the R7 as it does leave me frustrated at times. I hope your weather improves so you can make the most of the lens. Let me know how it goes. Cheers, Duade
I'm really considering getting this lens. Right now I'm still using the Canon EF 100-400mm 4.5-5.6 L IS USM. But even on a crop frame camera this doesn't get as much reach as the 200-800 on a full frame camera. And you can easily increase the ISO on full frame cameras by two steps if needed because of the aperture and still get cleaner images. Plus if you consider using a tele converter on the 100-400mm in order to get more reach you lose any aperture benefit of the shorter lens. A 2x converter would even result in less light.
just gpt the lens last week. It is amazing, enjoying it. I was in between with rf 100 500 but i do not regret, will not look back for sure. Yours videos helped. As you said, Modern cameras handles high iso pretty good, it is a bit heavier, but it will push me to do body exercises, bokeh is more than good... it is lovely lens. Thank you for reviews :)
Wondering if I should sell my 100-500 and pick this up instead? I love my 100-500 but just doesn’t have the reach a lot of times. I’m sure image quality is still better on the 100-500 but not having to crop so much on my R6mkii might negate that fact.
Thanks so much for the video! I have mine on order but it may be a bit before I get it. Seems like a great lens for birding. As usual you made some amazing images. Cheers.
I use a 100-400 push/pull for zoom so I was thinking you could push/pull the barrel on this 200-800 for rough adjustments and then the ring to fine tune the focal length/composition you want. I know for me having to do multiple twists to zoom to a desired length would annoy me, on my 100-400 it annoys me that I don’t have a ring to fine tune the focal length. Another great video, hopefully the back order on these lenses isn’t too long. Thanks much!
The collar must be removable. Canon still can do it. BTW, where is Canon in the case of APSC lenses? No news we are hearing about APS-C lens? Why Canon?
Yes, I am sure it is, I just don't know how to do it quickly and easily, there does appear to be some sort of screw on top so no doubt that is how. I will wait to see someone else do it first to see how hard it is. No idea re APSC lenses. Cheers, Duade
It sure looks like we will get lot of what we have been asking for. Keep calling out the improvements, For now , those of us with an EF 100-400 ,a couple of TC's, a R6, a RF800 f11 and a lot of sunshine are going to be happy (I will be) when our preorders get shipped. Thanks
❤❤❤ the places are beautiful...and seeing you two together is another thing that I love, obviously I will see Jan's comparisons and thank you for this video...wish to meet with you two someday and have a session together...❤
Here in the Pacific Northwest (western Canada), this would be a challenging lens to use for stills for quite a few months of the year. Now for video on the other hand.....could be interesting. That focal length is quite attractive.
Thank you for this review. I shoot the R7 and have the Sigma 150-600 contemporary lens that I used with my 5D Mark IV and purchased the RF 100-400 f/5.6-8 lens as the Sigma is too heavy for me to handhold. I can’t afford the RF 100-500 and don’t feel I would be gaining all that much if I purchased it. Would you recommend purchasing the 200-800 or should I save up for the 100-500? I love watching your videos and enjoy the photos you share of the wildlife where you are. I am in the US in South Texas and bird photography is my passion. Thank you for sharing your knowledge and insight with us.
G'day, if the Sigma istoo heavy unfortunately this lens weighs exactly the same, I would prefer this lens over the Sigma but it is twice the price. The RF100-400 is a nice light little lens but can feel a touch short at times. You could get a 1.4 extender for the RF100-400 to give slightly more reach if you need it and you still have the light lens. Cheers, Duade
The yellow Robin looks amazing almost unreal shard and colored. Great job. You are blessed having such colorful, interesting many different birds over there. In Germany we don‘t have that many and not even close colorful and different birds. 😒
Hi MR Paton. What you do making a high quality channel is difficult and impressive. I would like to comment that I received my 200-800 lens. There might be better lenses to take sharper shots. But more fun, probably not. Anyone who wants to go out, and just have a great time taking photos of nature, it’s like you said, that is the key.
Like you enjoyment is key for me. Stunning shots. Even on a cold grey winter’s day in the UK the extra reach would have helped with the local Red Kites and even the elusive Goldcrest. Thanks again for your passion.
You're making me regret not preordering this lens now 😂. Great images and info Duade. I'm definitely looking forward to your full review and lens comparisons.
Thanks mate, it is tricky, there are pros and cons and some other things I did not mention in this video. I will be sure to be thorough in the review. Cheers, Duade
I received mine today. I shoot with a R7. Coming from the rf100-400 it appears the image quality is better. The reach is fantastic. I’m able to get photos at twice the distance and with better image quality - so much fun! Aloha from Maui!
As usual, nice video, beautiful background with Australian nature beauty and the shots you got are very pleasing, always happy to watch your videos, motivating and refreshing :) cheers
A little late to this video even though I have been really looking forward to see you with this lens! Loved your review Duade, your excitement is contagious! Some amazing shots you have taken, they absolutely blew me away. This may be the push I needed to get off the M system and in to RF, those results speak for themselves.
Thanks mate, yes, for its price it has lots of things to like, it is not perfect and has weaknesses but I can see it being a very popular lens for birding, Cheers, Duade
I was excited to see your review on this lens. I use the R5 with the RF100-500. That combo is SO awesome. I have no intention of moving away from the RF 100-500, but there are situations for me that the extra reach of this new lens could get a shot that the RF 100-500 can't. Your videos are always very informative and well done. You bring out the good and the bad. And you back your comments with pics. Again, well done! Your video has given me the confidence to move forward with purchasing this lens.
Fantastic to hear that the lens is so sharp and that the autofocus is operating so good. These were the most important things I liked to know. We know the downsides, but given the price there is really no alternative for the most of oss who can't spend the price of a second hand car to buy a 600 og 800mm prime lens. I pre-ordert the lens immediately. Shipping date will be the 4th of January here in Norway.
Congrats on the lens, for its price I think it perfoms well, there are a few weaknesses but overall the image you will get will make you very happy. Cheers, Duade
Thanks Duade, really helpful and informative. I look forward to the full review. I have a hunch that the tightness of the lens and associated control ring will loosen over time. It certainly did on mu EF100-400 and I have noticed that my RF 100-500 isn’t as tight as when I first got it.
@@Duade I'm looking forward to seeing more of your experiences with it. I'm waiting for a review copy myself, but I think they are backordered at the moment.
