Canon RF 200-800 f/6.3-9: First Look
Vložit
- čas přidán 31. 10. 2023
- We had the chance to get our hands on the brand new Canon RF 200-800 f/6.3-9 for a few hours to share our first thoughts. As you can hear in the audio, we took it to the windy shores of Cape Town to see what this super tele zoom lens is all about.
BUY PHOTOGRAPHIC GEAR
Orms Direct: www.ormsdirect.co.za
BE CREATIVELY ENRICHED
Orms Connect - The Orms Blog: bit.ly/2Fsu2ro
FOLLOW ORMS
Instagram: / ormsdirect
Facebook: / ormsdirect
Twitter: / ormsdirect
We use Artlist for all our music licensing: artlist.io/
ABOUT ORMSTV
OrmsTV is one of the leading photo- and videographic CZcams channels in South Africa. We create videos about the latest cameras, news and rumours roundups for the avid gearhead community and rich educational content where we share the knowledge of local industry experts. Familiar faces you may recognise include Deon, our veteran host and resident Fujifilm fanboy; Andre, one of our sales reps and amazing gear expert; and Matt, our Visual Content Creator who occasionally steps out from behind the camera to contribute to our community. - Věda a technologie
Good to see Canon pushing the envelope - I'm sure this lens will be a big favourite with wildlife togs. Thanks for the vid!
It paints an exciting picture for lenses to come! Glad you enjoyed it.
I appreciate the review, covering the sharpness of the lens. I am looking forward to this lens. I'm a little envious that you already have it in your hands.
Im happy to hear you say that in this day and age its hard to find bad gear. This is the truth...with all the accusations of reviewers being bought off, the truth is there isnt much bad to say about anything. The differences are mostly down to preferences or nit picks.
Thank you for this review that give me personally the last decision arguments to buy/pre-order this lens for use on my R7!
Fantastic video
Thanks for the honest opinion
Great video guys!
Thank you!
Beautiful lens..are these video you guys create is it been colour graded?
Ty. Would like to see this compared to 100-500 with 1.4 ET pics quality, lenght, weight, and feel. Also IBIS and lens stabilization at long end. Ty, again.
no IS stabilisation at the long end, you only have in-sensor stabilisation (I heard so from another review)
So, is the control ring and the manual focus ring the same just controlled by the AF/Control/MF ring
How does its optical performance compare with that of Sony FE 200-600?
that lens is so big, it can zoom into people's future 😂
my 24-70 feel so small after seeing this lens
It's certainly not small! But still reasonably 'compact' for what you're getting.
Cool video guys
Thank you
Thank you for the info. Would love to know how it behaves on R7. 800mm F9 is better than what I can get with 400 @ F5.6 + x2 TC = 800mm F11 so definitely an exciting prospect for the price point and weight point. And twin nano motors. Sounds very good. If only I had another child left to sell …
This only has one nano USM motor.
Yes, exact what im thinking - how is this lense perform on an especially on my R7. I have the "old" 100-400 L USM with 2x TC with mount adapter on my R7. The pictures I am getting out are awesome. But the 200-800 as native on my R7 brings me as an enthusiastic wildlife photographer forward. So I will pre-order this lense and put the older L lense into Reserve with my good old and beloved EOS 7D Mark II.
Question is when is it available? Always the problem with Canon they announce a lens and its not available for months later, the Canon 100-300 f2.8 is still on backorder from preorder announcement in April/2023...Ugggh!. I wish Canon would announce when they can fill orders vs pre-announcing months before its even available for delivery.
great video
Thank you
Does it come with a lens hood? I noticed the lens hood is block instead of white.
Yes
Im a little annoyed it's not an l series, just because I would love it to have some weatherproofing! Deffo one im adding to the wish list!
It does have weathersealing. It's listed as being "dust and water resistant ", which is exactly what they say in the description of the 600 f4 L.
Wow
Everyone wants a 200-800mm f2,0 that weighs 2 pounds and costs less then $1,000... People don't understand that lens design is all about trade offs, I will certainly be getting this lens as soon as possible!
Exactly right! Let us know what you think about it when you do get hold of one.
So you'll buy anything they come up with because lens design?
