Considering the aperture of f/8 as a negative, the rf100-500mm which is the best available RF telephoto zoom for wildlife is only a fraction of a stop brighter at f/7.1 at the long end. You would have to go to a much more expensive f5.6 or f4 lens to get a lot of difference in aperture brightness and ISO drop. I find sharpen Ai and denoise AI takes care of all of the noise or graininess easily. When the background is a good distance from the subject I get soft creamy backgrounds at all apertures. One last important point is I'm carrying this 100-400mm into the woods and everywhere every single day and I would not be carrying an F4 lens as often or into the same locations. I don't even carry my 200-600mm Sony set up everywhere unless I know a good subject is there in the right range because of the size and weight.

@jaralol

2 жыл бұрын

Ofc its the best for 3k +🤦🏻‍♂️

@doug433

Жыл бұрын

Agree with you 100%

So I bought this as my bird/sport budget lens. Using my R6 have has some incredible results...also make reference if you pair the image with photoshops neural depth blur filter you might find results that look like a very expensive lens. The new update has really improved the functionality!

@wattswildlifephoto

2 жыл бұрын

It can produce some very impressive photos! That’s a great tip! Thank you for watching 🙏

Great review, thank you !

Thanks man! Very nice to hear such a detailed and informative review. Almost like a lesson for a beginner, like myself.

@wattswildlifephoto

2 жыл бұрын

I appreciate that, glad you liked it!

Thanks! Awesome review here, I would add that its a great lens for close up wildlife (butterflies and dragonsflies) and for landscape photography as well.

Good review and I agree. Just wish canon had a less expensive body similar to the r5/6 (not the R/RP for wildlife) to pair the lens with. The need to perhaps release an R mk 2 and and RP mk 2 with some slight beefing up and then either of those would pair up well with this lens.

I just got this lens and im loving it. Iv never had this big if a zoom and its great 👍. I use it for my kids soccer games and i can get so close from far away and it works well

Great discussion on this lens! It is interesting to see f7.1 on the 100-500mm is essentially exactly the same as f8 on this 100-400mm and all aperture negatives apply directly to that silly $2900 lens.

@wattswildlifephoto

2 жыл бұрын

Thanks!

Really good video, thanks man.

@wattswildlifephoto

2 жыл бұрын

Thanks for watching 🙏 glad to hear your enjoyed it

Perfect timing as I’m considering whether to purchase the RF or EF 100400 for the R6 when I order it. Weather sealing and the f8 are the things scaring me from this lens

@wattswildlifephoto

2 жыл бұрын

The lack of weather sealing is something I totally forgot to mention but yes that is one big downside. The f/8 aperture is not ideal either. You can still get some great shots with it, but it’s not as wide as you typically want.

Excellent video 💪🏼

@wattswildlifephoto

2 жыл бұрын

Thank you 🙏 glad you enjoyed it!

Combined with my R10, it weighs 1.6kg. My EF 100-400 L Mk1 weighs 1.75kg on it's own. The quality is 'more than good enough' for me, I get great images when working within It's sweet zone. I don't 'Pixel peep' though. A great lens.

Nice overall review. You covered the main points. I like that you did point out the aperture is not the best but good for a starter. :) We need to go out shooting sometime.

@wattswildlifephoto

2 жыл бұрын

Thanks, glad you enjoyed it! Yes we should!

@doug433

Жыл бұрын

Good for more than a starter...

Beginner? How about the weight for the older photographer? Over 50 years of photography here and glad I have this lens.

great review, i'm seriously considering getting this lens for my kids outdoor sports. you've mentioned that the aperature at f8 is an issue, what's an ideal aperature at 400mm for wildlife? f/2.8? you've mentioned the 100-500 but that's f7.1, is that enough of a difference in aperature to warrant the huge price difference for a casual shooter? i was eyeing the 100-300/2.8 but that looks a bit too large and heavy for my needs. thanks for the great video!

@wattswildlifephoto

10 ай бұрын

Thank you! For a casual shooter I would say this lens will be plenty. Anything more would be a pretty serious investment for someone who isn't shooting for work or looking for more artistic shots.

Thanks for an informative video! I'm getting fantastic images from this lens and enjoying it's lightweight and portability everyday when I go out with my R6. My keeper rate is also way higher than before with other combos. Whenever I can't get close enough for really high resolution and details I can combine and stack the birds in flight images to create some really interesting and beautiful sequences. Often I'm zooming out to 200-350mm to get the best composition. At less than 25% the cost of the larger rf 100-500mm lens and so much smaller and lighter I'm really happy with this option. Photos and sequences can be viewed at the "Canon EOS R6" Facebook group page

@wattswildlifephoto

2 жыл бұрын

Absolutely, and thanks for watching! That’s awesome to hear! It is one heck of a lens, especially given the price. Tack sharp, fast and accurate AF, and as you said much lighter, more portable, and cheaper than other options. Canon has been knocking it out of the park with the quality and accuracy of their RF glass. Glad you are enjoying the lens and the video!