You look so happy in this video Duade! I assumed its because of this lens, so I bought it and it will arrive on Friday :D 800mm is simply a must have. Thank you for the video, it helped me little bit to decide - I know its not yet full review... Im curious if this lens will be good for video, I think it will be much better then Sigma 150-600, but will see. Take care! Tomas
Excellent review, as always I really enjoy the fact you show us the images to go with the facts, I am tired of reviewers who just talk the talk, You and Jan are the best, I wish we had your Ozy light here in the Uk. Here its that time of the year of short, grey days. Will be interesting to see a review in dull conditions. Will you be trying to shoot this lens with a teleconverter and a direct comparison with the Sony 200-600 with 1x4 would be very interesting. Please keep up your excellent work..many regards.
Lovely first field test. As an aside, the “little eagle’s” morphology is strikingly similar to a hawk in the US, though I appreciate it is a separate and unique species to Australia. What a neat place and you are certainly blessed with such distinct wildlife. Interestingly, you didn’t speak to any atmospherics and how well this lens performs with respect to CA or flare and whether the af suffers in lower light conditions. Kudos to Canon for creating an entry level, long reach, reasonably affordable lens. It’s not for me, though I suspect many users will find it useful.
Thanks for the comment and yes you raise a great point re the CA and flare, unfortunately due to the lack of coatings it is far more impacted than the 100-500 and with bright perches, spots and it does appear to be impacted. I will be sure to cover that in the review. Cheers, Duade
Duade, congrats on the new lens! Looks very promising in conjunction with R5 for most applications, and R7 if you have a perched bird far away. Birds in flight with R7 will be a challenge at f9 as you said. Hopefully, I get my preorder filfilled by February, which is when Adorama is forecasting their next shipment. Canon apparently made so few of these that they were in short supply for preorders.
Thanks and sorry to hear about the delay, I pre-ordered from Canon Australia the minute it was announced and I was very lucky to get one of the first shipment. Cheers, Duade
Great review Duade 🙂 If you have the money to buy either the 100-500 Canon F7.1 or the Canon 200-800 F9 for bird photography which lens would you recommend buying? I would be using it on the R7.
Thank you! Not planning on buying the lens anytime soon, but the variable zoom range would be nice. I used the Rf 100-400 and Rf 800. I tend to use the 800 more, but at times it is just too long. Would be nice to able to adjust the composition to better fit all of my subjects in it. Looking forward to seeing you work with the lens more. Beautiful images! I always enjoy seeing what you are able to capture regardless of the camera or lens.
Morning duade really enjoyed this video also have This lens for about 2 weeks with the R5 I find the reach amazing also tried with 1.4 converter results ok in good light but overall really happy so far
I can't say i am exited about this lens, but that has to do with the 100-500RF with the 1.4 extender i got which gives me 700MM with F10. I hardly use the extender and if i do the quality is more than OK for me. I need to make choices money wise what to buy and not. I am going to wait for the Canon R5 MarkII which looks more promising to me than the 200-800.
Another great video Duade. Like a lot of other people commenting on your channel, I would love to see a comparison video between the 100-500 with the 1.4x extender, and this new lens. Should those of us who shoot birds and already own the 100-500 + 1.4x consider changing to the new lens?
Thanks Duade for showing the bad bits as well as the good, before dropping two grand. Getting mine in a few weeks after watching your video. Merry Christmas.
Nicely done, Duade! Thank you again for the quality content. Congrats on the new lens & glad it looks like a keeper. Definitely, several high quality shots you shared with excellent technique, as usual. I pulled the trigger on one, but still backordered after 6+ wks. Should be interesting on the R7 for those long reach scenarios. Looking forward to putting it through it's paces. I often shoot my EF 100-400mm ii @ F9 with the ext., so don't think this lens @ F9 should be an issue most of the time. Hope you are well, enjoying summer there & had great holidays. All the best on future outings & have a nice time breaking in the new gear. Best regards ~ Chris
Thanks Chris, you will absolutely love this lens I am sure, if you are used to shooting at f9 you know exactly the settings you will be using. Having 800mm without TC is a huge benefit and having that extra reach comes in very helpful. Have fun, Cheers, Duade
Duade i got mi ne yesterday and am very happy, i have the 500mm L series and its an amazing lens although the 800 doesnt keep up with this for sharpness i find it ok, i struggle with the higher iso because its never really that bright in mid wales UK but am now having to learn more about w hat i can get out of the lens and its good to learn
Been watching your videos for a couple of years and just had to say that I love the way you show the original raw image and then the crop and edited version. Really helps a beginner like me see what’s possible
G'day Jimmy, it is my pleasure and a great learning tool for sure, Cheers, Duade
After your review, 'we would be bonkers' not to buy this lens. With this reach plus 45MP of the R5 we would be in birding heaven. That Little Eagle shot blew us away. Your processing is perfect, Duade. Really can't thank you enough for everything you do.
Thanks Joan, yes, it works very well on the R5 and makes those subject much bigger. It is not quite as sharp as the 100-500 in that range and is heavier but lots of fun for the small birds out there. Cheers, Duade
Yeah, its universal for birding with 200-800mm, but i would have rather preferred a 400-800 F5.6-7.1 or similar with the same weight or a 400-800 with constant F8 but like 400g less and even more focussed on sharpness and image quality.
Anyways, it seems amazing if weight isnt a concern, as a RF 800 F11 and Sigma 150-600C user its pretty hard to decide if i should sell both for a single 200-800 or keep those lenses with their specific advantages (800 F11 weight/size and stabiliser for handheld only usage, Sigma faster aperture but big/heavy and tripod needed for smooth video)
Yes, a tough choice for sure, all lenses have their advantages and disadvantages that is for sure. Good luck, Cheers, Duade@@harrison00xXx
I got the lens now since Dec 23rd on my R 5 and the resulsts are flabbergasting. Ideal for travelling abroad, no hassle with airlines ( United, Brexit Airways ) wanting you to to buy an extra ticket or your bulky 800mm lens case. The image quality is superb and handling is easy.
Great video, Thanks..... I'd be interested to hear how the 200-800 compares with the 100-500 + 1.4tc..
Duade I have never seen you quite so animated so initial testing signs are very promising! Wonderful background blur at f9 esp with the crop factor of the R7 factored in. The sharpness and detail were clearly evident as was the flexibility and relative ease of use of the lens. Some stunning shots including the bird silhouettes. Light in NZ during winter months would be an issue I guess. Looking forward to more detailed analysis to come from you as time allows and I really wonder where this leaves the 100-500 lens.
You reckon the light is bad in NZ you should try Northern Ireland lol
I've been here 3 years and the light back home in New Zealand leaves this place for dead.
However I have been using the 100-500 with the 1.4x converter on the R5.
DXO pure raw becomes your best mate when you have to work with high F stops.