Canon has been releasing some of the slowest stuff lately (f8-f11). Their lens situation is sad. It used to be their strong point. If it's any good, it's not affordable.
@@stephangauthier911they just released a 24-105 2.8
@@stephangauthier911you haven't used one thus complain.... The affordable and usability of the RF100-400 at f8 400mm,and the 2 f11 primes can make great results and performance despite the poor specs on paper.
Go out and shoot.... Focus on specs and decide argue with other on the net is pointless
@@zegzbrutal I've already shot on slow lens before. It's fine until you need the speed. Also, uninteresting bokeh. It it fits your needs, more power to you but it is a fact that canon has been slouchy on their lens game lately. I'm not the only one pointing at it. Older ef-s lenses used to be reasonably fast for the price.
Nice, the problem with shooting in a location like this with a lens that goes to 800 is the heat haze. Very hard to do proper long range tests as everything will be distorted from the hot air.
100% especially on the water. When we have it in hand for the full review we'll do some early morning shoots to give it the best chance.
For the price and my budget I’ll stick with the canon 300mm f2.8 I bought in 2009 with a 1D Mkiii. Hefty, but, ok.
Also, I suppose it’s who is using the equipment as well!!
It's an option that is available only in Canon's lineup, which is why they are patenting the crap out of all different configurations of 200-800 or 200-1000mm lenses!
If canon patents this, I hope they make an L series down the road. This isnt a bad lens, but I can tell it's not an L lenses in image quality. I'm willing to pay the money if canon ever makes an L version, especially if they make it a f6.3 vs f9
@@guitaristwagner It'll be huge, both in price and size!
Canon 100-300 stands on its own? I have been using a Sigma 120-300 f2.8 for years, absolutely brilliant lens. It is really sharp for this price range, I have heard that before! Is it was good as putting a 2x on an EF100-400Lii?
We're not denying the quality of the Sigma 120-300, but the newer RF 100-300 will push through 30fps shooting with the incredible AF in the mirrorless bodies. That makes it very, very difficult to compare the Sigma to the Canon. The EF 100-400 L II with 2x TC will likely cost you more than the 200-800 and you're still foregoing the shooting and AF speed of RF to RF.
But at the end of the day, if you're happy shooting with the lenses you have then keep shooting with them. We're just here to share our thoughts on new gear.
@@OrmsTV I understand what you are saying, only as a pensioner I need to consider how good any new kit is, I have a 100-400Lii and a 2x, I have the 120-300, brilliant on a DSLR, even the R6, but the firmware of the R5 makes it useless, possibly because Canon wants you to spend 10x more on their lens. I realise that RF mount lenses will be better than older EF lenses, but only if you can afford them.
@@blisteringbooks2428 absolutely, we're big advocates of "the best gear is the gear you have" but that's not to say the newer gear isn't exciting.
@@blisteringbooks2428 I believe there is ways to downgrade firmwares.... There are few tutorials on CZcams
5.6 - 7.1 for 3k would have nailed it and hit a serious home run.
200-800mm f6.3 for 3.5K 👌🏼😁
Exactly. The gap between the lower and super high-priced lenses needs to be filled. A 6.3 all the way through would have really appealed to the pro shooters. Pushback about it potentially being too heavy is just a buzzword for cheaper lenses, which is irrelevant now that we have one. But a dedicated faster L series superzoom that is a touch faster is a miss if Canon doesn't deliver on it or at least heavily consider it. The need for more reach is especially true on full-frame cameras. But Canon is also smart enough to know that selling a camera body that can push a higher ISO is more lucrative and with other features (stacked sensor) it solves a multitude of issues. They know what they are doing. Not that I am all that thrilled about it. @@jassim_pic
I agree. Would have been great. Would have also been out of the reach of a lot of people. They will sell many times as many at this price point (and ultimately make more money....which is what it's all about!) Maybe the lens you want will come down the pike?? Canon can't win. They make expensive lenses and people complain that "Canon never makes anything for the every man!" They make affordable options and people cry, "Canon just makes crap!"😂
@@alansach8437 There is certainly some truth to that. It is also true that (all) camera companies are more concerned with not impeding the sales of current models. Everyone knew that Canon was never going to conflict the sales of the 1 - 500mm lens which is also slightly slow.
