Canon 100-500mm RF Lens - 3 Year Review - Professional Wildlife Photographer - Should You Buy?
Vložit
- čas přidán 28. 01. 2024
- This video is my thoughts on this lens after 3 years of very hard use by a professional wildlife photographer and videographer. I think this may help you make a decision if you are debating getting a 200-800mm RF lens and want to know if this is worth the extra money? I would like to do a comparison in the future once I have long term use with both lenses. Let me know in the comments if you have any other questions about this lens. Thanks for watching!
Lens in stock here: amzn.to/48X7T0r - Zábava
My long term review of the Canon R5 here: czcams.com/video/HE0eR5n-tEo/video.htmlsi=gaL0_IHLbqoCJSI8
I’ve been a professional photographer for nearly 40 years and the 100-500 is my favorite lens of all time. I use it for wildlife, landscapes, portraits, and even at a wedding!
Finally a review from a skilled photographer who takes beautiful photos.
Thank you I really appreciate that!!
Thanks for this review! super informative, dynamic and great to learn a bit more for this leans on mirrorless Canon cameras! Simply great to see its results in photo-video and variety on extreme conditions to work with! thanks!
Glad it was helpful!
I’m ‘only’ a keen amateur, and last year I had the opportunity to spoil myself. I bought an R3 last May, and then a 100-500 with 1.4x in the Black Friday bonanza.
If you’re a keen amateur like me and wondering whether this lens is for you, just do it. You’ll forget about the price the first time you use it. This lens is almost permanently on my camera now, usually with the 1.4x, and the results astound me. Even I can achieve almost professional photographs!
The few negative points are also soon forgotten. Yes, I would love to own an RF 600mm f4, but there’s just no way I can splash out £14k on one, and I’d lose the zoom, and add 2kg!
Awesome Harry, thanks for sharing!!
Thank you!!
I went from a sigma 150-600mm with an adaptor on my R7 to the RF 100-500mm and the difference is exceptional! Seriously blown away and honestly don’t care about how much it cost (although I did get a £500 off deal on mine). This is a lifetime lens for sure!
Hey. The shots of the canon were amazing. Thanks for sharing your experience with it. Greets Stefan
Thank you Stefan!
I’m so excited to buy this lens soon ❤
Great review! This inspired me to pair the lens with the R5. I am duly impressed with all aspects of it in the field (image quality - so sharp!, weight, IS for both video and photos, top among them), bar the AF performance in lowlight for photos especially. It really does keep searching around dusk or in dark, forest environments - a noticeable stepdown from the EF 300 2.8II, with TCs.
Amazingly talented!
Great video, thanks
They are some great pictures and videos Harry. Even given your two negatives about the lens no one would notice it in the quality of your shots. I recently upgraded my Canon RF400 to the 100-500 and yes the quality is superb but compared to the little 400, wow it’s heavy.
That loon shot at 2:21 is just incredible!
Thank you!
Such pretty pictures ❤
Great review & outstanding images and videos, Harry. When the 100-500mm first came out, I had the reaction, "F7.1? I'd never use that." This past spring, I set up for hummingbirds on my back deck. When I heard another photographer mention the 3 ft minimum focus distance, I thought... "That could work very nicely." And it did. I was really surprised to find out that the F7.1 was pretty much a non-issue. I won't repeat all the positive comments from your video but I will concur with them. ...Jerry
Thanks Jerry! I was shocked when making this video at how many of my photos and videos were taken with this lens and not one of the primes!
Great video!
Thanks Akini!
Harry...
... I have owned my RF 100-500mm also for about 2.5 years, and fully agree with everything you have said...
I own 5 of Canon cameras with/ 10 of their lenses... including the EF 600mm f/4, and NOW, that lens stays at home because I have the 100-500mm which is much more versatile...
For me, my favorite is shooting hummingbirds at a distance of 8 ft on a tripod with this combination... Just love it...
Hi Harry, very useful video and great images and a 3-year review in just 6.5 minutes is really appreciated . I've been looking at the 1-500 for use on an R6/R7 back-up when travelling. The 2-800 is tempting but the R7/1-500 combo will give 800mm max if needed so you've really helped in my decision. Thanks a lot!
Hey there, both are great options but I prefer the 100-500 in my personal opinion. I think the image quality, IS and weather sealing are superior. The 200-800 is great for what it is at that price point. But me personally I’d take the 100-500 every time myself.
@@HarryCollinsPhotographyif you had the 200-800 in the instances of low light that the 100-500 were would it be able to compete? looking to pair one of these with my R5 and im torn which to get
So all of these were shot on the 100-500? Wow. You have a great ability to find good light and know where the animals are going to be. Congratulations on getting to this point. The video of the elks was outstanding, great angle, great details like how they used their muscles. So much better than most documentaries that make it to the mainstream. Light on the puffin was insane. I dream of finding this kind of light. But with kids and a job, my resources are limited. Make sure you pat yourself on the back sometime. Great work.
Yes everything in this video is with the 100-500, thank you and thanks for watching!
Amazing shots! And I wish I would have kept my 100-500, but traded it in for a 400mm prime. I wanted that smaller aperture, but someday I hope I will get one again! Great review of it and I agree with everything you said about it!