Thanks Mike, the 100-500 is in a class of its own to be honest, as a shorter zoom it cannot be beaten. It's only weakness is the reach and that is where the 200-800 shines. I will use both but the 100-500 will always be used for macro, landscape, large subjects, tame subjects etc. I will only use the 200-800 when reach is an issue. Cheers, Duade
How do you denoise your photos in post? They look so clean and beautiful...great work! @@Duade
G'day a combination of Lightrooms new denoise AI and Topaz Denoise. Cheers, Duade
Hi Mr Paton, I have a question. I don’t get lenses to often. They are after all expensive. Here in the United States, the rf 100-500 is only 200 dollars more then the rf 200-800. If I bought only 1 lens, what do you think would be my best bet.
Finally one of the videos i was waiting for. You and Jan are the main channels i look at to get input about new equipment. So far it looks very good this lens, so i believe that this will be my next lens. Looking very much forward to your full review on this.
Wishing you a great week mate, with a lot of wonderful photos.
Cheers, Bjoern
100% agree. I was waiting for them to do their review
Thanks mate, good so far, the only other weakness I didnt mention as we have only really discovered the lack of coatings on the lens can lead to some fringing and blown whites in bright perches or lighting. I will be sure to show this in the review. Cheers, Duade
@@Duade As long as you are aware of it, i guess it's possible to "work around it"
Thanks for the info, and have a great week.
Cheers, Bjoern
Duade, Thanks for presenting your excellent review video of the Canon RF200-800mm. A bunch of your USA followers have been awaiting your real life wildlife and evaluation of the 200-800mm. Eagerly awaiting the video from Jan Wegener. Best to you and yours.🦜
Thanks, first impression is good but some interesting things we noticed that will be discussed in the full review. Cheers, Duade
I'd be really interested to see a comparison between the R5 with the 200-800 and the R7 with the 100-500 because it's the same reach. F9 is very very dark for European dusks/dawns especially in winter.
+1
I would have the same question.
Not the same reach if we use it with he R7.
very interested in this comparison as well.
It’s one of the reasons, I would never purchase this lens. There are many days here where shooting at even f/5.6 yields unacceptable TV for BIF.
Great review. For us photographers who already have RF 100-500mm, a shot for shot comparison of that lens with 1.4 teleconverter to the RF 200-800 would be really helpful. Looks like the this lens is significantly heavier than the RF 100-500.
Lens for lens, the RF 200-800 is heavier at 4.5 lb., compared to the RF 100-500's 3 lb. However, if you add a 1.4x to the 100-500 to have the same "reach", the difference will be a little more than 1 lb. (plus the 100-500 & 1.4x combo will be slightly dimmer at 800mm: f/10 rather than f/9).
@@alanm.4298 But - the RF 100-500 with the 1.4x only goes to 700mm @ f/10, presumably a typo?
@@marktaylor9579 You're correct. My mistake. The 100-500 becomes a 140-700 with the 1.4x added, and goes from f/7.1 @ 500mm to f/10 @ 700mm.
@@alanm.4298 You're welcome 🙂. The extender does also extend the minimum focal length to 420 as it can't be attached unless the base lens is extended to 300mm first. So it's either 100-500 or 420-700 @f/10 with extender. Personally I find the 420 -700 range a bit of a bind as when larger birds approach I can't zoom back to (say) 300mm.
Thanks, I will be sure to compare with that setup, yes, much heavier for sure. Cheers, Duade
Prior to ordering this lens I practised with my 100-400L USM @f9 on My R5. No problems in typical daylight conditions. Now by November I hope to have one of my own!
Thanks for your excellent videos and reviews Duade!
Very interested how this lens compares to the 100-500, both with and without a 1.4x teleconverter. Are there any compelling reasons for those who already own this combination to consider switching?
FWIW, I decided to go with the 100-500 because its lower weight makes it far easier to handhold, plus the 3 foot minimum focus distance makes it possible to shoot insects and other smaller subjects without changing lenses.
Plus, the lower 100mm focal length is useful if I want to snap off a few portraits or landscapes.
That may or may not be important to you, but those were the key differences that pointed me to the more expensive lens.
A very good question that I will try to answer in the review, I think owners of the 100-500 have the hardest choice to make. If I personally had to choose one lens it would be the 100-500 as it is just such a good lens for its focal length. Now if you have the funds available I will use both lenses, the 100-500 without TC is perfect for macro, landscape, big mammals, tame birds etc. But when I need reach I will go with the 200-800, I think that is more versatile than 420-700 f/10. Cheers, Duade
@@Duade Thanks Duade, I have the 100-500 with 1.4x and I am leaning towards adding the 200-800. I pretty much shoot my existing combo at max FL all the time with an R7, so there are advantages with the 200-800 I think. I bought the R7 to fill time while I await the R1, so it looks like 2024 is going to be expensive for me. Ah well. it's only money.
Tested bothmon a R 5 and image qualility is quite identical with 200- 800 showing a more soft and even Bokeh than the 100 - 500 with 1,4 converter .
Thanks Russell, I think they are two different lenses for sure, I will use the 100-500 for that focal range as its very sharp and excellent for that. For reach I think the 200-800 has that advantage and you should be able to get wonderful shots. Yes, the R5II is also coming so an expensive year. Cheers, Duade@@RussellStewart
for all those concerned with background separation, just check a depth of field calculator. F/9 at 800mm gives less dof ( = more bokeh) than F/6.3 at 600mm. There is genuinely zero reason to worry about the bokeh just because it is an "F/9" lens. the 800mm make more than up for this.
Here's some numbers if you're interested: At 10m distance, F/6.3 and 600mm has a dof of 10cm, while F/9 and 800mm has 8cm. This corresponds to the dof of F/5 at 600mm, so it's quite a bit better at dissolving backgrounds than the typical 600mm zooms.
Ahh but the key thing is that the 800mm will be a far tighter shot, to get the same framing you'll have to either zoom out or step back, both of which will reduce bokeh. So sure, for tight portraits it will be fine, but for more creative bird-small-in-frame shots (e.g. Ray Hennessey), the 600mm f6.3 will be much better and produce more blurred backgrounds with the same framing. So to claim there is 'no reason' to be worried about bokeh is incorrect.
@@willherondale6367Nonsense negative response. You'd only buy an 800mm lens if 600mm generally isn't enough, so your argument is moot for those who need 800mm.
@@willherondale6367 well it depends. if you're intending to crop (or would have needed to crop a 600mm picture to 800mm-ish), it'll be in your favour. And since the reach is the main strength of the lens. this adds perfectly to it.