Do you remember about how far away you were standing from the squirrel at 13:50 mark? New to tele lens and am considering this vs the RF 600 or RF 800 for my R6

@wattswildlifephoto

2 жыл бұрын

Maybe.. 6-8 feet. Honestly not sure but I'd say that's a decent estimate. Thanks for watching 🙏

Seriously considering this lens. I'm currently shooting a Sony A7R3 with a Sigma 100-400 DG DN, and while it's a great combo, it misses action too often for my tastes. I'm also limited to 10fps, which hurts my birds in flight even more. I'm looking for higher fps, faster AF, and similar(or better) resolution. Since the only thing Sony has which ticks those boxes is the ~$6500 Alpha 1, I'm considering an R5. My big decision, then, is do I get the 100-500 L lens and the 24-105 L kit, or this budget 100-400 and use the extra money on faster zoom/prime lenses in the non-tele range(24-70/2.8, 50/1.2, etc.). The lack of weather sealing makes me nervous, especially for a wildlife lens, but it's good to hear that the image quality and AF speed hold their own against the L.

@wattswildlifephoto

2 жыл бұрын

It’s a great little lens especially for the price! I was very impressed by what I got from it.

All reviews harp over and over again about the f/8 'problem'. The old saying is "f/8 and be there"! This same lens in constant f/5.6 would simply not "be there" for me at least. It would weigh more that the RF 100-500. It would cost more than I would pay. It would be left home in many cases where I was limited to the total weight/bulk. f/8 is a fact, not a fault. I also have the RF 600mm f/11. Reviewers laughed at it for not being a big white prime. This was before the RF100-400 was announced so the 600 looked like a small lens at the time. There must be something about making reviews that makes you think that the laws of physics don't apply to us all. You are better than most in this regard but I might point out that people who use a $3-4k camera body may be expected to spend more on a lens and the gym membership needed to bulk up those arms. The real place for this lens is on a lighter weight body (R8 or any of the APS-C line). APS-C also adds that 1.6x factor which is good for distant wildlife as well as working distance for 'macro' (a side benefit of the RF100-400 is the close focus distance). My choice was the R7 but it was the only option 11 months ago when I got mine. I subscribed here not because of this video but because of your 'goals' video promising fewer, better videos. Keep up the good work.

How come Canon ends up producing slower telezoom lenses for their MILCs? The EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 IS II USM is way faster.

@teej626

2 жыл бұрын

It's also close to $2,000 more.

Will this lens work with the RF 1.4 Extender? I realize that it will take away 1 or 2 stops.

@wattswildlifephoto

2 жыл бұрын

It does work with teleconverters. Unfortunately I haven’t tested it with teleconverters though, so I’m not sure how well it will work.

@tedinohio3981

2 жыл бұрын

Yes, it does, though now the aperture at 560 is f/11. Other reviews mention that the images are still sharp with the 1.4, and AF is still good. Not so sharp or easy to focus (and now f/16) with the 2X extender.

I own both this lens and the RF 100-500. This lens is nice, but the 100-500 is sharper and faster focusing, plus it has weather sealing and the 100-400 doesnt (which is very important). They're in different leagues. (Edit: To butthurt commenters: he mentioned the RF 100-500 in this video, so I'm giving my take as someone who owns both this new RF 100-400 and the RF 100-500).

@BrentODell

2 жыл бұрын

Thanks for the comparison. I'm considering moving over from Sony to a Canon R5, and looking at both the 100-400 and the 100-500. Obviously the L glass is better, I'm just curious if it's ENOUGH better to justify the money, when I could instead get the budget tele and spend the saved money on some additional lenses or a fast(non-tele) prime.

@doug433

Жыл бұрын

Sharpness difference is marginal and as for the weather sealing look at the price of this lens, a rain cover is less expensive than paying for the sealing.

Has anyone tried this lens on EOS RP?

@z4ng3tsu1ch1g0

2 жыл бұрын

This. Lmao. Not many people who have an R5 is gonna stick a budget lens on it. This lens was made for us cheapos who can only afford an R or RP.

Why is this "beginner" lens if it's matching image quality of "professional" grade lens, because "pro" lens is a lot more expensive?

Even better, it's just 499 now.

i have this glas, i'm not beginner i'm just poor :D

You looks like a Lego Guy 😳

How many Beginners do you know off that has gone out ... and bought a R5 Mirrorless Camera as there Very first Camera purchase ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, Then go out and buy that lense ?? When a EOS R Fullframe Mirrorless Canon cameras costs far more than any Budget entry level DSLR .. even the EOS M Range That lense may be sub 1,000 ... but even the R6 is like 2,399 to buy that's half the price of the R5 £4299 My first Camera ... was a Canon Sureshot Supreme .. that was bought for me back in the 80s .... my 2nd was Sony DSCHX350 which i used for 3 1/2 years a Bridge camera with a Zoom .. lense it's brilliant VFM .. for less than 400 quid And then i got my first DSLR A Canon 850D ...cost me just shy of a 1,000

@wattswildlifephoto

2 жыл бұрын

I agree. This is one of the biggest issues that I see with this lens that I wish I had noted on more in the review in hindsight. Canon has created a great beginner lens, but no camera to go with it. EOS R would be a decent option, but not totally ideal. We need a good beginner mirrorless camera before this lens can have any application for beginners.

