Hector1970 said:

It would be handy if Canon developed a Zero//1.4/2 extender that could be attached to any of the big whites.

Click to expand...

They already have a Zero extender for all lenses.

It would be handy if Canon developed a Zero//1.4/2 extender that could be attached to any of the big whites.

Daylight, so maybe say, "F/8 and be there." I presume you mean the RF 24-70/2.8L IS USM. In the center of the frame at 70mm f/8, the L-series lens is a little sharper, away from the center of the frame the L lens is noticeably better.


If by some chance you mean the non-L 28-70/2.8 IS STM, you can compare that lens using the above tool as well, and run through more focal lengths and apertures if you like.

Chig said:

Yes and most expensive , however Nikon's new one is just as good and slightly lighter from what I've read but even more expensive

Click to expand...

Just as good? Also with the 2X extender?

This is some of the extreme cropping I sometimes have to do, with examples from yesterday. A Little Ringed Plover had been reported, and a rare visitor of a Northern Wheatear, both far behind a fence. Using the RF 200-800mm on the R5ii, I got a decent enough shot of the Plover, where the bird occupies only 250x330 px and the the Wheatear in 500x500 px. Much closer was a Linnet, which occupied a massive 850x650 px. Were I in the Pantanal, using my 7D and 100-400mm (original) at half the distance, the first would be rather a blob, the second blurred, and the third lacking the detail. The line of the eye ring on the Plover is only 2-3 px wide, and the 200-800 is not considered very sharp at 800mm!

Anon said:

What a blast from the past! I really loved my 5D II, and with the small 40mm pancake it was surprisingly portable.

Click to expand...

Me too! I’m team Canon but the 5D II was so great! I didn’t think I would ever upgrade. I kept it until the R5 and don’t think I will ever buy another camera until it can’t be fixed! 5D IV is my backup.

I love my R5! I use the D5 IV as my second camera. I am still happy with the images!

neuroanatomist said:

I must have gotten lucky, my copy of the original 100-400L was quite good. I sold it after getting the 600/4 II, and never owned the 100-400L II.

“Mockingbird’s Glare”
View attachment 228874
EOS 7D, EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS USM @ 400mm, 1/640 s, f/5.6, ISO 200

Click to expand...

Here is a 3000x2000 crop downsized the same as yours to 1600x1060 (a Snail Kite, taken in the Pantanal in 2013). They seem similarly sharp, and my images occupying a large fraction of the frame are fine. The problem is that I usually have to crop far more than that. My images often used to be rejected by the mods on a Dutch bird site because they considered them too soft. Everything changed when I got a 300mm f/2.8 II and put a 1.4xTC on it. The increase in resolution made all the difference for heavy cropping, and my images sneaked through. Nowadays, if I have an image of a bird that is about 1000 px long, it looks very sharp and I see lots of detail. I couldn't do that at 1000px on the 100-400mm original, though modern software would help greatly. They are still sharper than many images posted here but they wouldn't get past those tough Dutch mods.



EOS 7D, EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS USM @ 400mm, 1/500 s, f/5.6, ISO 400

Del Paso said:

It might be the best 70-200 zoom ever!

Click to expand...

Yes and most expensive , however Nikon's new one is just as good and slightly lighter from what I've read but even more expensive

GirlsAreBeautiful said:

I mean, you have to build those electronic parts as well. And the design part especially looks very very complex.

Click to expand...

Some... but Canon, e.g., builds sensors but buys DIGIC CPUs and other chips. In any case, building chips is relatively quick once the facilities are in place, while growing / polishing / preparing the big glass elements for big whites takes up to 1 year or so in certain cases and it's therefore much less scalable

ISv said:

I have seen only once adult female on Oahu. The purplish collar on the neck is practically invisible with the females, with the males it's better but usually at shorter distances. It was pretty shy: on the last photo, when I was like "oh, it's coming closer!!!" it actually accelerated and took off !

View attachment 228875View attachment 228876View attachment 228877

Click to expand...

Ducks,in general, are not very cooperative.

Chig said:

Asking about the RF 70-200 Z ? It's amazingly sharp corner to corner

Click to expand...

It might be the best 70-200 zoom ever!

For those unsure about equivalency with APS-C vs Full Frame, here's a DOF simulator that perfectly shows examples. https://dofsimulator.net/en/

This sounds like it would be a good general purpose kit lens for the R7 II, they should make it a kit lens for an R10 II as well. An F/4 lens on an APS-C would be fairly decent for a lot of things. You can even mount it on a full frame RF body such as the R1 if you really want to

AlanF said:

Active couple of days. Today, from the largest, a Great White Egret - formerly very rare but now more common, a tiny Eurasian Wren, a Pied Wagtail (White Wagtail). A Linnet from the same locality, and from my garden yesterday, a Jay, Chaffinch and Goldfinch. All with R5ii and RF 200-800mm.View attachment 228854View attachment 228855View attachment 228856View attachment 228857View attachment 228858View attachment 228859View attachment 228860View attachment 228861

Click to expand...

Very nice series Alan! My favorites are the Wren, Jay and the Goldfinch on that apple branch!

Noreaster said:

ring-necked duck (Aythya collaris)
most of the time it is hard to see the ringView attachment 228865View attachment 228866View attachment 228867View attachment 228868

Click to expand...

I have seen only once adult female on Oahu. The purplish collar on the neck is practically invisible with the females, with the males it's better but usually at shorter distances. It was pretty shy: on the last photo, when I was like "oh, it's coming closer!!!" it actually accelerated and took off !

stillviking said:

How about corners for landscape?

Click to expand...

Asking about the RF 70-200 Z ? It's amazingly sharp corner to corner

AlanF said:

It's an incredible lens. I did a comparison of it with other star lenses and it did so well. I really should get one.

https://www.canonrumors.com/forum/t...tc-vs-ef-600mm-f-4-iii-vs-rf-200-800mm.44688/

Click to expand...

Yes you won't regret it if you do even though it's very expensive it fills a gap in Canon's line up when paired with the 2x and the bare lens is of course fabulous for portrait work

Nicely done, Noreaster.

Very nice shots, antonn.

AlanF said:

Is that a crop or the full image?

Click to expand...

Cropped to about 2000x3000 (before downsampling to post).

roby17269 said:

To be fair they are pretty different processes: cameras are mostly an assembly of electronic parts, while lenses, especially high end ones, require a lot of time and effort to mold / polish the glass elements

Click to expand...

I mean, you have to build those electronic parts as well. And the design part especially looks very very complex.

neuroanatomist said:

I must have gotten lucky, my copy of the original 100-400L was quite good. I sold it after getting the 600/4 II, and never owned the 100-400L II.

“Mockingbird’s Glare”
View attachment 228874
EOS 7D, EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS USM @ 400mm, 1/640 s, f/5.6, ISO 200

Click to expand...

Is that a crop or the full image?

I must have gotten lucky, my copy of the original 100-400L was quite good. I sold it after getting the 600/4 II, and never owned the 100-400L II.

“Mockingbird’s Glare”

EOS 7D, EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS USM @ 400mm, 1/640 s, f/5.6, ISO 200