600mm at f/8 isn't too bad considering that any of the f/6.3 600 zooms will be f/9 if you chuck a 1.4x TC on them to reach 800mm anyway. For those that know they need 800mm for their use, this lens is actually consistent with those other options and doesn't require swapping a TC on and off to get it. For me the f/6.3 zooms are already on the limit for the light levels here but for people in less dreary areas it looks like a good option 😄
Well I keep my Sigma at 600 f8 anyway, because it is soft at 6.3. If this Canon 200-800 solves the dreaded focus pulsing/hunting issues, gives a bit extra reach and is 30-40% less expensive than rf 100-500mm, it is a no brainer for me :)
Great comment and totally agree, if you need reach or use a TC on your 600 zoom then this lens fits that niche well. If light is an issue then this might not be the best choice. Cheers, Duade
You are such a generous UA-camr Duade, and your enthusiam is infectious 👍
Thanks for the feedback, I apprecaite it, Cheers, Duade
Thanks D as always a good honest review. I’d love to know how it compares with the 100-500 and 1.4x Tele. Both r5 and r7.
That would be very interesting.
I believe it will be a lens that many Canon users will want to own, whether professional or amateur. Thank you Duade.
Seems like a no brainer for FF shooters. For crop I reckon the 100-500 is still the better option, especially when you take the weight factor into account for longer wildlife treks.
No... R7/R50/R10 with this 200-800 will be 1200mm+ at f9 which is v.useful
@@zegzbrutalyou'll still need a sunny day or high iso. Whatever, I wish I can have both lenses 😂
Yes, I think it makes the R6II a lot more attractive for wildlife as it is such a good camera but the 100-500 was just a touch short. Cheers, Duade
100-500 F/4.5-7.1 + 1.6 crop factor = 160-800mm F/7.2-11,3. So you will lose 2/3 stops of noise capability and DoF on the long end against a FF + 200-800 combo.
I managed to pick up the lens the day it arrived so been using for a few weeks now. I also have zero regrets & find it glued to my R7. We all want a faster lens but none of us want the weight penalty that would come with it. l would rather dip out on a stop of light to have an extra 200mm so would take this over another 200/600 f5/6.3. I do still feel at least on R7 that the autofocus is not as fast or accurate as the 800mm prime F11 probably due to less glass to move around. Anyway l will happily replace my 800 f11 & Tamron 150/600 with this lens. These slower lenses from Canon are very useable you just have to learn the limitations & go with it.😊
Currently running a Tamron G2, is the autofocus improved? My g2 seems to hunt quite a lot. On the fence about upgrading right now not sure if I can justify the cost.
Great work as always Duade. I've been really enjoying mine. You make a great point about the missing manual focus ring. I haven't run into a situation in several outings where I've needed to bump the manual focus ring to help the camera out but I'm sure I will. I was surprised when I tried it with the 1.4x extender. It's a rockstar at f/13! LOL
Great to know Phil, yes, a nice lens for sure, I have not tried the 1.4 yet, but will soon. Cheers, Duade
Nice review. Thank you. Test chart shots I've seen show it's not L image quality unfortunately. The old 100-400 mk II is sharper across the board in the 200-400 focal range. Darn. If you need 600-800 range , this is your reasonably priced Canon offering.
🙄
Great value lens. The fact it can focus on a subject at 3.3metres away when using an 800mm focal length is very impressive at this price point.
Given the relatively cheap price (in the grand scheme of things) looks pretty good value given some of the annoyances. Nice review Duade !!!!
I got mine already. Very happy with the image quality (on R6 and R7). I don't really notice much of a size/weight difference from the RF100-500, particular when it has an extender. It's really fun to go from 200 to 800. Yes, the tripod mount is a pain. Did very well on wetland birds. Am looking forward to trying it out on some shorebirds over Christmas holidays. I suspect there are going to be a lot of RF800 f/11 lens on the second hand market now (including mine)....
The ones who can't afford the RF200-800MM will be itching to get their hands on the RF800 f11 we trade in I guess. I've been really pleased with mine bar the lack of weather sealing. I can't wait to get mine and head up to the Farne Islands hopefully before we sell our house and move too far away to get there easily.
Jan and Duade - the A Team. 2 of my 3 subbed photography channels. So grateful for your efforts. Merry Christmas Du(a)de 😊
What is your 3rd ?
@@nordic5490 You might be surprised - The Photographic Eye. I check in on Steve Perry and Wild Alaska from time to time.
Happy holidays!
Excellent initial impressions review. In your final review, I'd like to know how the sharpness and focus speed of the RF 200-800 compares to the RF 100-500 bare lens and the RF 100-500 with the 1.4 teleconverter, at the same, shared focal lengths. Thank you.
Morning Duade, very interesting video , and some fantastic images you got, such wonderful diversity in wildlife. The lens looks great I must admit, I’m just worried that F9 is pushing that ISO up, we get a lot of bad light days here in the UK. However what other options is there for Canon shooters! Again Canon are pushing that compromise on us.
Good to see you back with that sparkle Duade. Looking forward to hearing more about this lens.
Gary
The 100-500 on an R7 would be a bit more light with the same reach. There's even a used EF 500 F4.5 on MPB that would give the same reach and a tonne more light on an R7 with EF-RF adapter. We have to get creative in the UK with our light situation! ha!
@@stephencooper5155 yeah unfortunately 😃 looking at the weather it’s poor for a while now. I use a 600 F11 and find you just end up pushing the ISO way too high for the stutter speeds you ideally want for BIF. Great when it’s nice and sunny. F9 is better but the 6.3 on the Sigma is better again, albeit you lose 200mm. It’s good to see Canon trying new things and modern cameras are much better with ISO. I’m going to watch a few more videos from this direction to see what the verdict is.
Thanks mate, yes, always a comprimise, I think for us in the lucky country with plenty of light it is not so much an issue, but in low light it will always push that ISO up. So it is a big trade off isnt it. Crop in on 600 6.3 or go up a stop of ISO at 800 f9, actually I will try that in the review, thanks for the idea. Cheers, Duade
Love your channel, thank you for the awesome content, I have to say that going from traditional DSLR to Mirrorless and using the RF lenses, worrying about sharpness has become a thing of the past
try zooming by pulling and pushing the barrel instead of the zoom ring. thats what i do and i can zoom faster. thats what many used to do on the ef 100-400 mk 1
Thank you so much for this excellent review. I just got the lens and hope to use it soon.
Have fun with it, let me know how you go. Cheers, Duade
I expected nothing less from this video. Always a pleasure watching your videos, Duade!
Great shot on the Little Eagle. with good day light, f/9 is not a problem. I use my Sigma 150-600mm Contemporary lens with TC1.4, it comes f/9 and 850mm. I don't have issue to shoot 20fps with Nikon Z8, it might be the stack sensor can keep the 20fps without any delay. for low light, i won't use the TC1.4 or for really cloudy day. I will use Z70-200mm with 2 x TC to get 400mm at f/5.6.
Not sure why I'm watching this, as I'm not in the market for an 800mm lense, neither do I own a Canon😂. But I absolutely loved this video, your passion for wildlife photography is clear!