Thankfully the battle for market share is forcing advancements, otherwise this lens would have never seen the light of day.
The gap between 13-16kk primes and 2-3 k lenses is now our mid-priced standard of which simply doesnt exist and it should. Nikon seems to understand this and in all due time others will/ should fall suite.
In the meantime, Canon will certainly push the sale of new camera bodies that "can push higher ISO without compromising IQ."
And they all wonder why camera sales overall are declining. It's not solely because of smart phones.
I have less expensive and the crazy primes. Just like to see companies at least reach for the satisfaction of consumers and at least this len is a start.
Its so annoying how people complain about the aperture, they can always find something to trash talk about any lens. Learn some simple physics realise every lens design is about making trade-offs.
Remember the last time sigma made a 200-500 f2.8? I wonder how many people bought that?
Not many bought it, fewer could lift it!
Same class as the Fuji 150-600 f8 (FOW 300-800 mm) For Fuji it is not a great seller. The lens is sharp internal zoom that the Canon does not offer, lightweight for its size and focal length. Great in good light at shorter distances. These super zooms all work well in good light, shorter to medium distances from subject. Personal view, It is on the expensive side of things. Yes compared to the 150-600 Sigma and Tamron or the Nikon 180-600 you get extra reach but what is the price justification. Add the 1.4 to the Sigma or Tamron and you get to 840 at f9 at a much lower price point. The same reason the Fuji 100-400 f5.6 owners do not upgrade to the 150-600, add the 1.4 and you at 560 with smaller f stop. But there will be a lot of upgrades to the RF mount.
How do you know the Fuji 150-600 is or isn’t a good seller? Also, TCs suck. I had a chance to pick up a 100-400 but reach is reach, it’s a pumper, and optically its basically an f/8 lens if you want best quality. The 150-600 is an awesome lens at all lengths wide open to f11-f16. At 900+ mm you need to stop down often to have the right DoF. That is just a fact. The Canon looks huge and is a pumper-but I’m glad it exists. On the R7 it’ll outreach the Fuji which is already pretty nuts.
Its a Pumper unlike my Superb Nikon 180-600 which zooms internally @@matt88169
RF 200-800 has only Single Nano USM, while 70-200 2.8 RF and 100-500 has Dual Nano USM.. Dual Nano USM has two Nano USM motors, each driving different lens groups, working together to produce faster, more efficient focusing. That is a bit disappointment. I'm not too hyped about this lens but nice cheap alternative for 100-500.
It's not slow. RF100-400 is also mono nano USM. Its AF is not slow at all
@@zegzbrutal generally speaking, the shorter the lens, shorter the drive. So 100-400 would be easier to handle for nano USM motor.. but yeah, Canon usually knows what they are doing so it might be about the same as 100-400 or Sigma 150-600 and 100-500 is a bit snappier and more pro tool for most cases..
@@m11kan For me the problem isn't the speed but the precision. For some reason the single nano USM motor of the RF 100-400 is rather imprecise - it gets the bird in focus most of the time but if I was to nitpick it doesn't actually properly lock on to the eye as well as even the 800mm f11.
Damn, now i need a new camera.
Why not just buy the 100/500mm L series lens it's better quality and about the same price just add a extender for about the same focal length make's sense to me..
Or switch to Sony and get a F6.3 at 600mm 😊
@@lewcehjitl3282 or get a canon F4 - 600 mm.
Nice first impression mate! To the Nikon & Sony negative people who feel the need to rag this lens I say, I don't give a fat rats. You have the lense in your hand they have a keyboard. Ask someone with experience, not someone with an opinion.
Exactly.... I'm sick of Non-RF users coming to every RF video to trash talk.... It's not end of the world for not using NiSony
You can always tell who the non Canon shooters are by the comments. Stay mad! 🤣
On R7 it would be nuts.dont need any telwconverters
We're definitely going to pair it with the R7 when we do our full review!
Why's the bokeh so horrible though?
Wish they would have made it internal zooming and sacrificed 100m or so. F9 not ideal either
A lens case cost extra,$ 190.00
Canon RF 200-800 f/6.3-9 GOOD LEMS
It seems like it! Looking forward to giving it a proper run.