@colintraveller

2 жыл бұрын

@@wattswildlifephoto It's ironic as chuff for Canon to make a Sub 1,000 priced for the R range .When cost of ethier the R5 and R6 is far from affordable .. never mind entry level .

@wattswildlifephoto

2 жыл бұрын

@@colintraveller Totally. I think Canon missed a great opportunity to release a replacement for the 7D series, such as an R7, or the mirrorless equivalent to an 80D or 90D, to go with this lens. Or at least, they should’ve waited to get this lens out there until they had a budget-friendly mirrorless camera out there as well.

@rich060286

2 жыл бұрын

Me 🙋🏻‍♂️ I’ve gone for an R6 and RF 100-400. For 6 months I’ve watched every video on KZread of every Mirrorless camera and finally decided animal / bird eye AF was most important for me and Canon wins this area. Body took most my money so this is great lens for me until an RF150-600 comes out in future. £2500 for camera and lens of this quality seems win win 👍🏻

@colintraveller

2 жыл бұрын

@@rich060286 How long did you save up for it .??. or were you fortunate to have enough funds already in the bank to pay for it in one stroke .. or Pay Monthly

I'm calling the police

People who buy this lens will be fine with f8, not sure why you bring this up in this kind of review. It’s not a $13,000 lens, so why spend all this time on these negatives? This is for beginners, right? Honestly, you ruined your well-intentioned review. There are plenty of opportunities to shoot when light is not low and I (and others) have thousands of images to proof it. Sometimes less is more. You spend way too much time on the negatives. Better to recommend what body to pair this lens with and why. That would be more useful. And please talk slower. You seem nervous. Just slow down a bit and write a script with major talking points and stick to it. Anyway, i still agree with your overall point about this lens and your recommendation of it for beginners. Keep up the good work.

@wattswildlifephoto

2 жыл бұрын

Thank you for the comments. I spent less than 4 minutes on the negatives (aperture). Each other section (shutter speed, focusing speed, etc) were each focused on for 3-4 minutes as well. I also used a script with each major talking point that was written in advance. If it came off as overly negative, I apologize. My intent was to make sure anyone who bought this realized exactly what they were buying. I’d rather beginners see the negatives prior to purchasing it than purchase it, have no idea what they’re getting into, and expect every image to have a buttery background like they see on Instagram. That’s simply not the reality with this lens, and I want to make sure I’m conveying the unbiased reality with each review I do. Again, I do apologize if I came off as too negative, that’s something I’ll be sure to put more thought into in the future. I talk as fast as I do because viewer retention time on KZread is very low, so if you don’t keep up a quick pace, videos that have potential and could have great information will flop and go nowhere simply because you weren’t moving fast enough to retain viewership. I do agree that a recommendation on which body to pair with this lens would’ve been helpful though, that is a great idea. Canon really needs to put out an R7 to replace the 7D series, that would be perfect with this lens… anyways, thank you again for the comments, I truly do appreciate feedback from viewers, whether it’s critical or not. I hope you still found the review helpful. Have a nice day! 🙏

@dychui

Жыл бұрын

@@wattswildlifephoto don’t change a thing, you’re doing great

Sorry if I crash the party but you’re showing pictures that are extremely soft and tell us how sharp they are all the time… don’t you actually see that they’re really not good at all? It’s probably because of the very low light situation since the pictures on other channels from that lens are surprisingly really very sharp almost like the rf 100-500 mm like on the channel from Gordon Laing…I don’t like to give destructive comments but as a photographer you really shouldn’t say that these pictures are really sharp - that’s just misleading assessment of the footage ;) cheers

Excellent review, mate. I got mine in September, and gladly sold my EF 100-400 II. 👍🦘🇦🇺

@wattswildlifephoto

2 жыл бұрын

Thank you! That’s awesome! I don’t think I’ll be parting with my EF 100-400 ii for it, but I can say I’ll miss how light and mobile it is. So much easier to move around with and handhold than the EF 100-400 ii.

@peterfritzphoto

2 жыл бұрын

@@wattswildlifephoto That’s what appealed to me most. As a landscape photographer and vlogger, I want everything with me at all times, and the EF, which remains my favourite lens of all time, was just taking up too much room (and weight) in the bag. Now, with the RF, I can have it, plus 3 other lenses, my drone and all my bits and pieces in the one bag. It’s brilliant.