Best wishes from Leicestershire, UK
Thanks for watching!
Thanks for your thoughts. Lots to ponder.
I got mine on the 14th. So far I like it. Since it is winter here in the Puget Sound Area of Washington State, USA, I have been able to shoot in low light. In fact, this time of the year with only 8 hours of daylight, it is my only option. 😂 This has allowed me to see what my limitations are. I have been testing how low of a shutter speed I can hand hold, 1/60 at 800mm on my R5 still looks good. The R5 handles ISO fine and I have shot at ISO 5000 without a problem. I haven't tried it with my R7 yet.
You are correct, the collar doesn't come off. In reviewing the pre-production, one reviewer thought that was a good thing since it wouldn't accidentally come off and cause you to drop the lens. I thought that was a bit of a stretch but since I don't ever take the collar off on my lenses that I can, it doesn't bother me.
Unless you are willing to spend a lot more money you aren't going to get 800mm of reach with a faster aperture.
Nice. Seems the magnifications helps blow out the background more than expected for "slow" lends
Please review with canon R7 + 200-800 mm lens
Duade used his R7 with the 200-800mm...didn't you watch the video?
So pumped!!! Using mine for the first time today. Lovely images!!
Congrats, let me know how you get on. Cheers, Duade
Looks like an awesome lens. I'm kind of bummed about the weaknesses you highlighted. These seem like obvious things.
Yep, totally agree, maybe one day Canon will send me the pre production lenses and I would be more than happy to share my honest real world experience with them. Cheers, Duade
The review is honest and the photos are good example of what the lens can do. Versatility is what you are buying...200 to 800mm, easy of use and etc. I will stick to my 100 to 500 and my 1.4 converter for now.
Your combo is excellent and the 100-500 is one of the best zooms on the market. Cheers, Duade
I don't think there is any other reviewer who does the review like you Duade higligting all the pros and cons and if they are important. Thank you for that.
My pleasure, working on the review now, Cheers, Duade
My pleasure, Cheers, Duade
You made an excellent choice with that lens! Its quality is truly impressive and I'm confident you'll keep loving it for a long time. Enjoy capturing those stunning shots!
Thanks mate, yes, lots of fun so far, Cheers, Duade
Great primer Duade... you have me riding with you on this wave of excitement! I am definitely inching closer to wanting one of these to pair up with my R5 vs using my R7 + 100-500. Sharpness and details at 800 look impressive... i wholly agree, getting more reach is addictive! Will your next review get me committed? Will i want the 200-800 over my 100-500+1.4x? I can't wait for your follow-up segment to find out! Awesome and quality presentation... You and Jan have us on the edge of our seats! Thank you mate!!
Thanks Winston, Jans review is incoming and he talks about a few things we discovered after my first impressions which are worth thinking about. My review will take a bit longer as I need to compare it with lots of lenses etc. But so far I am enjoying it. The RF100-500 is by far the most amazing lens in that range and I will continue to use it. But it is annoying to use the 1.4 on that lens so I suspect I will use them both. The 200-800 for when I need reach and the 100-500 for macro, landscape, up close, tame subjects etc. Cheers, Duade
Thanks Duade! Take your time! Give us time to soak up Jan's review before moving on to yours! A lot of us are delighted to see you and Jan tag team and providing different perspectives!
Mate I think you’ve convinced me to buy this lens after a lot of research. Cheers and Merry Christmas from Coffs Hbr.
Happy holidays!
My main shooting times are blue to golden hour here where I live, rarely am I out past a couple hours after sunrise, my 600 F/4 prime can struggle at these time frames, so I'm sure an f9 just wouldn't work. For those that can't seem to get out of bed to make that type of lighting, then this 2-8 F/9 would be handy as you wouldn't have the weight of the prime. The image quality looks decent for the price range of this lens. - I look forward to a more comprehensive review.
G'day I agee re the primes, there is no comparison to the fast primes, they will always have that massive advantage. This lens is more of a secondary lens when you cannot be bothered with the weight or size of the prime. You can have this next to you in the car or when scouting in the bush etc. Or of course if you cannot afford a big prime. It is no replacement that is for sure. Cheers, Duade
Nice to see its a solid performer, even with that f9 max aperture at 800mm
Yes, first impressions are good, maybe f10 is slightly sharper but f9 is still more than adequate. Cheers, Duade
Such a vitamin injection of Happy Duade, much appreciated for me that just now have a wonky wisdom tooth that choose this time of year to act out. It needs to be drawn, well before the Aussie trip, that's for sure!😬 Not looking forward to that, at all, but after the deed is done: big relief.
I'm looking forward for more videos on the 200-800 testing and comparings, both from you and Jan! I bet you're gonna test it together with the f11 as well. I'm *almost* sure I'm going to buy it, but the shipping seems to be slow and uncertain. Canon clearly didn't think it would be a "best seller", so too few has been manufactured. We'll see if it's available before end of August-24...
It won't replace my beloved 100-500, of that I'm totally sure, but maybe(probably?) the 800/11. I don't know! That one is so much lighter and have no big foot to annoy me forever and ever! And it's sharp, as well, only thing is the f11 but that's the way it's built. Wouldn't be as light and cheap if it was faster. The min focus range is a bummer as well, but I guess the same reasons applies.
The new zoom has very good min focus distances, which is a large bonus, even at 800 mm.
As you see: I'm waffling, very undecided. I can afford to be, no cow on the ice, it's still unavaialble here in Sweden. I might get it before the Aussie trip, or I might not. I'd prefer to get it before the trip, but won't die without it.
G'day Pia, sorry to hear about your tooth, I had all of mine removed as a teenager as they were growing sideways, very painful indeed. Yes, it is tough for existing 100-500 owners. That lens is just sublime at that range and I will always reach for that lens for up close work, or tame subjects etc. But if reach is an issue the 200-800 is great, but it is big and heavy compared to the f11 prime. But you do get full AF coverage, 200-800 range, slightly faster at f9 and of course the 3.3m mfd. Jans review is not far away. Cheers, Duade
Anxious to see a detailed comparison of the AF performance of the 200-800 vs the 100-500 with a 1.4x. Congrats on your new lens!
Amazing Duade. I'll be waiting for the final review, but seems to be an amazing lens to use. I love the kangaroo photos!
Yes, good so far, a few interesting things that I will mention in the review, it appears the lack of coatings maybe leading to less dynamic range and some ghosting on whites in bright parts which I will discuss in more detail. Cheers, Duade
@@Duade nice to know. I hope to see it's how it perform in the R7 in low light
G,Day, great vid, love the pics you've taken with the lens, shows how far I still need to progress, for me living in the uk and not as a rule not having such good light makes the f9 a bit disappointing, however I'll get my birding skills to a much higher level before I make my final decision as it maybe a tripod etc maybe the answer to have the extra reach, I look forward to seeing what you think when you have had it for a while.