Thinking out of the box eh? Finding ‘creative’ ways to reduce size and weight eh? Canon forgot that birders operate between 300-600mm most of the time. At that range bigger aperture can be achieved without compromising too much on weight and size. Nikon has almost a dozen tele zoom lens for wildlife shooting and Canon? 100-500 at f7.1! And this lens at 500mm is f8! What is Canon thinking?!!!
Where I live, it's 500€ more expensive than the Nikon 180-600 and 900€ more expensive than the Sony 200-600.
For that price increase you get a much worse aperture at 600mm but an additional 200mm at an even worse aperture. I very much prefer the 600mm zooms, even f/6.3 is pretty difficult to work with sometimes, f/8-9 is an absolute pain in the ass, unless you're out in the open on a very sunny day. Being different isn't always better.
Completely agree. Also the compact nature of the Sony 200-600 with its motorized in lens zooming is far superior in fast auto focusing with the Sony Alpha 1 checking faces at 120 times a second. I can understand why you might want to use greater reach but a compatible 1.4 extender giving you that reach.
Maybe is time to switch to Nikon or Sony, don't thing Canon will have a lens like the Nikon Z 180-600mm f/5.6-6.3😥😥
Nikon's not fast&cheap enough to switch system because of the f number
F9😂.
Oh look! Nikon is taking over the market let's try to catch up with Nikon! LOL f/9! 😂😂
Nikon's 800mm f6.3 is selling for 6500 bucks, I wonder how many people are buying that
That's a bit like Coke being worried about Pepsi taking over because one additional taco bell franchise opened up.
@@AzarathGirl123 True, but their 180-600 5.6-6.3 is selling for $1695.00.
@@alansach8437 an extra 200 bucks for an extra 200mm on the long end. If you put a teleconverter on the Nikon, it becomes a 840mm f8.8 which is very similar, except that the canon one can access the full range without switching teleconverters
Understandably everyone wants a faster, lighter, smaller and cheaper lens but physics isn't about to indulge us anytime soon.
@@bbasiaga Yea, Nikon with their Z lens line is definitely pocking Canon in the eye! LOL it's good to see competition. We as customers win. ; )
f/9.0 light??? Good luck in wildlife.. Better buy fullframe to handle that ISO's already.
Modern mirrorless handles f9 easily.... If you have not used one, don't say a thing
@@zegzbrutal How can you know what I do shoot with? Everything above f6.3 is rather crazy to handle. In forest area even with that light and 1/250s you don't go below ISO 12.800 in 80-90% of the situations. What are you want to talk about? F9 is unusable in other days than very bright, and in only in open areas. Maybe you don't say a thing, because I am objective in what I say.
@@pentagramyt417 i guess all m43 shooters are non-existent in your view? And the negativity around this RF 200-800 is more than XF 150-600 really baffles me.
@@zegzbrutal M43 have the best stabilization on the market and have very bright lenses. And because of the best stabilization and very fast apertures M43 hold ISO better than APS-C/FF. You would not shoot with shutterspeed of 1/13 at any fullframe tele-lens which you can with Olympus 300 mm f4. I am not Olympus user, but that is nothing new how much capability M43 has.
Terrible bokeh ... the out-of-focus highlights look extremely nervous. But Ok - for the price ...
We must keep in mind the price point and versatility of the zoom range. We also wish we could have it all.
A lot depends on how close you are to the subject. Closer= better bokeh. Of course, you can always move your position to get a cleaner background or, if all else fails, blur it in post
You are talking about blur, not bokeh. A Coke bottle can produce blur. Regardless of how shallow the DOF is, there's always a transition zone. Besides, you tend to use a 200-800m at rather long distances. To be fair here - most super tele-zoom lenses have a rather mediocre bokeh. This is where prime lenses are still much better.
For the same price point you could get 600mm +1.4x TC on other brands and f6.3 at 600 mm. And most of the time, I know whether I need 600mm or 820mm based on my subject and habitat. I wish this lens was priced lower (especially for f8 at 600mm).