Larger aperture, maybe..? 😉
@@tonylockhart1963 haha off-course, you are 100& correct ;)
@@Jimmiehammarstrom47 🤣 eye no
Thanks for sharing
Very good picture，good job
Great succinct summary. One thing. If it would be an internal zoom it would not be so wonderfully compact at 100mm. I'm okay with the trade-off.
I own the EF 100-400 II and RF 100-500. The 100-500 wins hands down !
Great review, I would love to see a video on the topic of how you manage shooting from a Kayak. I'm someone who does a lot of shooting while paddling but event though Kayak is my favourite to ride in, I haven't found a good solution to shooting from it.
The actual shooting from the Kayak isn't the biggest problem (though depending on the kayak the maintaining balance through a quick pan can be a big challenge in itself, as you probably know)
My main issue is storing the camera when not shooting. I just don't know where to put it. If I mount it to my chest, it interferes with my paddle stroke. If I put it in my lap or lashed to the deck, it gets soaked from water dripping from the paddle. If I put it under the spray deck it takes too long to get out when I need to make a shot quickly. All of this is magnified in choppy water. I'm looking to do a wildlife trip up the coast of Lake Superior soon and its something I'm really trying to solve. ;)
I'd love to see what your strategies are for this because I often find myself taking my canoe instead of a kayak for this reason alone even though I'd much rather be in one of my kayaks.
cheers!
Thank you! I keep my camera in a zip up dry back under my legs while paddling around and then when I find the birds it stays on my lap It does get wet a little bit from the paddles as you mentioned but being weather sealed, I dont worry too much about it. I also put an extra water catcher ring (don't know what they are actually called haha) that keeps some of the water from riding up the paddles.
Have you tried using a longer paddle? I have a long one that I use and rarely get drippage. I tried a shorter paddle, and because of the higher angle when paddling, I got a lot more water dripping in.
Great video, thanks for posting. I have the R6 Mark II and I shoot with the Canon EF 100-400. Ive been thinking about upgrading to the RF 100 - 500. Is there a lot of difference in image quality? Btw, I also love shooting from a kayak.
Thanks! I don’t think you will see a big difference in image quality necessarily over the 100-400 but where the 100-500 really shines is the stabilization. The RF lenses are noticeably better in that area over EF.
Nice review and fantastic shots, thanks! What camera body would you recommend? On Amazon etc. see many going for EOS models
Thank you! If budget is an issue then I would go for the Canon R8, If not then the R5 (High megapixel) or R3 (Low megapixel) are what I use. The R6 is a good option too and priced mid range.
thank you! @@HarryCollinsPhotography
Thank you for another great video, so well spoken. I am heading to Africa on a bucket list trip this fall and wondering if I should get the 1.4x extender for my RF 100-500mm lens? Also, do you shoot in autofocus? I am reading so many are doing this with the new mirrorless cameras. I am used to shooting in manual focus with all but birds, but have my camera on a tripod and won't have one while traveling in Africa due to weight. I am so afraid of missing out on key shots while over there. I may just be overthinking.
The autofocus of the mirrorless camera systems are amazing. So much so that I have even started using it for video which takes a lot for me to trust an AF system to rely on it.
I’ve only used a TC a few times because it puts the aperture at f9 but it does work yes
I'd be interested to see how you organize that many photos, and your storage and backup strategy.
It's messy. I don't think I'm the best example of how to do that. I have more hard drives than I can count with backups of each in many different fireproof safes. But it works for me and it's tough to change.
Outstanding review, Professor. PS Nikon misses you...
No they don’t. They don’t even know I exist 😂
Very helpful review… for a Costa Rican :)
Glad it was helpful!
Great video, which out of the 3 stabilization modes of the lens do you use?
Thank you! I have always used mode 1. That has produced the most consistent results for me personally.
Really like the bear shots. It would have taken a 100x teleconverter for me to do that. ;)
Great review. I agree with your cons BUT if the lens were f5.6 and/or internal zoom it would be bigger, heavier and less portable.
100% agree, that's always the trade off. Stinks haha!
Sigma announced a new 500mm f5.6 prime for Sony emount very compact and lightweight 😊. For $3000usd.
Don’t even own a canon. But awesome shots!
Thanks so much for watching any way!
How does one get kind of bokeh on a 100-500? Or is it done in post process?
4:37 Omg what a heartbreak :'( Hope you had it insured
Hi Harry.. Do you use a lens protector/ filter to keep out the dust on the main lens??
Hey there, I do not. I have more bad experiences with filters like that than positive. I’ve seen many soften images. Not a fan of clear or UV filters myself. But that’s my own experiences and opinion.
Internal zoom would make the lens size too big.
Well yes of course, but the sony 200-600 is manageable as well and based on focal length and aperture both being smaller than that lens, an internal zoom would be smaller than the sony. I would take that trade off happily for me personally.
What camo wrap do you use for lens?
This one: czcams.com/video/Rjbg-dASuK4/video.htmlsi=JfIXmrhWP5NSRXUN
Wait what, share how you smashed the 600?? You’re hard on gear. Remember going to Canada and all your Nikon gear freezing? lol
That still pisses me off that it froze on me. I think about that often! Nothing exciting on the lens, just a bad fall and it came off the tripod and hit hard
my 100-400mm II is sharper