Thanks mate, yes, lots more testing to do. Cheers, Duade
Hi Duade! I got my 200-800 last Friday and used it over the weekend on my R5. I'm really impressed with it!
Thank you for your detailed review. I have been birding with R5 or R3 and EF600F4 in Japan. I wanted to use a lighter telephoto lens, so I bought a Z8 + Z800mmF6.3 in January this year. However, I am frustrated with the AF of the Z8. If I had seen your review earlier, I would have bought the RF200-800mm.
Duade, from what I have seen so far in other videos 100-500 + x1.4 is sharper than 200-800 is that what you find? I currently shoot R7 with 100-400is ii. I am thinking about upgrading to an RF lens. I like the flexibility and ease of transportability of the 100-500 + x1.4 what would you choose with the R7?
I'm also curious. I have the R7 with RF 100-500 + x1.4. Is this 200-800 complementary or just "overdone"?
The RF100-500 is a sharper better lens without doubt being an L series lens. The only downside is its a bit annoying with a 1.4 as you cannot retract the lens meaning you have to take it off every time before putting in your bag, you can't just leave it attached. But as an all around lens the 100-500 is more versatile. I personally will use both but if I had to choose just one I would go with the 100-500. But in Australia at least it is $2000 more expensive with the converter so cost is always a consideration. It really comes down to your circumstances and if you think reach is more important I guess. Cheers, Duade
Your prelim, independent review (well done) is great news and very encouraging. Thanks for sharing so quickly, and some great images too! Loved the raptor photo. I've been hoping for a Canon lens like this for several years now, and jealous of Sony and Nikon users. I really fell in love with that 800mm focal length after using the RF 800f11 prime but that fixed focal length really limits composition at times, and this 2-8 lens will be faster with its max f9 aperture. The 2-8 flexibility and reach is well worth the small amount of added hand hold weight IMO. I'm not bothered by the max f9 aperture either -- nearly equivalent to a 600mm f6.3 lens with a 1.4 teleconverter added. I'm quite excited that Canon has provided a zoom lens out to 800mm, rather than designing a zoom to 600mm that would require a teleconverter to put on and off in order to reach that long focal length required for some shots. Those that need both reach and speed in a zoom can look forward to Canon's 2-5 f4, albeit at a predictable, (shocking) steep price. I look forward to your final review, and Jan's, and have been holding off on purchasing this lens until the 2 of you had a chance to review it. Kind regards.
Thanks mate, yes, promising so far and I like it compared to the 800 f11, it is not an L lens and we have both noticed a few things that will be covered in the review, one very interesting observation regarding bright whites and dynamic range possibly due to the lack of coatings on the glass. Cheers, Duade
Another great video, Duade. You can talk specs all day, but the evident joy in your voice is all you really need to know. What more could you ask for than having this lens bring you so much fun? For my preferred style of photos, though, I’m not convinced this lens is for me, as I tend to shoot very early or very late in the day, so my go-to lens is still the 400 f2.8. Happy holidays, Duade.
Thanks mate, yes, not a replacement for the fast primes in terms of IQ, it is just a fun alternative lens that will make plenty of people happy. I am just glad we now have lots of options on RF for wildlife. Cheers, Duade
Awesome a great 1st impression video looking forward to some comparison combinations up against the 100-500 on r7 then 100-500 on r6ii with 1.4tc against the 200-800 on r6ii aswell with the ultimate question 🙋♂️ should we upgrade the rf100-500 to the 200-800 as this is just solely my wildlife set up I have the old ef 100 &200 mm f2.8 lenses for everything else 👍👍👍👍
Nice review as always! I'm surprised that you consider ISO 1600 to be high! I think most of us are now using good noise reduction software, so on a FF camera like the R5, ISO 12800 is no issue, on a crop like the R7, ISO 6400 is my maximum default. Keep in mind that if you crop your shot, your subject will actually get more light in most cases at 800mm focal length at f/9, than the 100-500 at 500mm at f/7.1 due to the larger entrance pupil diameter of the lens. I agree that the zoom throw should be shorter, that is an issue on the RF 100-500 as well. While the tripod collar is not removable, I would suggest turning it 180 degrees and use it as a handle. I have another similar lens (another brand) and was disappointed that the collar was not removable, but since turning it upwards, I now realize that I would not have removed it even if I could. It is much easier to lift and carry the lens using the collar, and keeps pressure off the mount when you hold the camera/lens combo. Looking forward to your full review and I hope you have some comparisons between this lens and the RF 100-500 with 1.4x TC, since many of us already have that combination.
How would cropping get you more light ? F/8 is F/8 no matter what sensor size is behind. F/9 at 800mm is 2/3 stops slower than 500mm F/7.1 no matter what.
However if you crop the 500mm to get a 800mm equivalent, then you will get the same illumination of the sensor (so you'll still have the exact same ISO, speed and aperture settings), but you'll be using less sensor area (exactly 2,36 times less, as it is a 1,6 times crop) which will make the noise more noticeable (exactly 2,56 times more noticeable) and give you less background blur. So you would use your 500mm F/7.1 as a 800mm F/11,3 equivalent. Emphasis on the "equivalent" as the light output/area of the lens will still be the same, but you will be using your sensor at only 39% of its noise and DoF capability, so an image taken with this setup (with the 1.6 crop) at, for example, 1000ISO, F/7.1, 1/400th will look exactly the same as an image taken with all the area of your sensor at 2500ISO, F/11,3 1/400th with a real 800mm lens.
But it has nothing to do with the physical characteristics of the lens. And in this case, if you really need the 800mm reach, it is much better to use the 800mm F/9 than the 500mm F/7.1 cropped to 800mm eq., because you will have about 2/3 stops more bokeh and noise capability.
As a Canon user for over twenty-five years, it is simply astonishing that they still don't provided the Arca Swiss mount on their lenses. Can machining a couple slots and hard anodizing aluminum really be that big a cost factor on a lens?
not every head has arca swiss , a plate costs nothing
Comparison shots please showing focus speed\accuracy between R7 with the 100-500 vs the R6\R8 with the 200-800. I can't afford both lenses, need to pick the correct one for wildlife!
Picked mine up a few days ago. I had a cloudy badly overcast day the next day when I took it out using the R7. It struggled pretty hard with birds in flight with AF at 800mm, granted I was only able to shoot white seagulls with a bad over cast background so I expected that limitation. I know it will perform much better in good light after seeing lots of different post now on the sharpness of the lens. Think it will work much better on my R6MII. For sure is a long throw but I feel it is manageable at least for my uses. Would like to see what AF settings you found to work the best in an upcoming video of the lens if that is something that could be worked in. Pretty stoked about the purchase so far, just wish there were more birds around my area to shoot at the present. Local camera store received 2 lenses in on release date, I got lens #2. Look forward to your review of the lens. Thanks you sir.