@@SuriyaNarayanan987 What you can get in other brands doesn't matter if you have Canon bodies. It's not like you're not happy with the food at McDonald's so you run across the street to Burger King! I agree with what you are saying, but every lens has tradeoffs. If this lens won't work for you, don't buy it! Canon was very specific in saying it is not an L series lens. If you don't like the background with this lens you might have to move closer, change your location or pull out another lens. Doesn't mean this lens won't have its uses. Regardless whatever other lenses you have in your bag (and I've got an f4 big white), I see this as an awesome lens to have sitting on the passenger's seat driving around! The weight, size, reach and zoom range are unmatched.
It is not L series so definitely pic quality will suffer.
when can we buy it?
Orms direct is taking pre-orders from today and we're expecting stock some time in December. But we'll keep you posted!
Orms the biggest downfall to this lens is it is not internally zoom just look at Nikon and look at Sony look at it especially Nikon and look at the lenses that they are making for wildlife photography they are so much superior to Canon after seeing this lens I think I'm going to switch to Nikon I really think I am because is just not cutting it , they just aren't .
This is weather sealed
Meh, no thank you!
Canon could not have said it any better. Seriously, though, those are really, really poor quality images and video clips. Horrible resolving power. What good is the extra 200mm when it looks that bad? Mind as well throw a 1.4x TC on your Sigma 150-600, get better IQ/sharpness, and spend a fraction of the cost of the Canon 200-800. Maybe try this review again, expect do not use the script Canon wrote for you and take better images and video clips (if the lens is capable of it). If its that bad in full Sun, I cannot even imagine how bad it will be otherwise.
Why are you not talking about internal vs external zoom and related weather sealing? Also, f-stop on super tele is not about bokeh but low light or fast action performance like for birds. Your video sounds like a sales pitch to me 😂 Yet another overpriced mediocre lens from Canon for the uninformed
Overpriced? It costs a tenth of what 1.33 stops faster 800 mm f/5.6 costs. Canon gas options for those who want speed. It seems just that some want them cheap.
You can see in the footage that the lens has external zoom, and we can't speak to weather sealing as this is a pre-production lens and have limited information, hence the 'first look'. The lens is very fairly priced for what you're getting in our opinion.
@@OrmsTV Your video makes it sound like it’s the best thing since sliced bread. 😂 Sony and Nikon super zooms beat Canon hands down. Unless you can afford L lenses don’t buy a Canon. F11 and now f9 😂
@@Sebastian-lw1ei Well, that's a bit harsh. True, Nikon (and Sony) have similarly priced xxx-600 5.6-6.3 lenses. They are slightly faster at focal length. 600 at 6.3, rather than 600 at 8.0 as with this lens, but they need a teleconverter to reach 800. They are also bulkier. To arbitrarily say they are better without shooting them side by side is disingenuous. There are many variables.
And btw, external zoom can get you compactness, and make the difference whether or not the lens fits in the bag.
@@alansach8437 Yes, my comment is harsh indeed. At $500-800 USD more Canon gives us almost one stop slower lens, external zoom which is more prone to dust and water injection, not to mention the loooong zoom throw. All three are virtually same size and weight. All I’m saying is that Canon only cares about pro photographers with L lenses and rides the brand recognition with the rest of us overpricing and underdelivering on their equipment.
Would this be good to complement the RF 70-200 for sports? For budget minded people.
It would be fantastic for outdoor sports during the day, it might be a bit slow for fast-moving subjects in slightly lower light.
crap lens this is too slow!
I remember many said the same about the 100-500 4.5-7.1L. Most owners of this lens are very happy with it. Most scoffed at the 600 and 800 f11 lenses, but again, many folks like them. Give Canon credit for making lenses for real people who could never come close to buying an 800 5.6 for sixteen grand, but fourteen grand less and 1.3 stops less of light, can get one of these! Not bad. Is it an action lens? Not usually. But it can get you some reach, and it can get it without teleconverters.
@alansach8437 and in alot of cases you have to use iso 5000 for it to work.... F9 is nuts
@@Coreyhkh2 ISO 5000 is nothing anymore. The combination of high ISO capabilities of modern cameras, plus all of the high quality ai noise reduction software availble that is getting better and better with every iteration, I don't bat an eye at 5000. Full frame cameras can easily go two or three times higher than that.
@@alansach8437 I dont agree
I really wish I knew this thing would exist earlier in the year when I bought a RF 100-400.
RF100-400 is cheap though, nothing to lose
The 100-400 is one of the best value lenses you can buy