I am ready for a R7 Mark II !!!! - would like better auto focus, full sized controls and body size like the R5 & 6, NEED a battery grip for my bigger hands
@@donh4907 You're not the only one. Duade has called them out over the AF issues which I'm sure they could fix with a FW update as Nikon have just done but they won't, they'll make us pay for the R7 ii....💵💵😥
Congrats on getting the lens, looks like lots of people are on the waiting list. Yes, I struggled also with overcast BIF, just not enough light really and lifting shadows means loads of noise. Still working on the best settings for the R7 as it does leave me frustrated at times. I hope your weather improves so you can make the most of the lens. Let me know how it goes. Cheers, Duade
I'm really considering getting this lens. Right now I'm still using the Canon EF 100-400mm 4.5-5.6 L IS USM. But even on a crop frame camera this doesn't get as much reach as the 200-800 on a full frame camera. And you can easily increase the ISO on full frame cameras by two steps if needed because of the aperture and still get cleaner images. Plus if you consider using a tele converter on the 100-400mm in order to get more reach you lose any aperture benefit of the shorter lens. A 2x converter would even result in less light.
just gpt the lens last week. It is amazing, enjoying it. I was in between with rf 100 500 but i do not regret, will not look back for sure. Yours videos helped. As you said, Modern cameras handles high iso pretty good, it is a bit heavier, but it will push me to do body exercises, bokeh is more than good... it is lovely lens. Thank you for reviews :)
Great to hear!
Wondering if I should sell my 100-500 and pick this up instead? I love my 100-500 but just doesn’t have the reach a lot of times. I’m sure image quality is still better on the 100-500 but not having to crop so much on my R6mkii might negate that fact.
The most important of doing anything is that you have fun doing it.
Thanks so much for the video! I have mine on order but it may be a bit before I get it. Seems like a great lens for birding. As usual you made some amazing images. Cheers.
Thanks mate, sorry about the delay, I look forward to doing the review, lots to cover. Cheers, Duade
@@Duade I look forward to it!
I use a 100-400 push/pull for zoom so I was thinking you could push/pull the barrel on this 200-800 for rough adjustments and then the ring to fine tune the focal length/composition you want. I know for me having to do multiple twists to zoom to a desired length would annoy me, on my 100-400 it annoys me that I don’t have a ring to fine tune the focal length. Another great video, hopefully the back order on these lenses isn’t too long. Thanks much!
The collar must be removable. Canon still can do it. BTW, where is Canon in the case of APSC lenses? No news we are hearing about APS-C lens? Why Canon?
Yes, I am sure it is, I just don't know how to do it quickly and easily, there does appear to be some sort of screw on top so no doubt that is how. I will wait to see someone else do it first to see how hard it is. No idea re APSC lenses. Cheers, Duade
It sure looks like we will get lot of what we have been asking for. Keep calling out the improvements, For now , those of us with an EF 100-400 ,a couple of TC's, a R6, a RF800 f11 and a lot of sunshine are going to be happy (I will be) when our preorders get shipped. Thanks
❤❤❤ the places are beautiful...and seeing you two together is another thing that I love, obviously I will see Jan's comparisons and thank you for this video...wish to meet with you two someday and have a session together...❤
Your videos are so relaxing - I really appreciate your perspective and presence, just you enjoying the nature and trying to get good photos.
Thank you so much!
Here in the Pacific Northwest (western Canada), this would be a challenging lens to use for stills for quite a few months of the year. Now for video on the other hand.....could be interesting. That focal length is quite attractive.
Thank you for this review. I shoot the R7 and have the Sigma 150-600 contemporary lens that I used with my 5D Mark IV and purchased the RF 100-400 f/5.6-8 lens as the Sigma is too heavy for me to handhold. I can’t afford the RF 100-500 and don’t feel I would be gaining all that much if I purchased it. Would you recommend purchasing the 200-800 or should I save up for the 100-500? I love watching your videos and enjoy the photos you share of the wildlife where you are. I am in the US in South Texas and bird photography is my passion. Thank you for sharing your knowledge and insight with us.
G'day, if the Sigma istoo heavy unfortunately this lens weighs exactly the same, I would prefer this lens over the Sigma but it is twice the price. The RF100-400 is a nice light little lens but can feel a touch short at times. You could get a 1.4 extender for the RF100-400 to give slightly more reach if you need it and you still have the light lens. Cheers, Duade
The yellow Robin looks amazing almost unreal shard and colored. Great job. You are blessed having such colorful, interesting many different birds over there. In Germany we don‘t have that many and not even close colorful and different birds. 😒
Super excited about this lens too. 800mm in a handholdable lens is a real game changer.
Hi MR Paton. What you do making a high quality channel is difficult and impressive. I would like to comment that I received my 200-800 lens. There might be better lenses to take sharper shots. But more fun, probably not. Anyone who wants to go out, and just have a great time taking photos of nature, it’s like you said, that is the key.
Like you enjoyment is key for me. Stunning shots. Even on a cold grey winter’s day in the UK the extra reach would have helped with the local Red Kites and even the elusive Goldcrest. Thanks again for your passion.
I have been waiting for this video review!! Excellent Duade!
I found Jan's channel because of you! I love both channels!!
I paid more for my 70-200 2.8 L III EF lens, than this 200-800 RF!!
Thanks, first impressions are good, working on review now. Cheers, Duade
You're making me regret not preordering this lens now 😂. Great images and info Duade. I'm definitely looking forward to your full review and lens comparisons.
Thanks mate, it is tricky, there are pros and cons and some other things I did not mention in this video. I will be sure to be thorough in the review. Cheers, Duade
I received mine today. I shoot with a R7. Coming from the rf100-400 it appears the image quality is better. The reach is fantastic. I’m able to get photos at twice the distance and with better image quality - so much fun! Aloha from Maui!
As usual, nice video, beautiful background with Australian nature beauty and the shots you got are very pleasing, always happy to watch your videos, motivating and refreshing :) cheers
Thanks Gregory, glad you enjoyed it, Cheers, Duade
Thanks mate, glad you enjoyed it, Cheers, Duade
A little late to this video even though I have been really looking forward to see you with this lens! Loved your review Duade, your excitement is contagious! Some amazing shots you have taken, they absolutely blew me away. This may be the push I needed to get off the M system and in to RF, those results speak for themselves.
Thanks mate, yes, for its price it has lots of things to like, it is not perfect and has weaknesses but I can see it being a very popular lens for birding, Cheers, Duade
I was excited to see your review on this lens. I use the R5 with the RF100-500. That combo is SO awesome. I have no intention of moving away from the RF 100-500, but there are situations for me that the extra reach of this new lens could get a shot that the RF 100-500 can't. Your videos are always very informative and well done. You bring out the good and the bad. And you back your comments with pics. Again, well done! Your video has given me the confidence to move forward with purchasing this lens.
Focal length has a lot more to do with great backgrounds than aperture .... Great video .... 👍
Thanks Paul, it will be interesting to do some tests to see the difference between 600 6.3 and 800 f9, Cheers, Duade
That yellow Robin really popped! I was looking forward to your video and now it's here!
Fantastic to hear that the lens is so sharp and that the autofocus is operating so good. These were the most important things I liked to know. We know the downsides, but given the price there is really no alternative for the most of oss who can't spend the price of a second hand car to buy a 600 og 800mm prime lens. I pre-ordert the lens immediately. Shipping date will be the 4th of January here in Norway.
Congrats on the lens, for its price I think it perfoms well, there are a few weaknesses but overall the image you will get will make you very happy. Cheers, Duade
Congrats, enjoy the lens when it arrives, Cheers, Duade
Yay! I've been looking forward to this review🖤🖤
Thanks, working on the full review now, but the first impressions was fun. Cheers, Duade
Thanks Duade, really helpful and informative. I look forward to the full review. I have a hunch that the tightness of the lens and associated control ring will loosen over time. It certainly did on mu EF100-400 and I have noticed that my RF 100-500 isn’t as tight as when I first got it.
Thanks Duade! That lens looks amazing!
It is a good first impression but will do more testing for the review. Cheers, Duade
@@Duade I'm looking forward to seeing more of your experiences with it. I'm waiting for a review copy myself, but I think they are backordered at the moment.
You look so happy in this video Duade! I assumed its because of this lens, so I bought it and it will arrive on Friday :D 800mm is simply a must have. Thank you for the video, it helped me little bit to decide - I know its not yet full review... Im curious if this lens will be good for video, I think it will be much better then Sigma 150-600, but will see. Take care! Tomas
Thanks Tomas, yes, a lot of fun, it has its weaknesses but for its price I think the reach is fantastic. Cheers, Duade
Excellent review, as always I really enjoy the fact you show us the images to go with the facts, I am tired of reviewers who just talk the talk, You and Jan are the best, I wish we had your Ozy light here in the Uk. Here its that time of the year of short, grey days. Will be interesting to see a review in dull conditions. Will you be trying to shoot this lens with a teleconverter and a direct comparison with the Sony 200-600 with 1x4 would be very interesting. Please keep up your excellent work..many regards.
Lovely first field test. As an aside, the “little eagle’s” morphology is strikingly similar to a hawk in the US, though I appreciate it is a separate and unique species to Australia. What a neat place and you are certainly blessed with such distinct wildlife. Interestingly, you didn’t speak to any atmospherics and how well this lens performs with respect to CA or flare and whether the af suffers in lower light conditions. Kudos to Canon for creating an entry level, long reach, reasonably affordable lens. It’s not for me, though I suspect many users will find it useful.
Thanks for the comment and yes you raise a great point re the CA and flare, unfortunately due to the lack of coatings it is far more impacted than the 100-500 and with bright perches, spots and it does appear to be impacted. I will be sure to cover that in the review. Cheers, Duade
I live in North West England. Could someone explain to me what the term good light means?😢
something you don't have lol...imagine going to Majorca...that's good light. Or Crete or Greece. Or Spain.
Duade, congrats on the new lens! Looks very promising in conjunction with R5 for most applications, and R7 if you have a perched bird far away. Birds in flight with R7 will be a challenge at f9 as you said. Hopefully, I get my preorder filfilled by February, which is when Adorama is forecasting their next shipment. Canon apparently made so few of these that they were in short supply for preorders.
Thanks and sorry to hear about the delay, I pre-ordered from Canon Australia the minute it was announced and I was very lucky to get one of the first shipment. Cheers, Duade
Great review Duade 🙂 If you have the money to buy either the 100-500 Canon F7.1 or the Canon 200-800 F9 for bird photography which lens would you recommend buying? I would be using it on the R7.
Thank you! Not planning on buying the lens anytime soon, but the variable zoom range would be nice. I used the Rf 100-400 and Rf 800. I tend to use the 800 more, but at times it is just too long. Would be nice to able to adjust the composition to better fit all of my subjects in it. Looking forward to seeing you work with the lens more. Beautiful images! I always enjoy seeing what you are able to capture regardless of the camera or lens.
Morning duade really enjoyed this video also have This lens for about 2 weeks with the R5 I find the reach amazing also tried with 1.4 converter results ok in good light but overall really happy so far
Great to hear!
great review and thanks again for showing the raw images and then the processed images.
I can't say i am exited about this lens, but that has to do with the 100-500RF with the 1.4 extender i got which gives me 700MM with F10. I hardly use the extender and if i do the quality is more than OK for me. I need to make choices money wise what to buy and not. I am going to wait for the Canon R5 MarkII which looks more promising to me than the 200-800.
Another great video Duade. Like a lot of other people commenting on your channel, I would love to see a comparison video between the 100-500 with the 1.4x extender, and this new lens. Should those of us who shoot birds and already own the 100-500 + 1.4x consider changing to the new lens?
Thanks Duade for showing the bad bits as well as the good, before dropping two grand. Getting mine in a few weeks after watching your video. Merry Christmas.
Hope you enjoy it!
Nicely done, Duade! Thank you again for the quality content. Congrats on the new lens & glad it looks like a keeper. Definitely, several high quality shots you shared with excellent technique, as usual.
I pulled the trigger on one, but still backordered after 6+ wks. Should be interesting on the R7 for those long reach scenarios. Looking forward to putting it through it's paces. I often shoot my EF 100-400mm ii @ F9 with the ext., so don't think this lens @ F9 should be an issue most of the time.
Hope you are well, enjoying summer there & had great holidays. All the best on future outings & have a nice time breaking in the new gear. Best regards ~ Chris
Thanks Chris, you will absolutely love this lens I am sure, if you are used to shooting at f9 you know exactly the settings you will be using. Having 800mm without TC is a huge benefit and having that extra reach comes in very helpful. Have fun, Cheers, Duade
Duade i got mi ne yesterday and am very happy, i have the 500mm L series and its an amazing lens although the 800 doesnt keep up with this for sharpness i find it ok, i struggle with the higher iso because its never really that bright in mid wales UK but am now having to learn more about w hat i can get out of the lens and its good to learn