Nemorino said:

Gasteruption
R5 + RF100L
View attachment 225558

R5 mk2 + RF100L
View attachment 225559

Click to expand...

When I saw Gasteruption I really expected to see pictures of TacoBell.
Nic pics though

justaCanonuser said:

Ah, thanks. I didn't expect that anyone offers a 2mm thin adapter ring...

Click to expand...

But it's not the most reliable, new firmware from Nikon might brick the adapter....

AlanF said:

I wish we had an angry emoji. Was it at the join and how big was the bend?

Click to expand...

I too wish we had a wider choice of emojis, just "thump up" is very limited possibility to express one's feelings or opinions...
Any answer, Craig?

AlanF said:

I wish we had an angry emoji. Was it at the join and how big was the bend?

Click to expand...

It was at the join. I did not see the lens but the bend was sufficient to cause major sharpness issues.

P-visie said:

Yes, I have. The front end of the 200-800mm lens of a friend of mine was bent. Despite being less than two years old: no warranty, but a 900+ € repair bill.

Click to expand...

I wish we had an angry emoji. Was it at the join and how big was the bend?

AlanF said:

There do not appear to be any reports of the 200-800 breaking since April. Have you seen any?

Click to expand...

Yes, I have. The front end of the 200-800mm lens of a friend of mine was bent. Despite being less than two years old: no warranty, but a 900+ € repair bill.

justaCanonuser said:

If this zooms hit with these specs the market, and if it really is an L lens, dial me in. I would immediately upgrade my RF 200-800mm with it as a lighter combo when I don't want to carry my heavier 600mm prime. My main reason to replace the RF 200-800mm is its obvious fragility that prevents me to take it with me in more rugged environments, otherwise I still like this compact zoom.

Click to expand...

There do not appear to be any reports of the 200-800 breaking since April. Have you seen any?

SvO2 said:

Okay, but the discussion is more around 500 / 5.6 and 600/6.3 lenses (latter being popular in recent zooms as well as Nikon's excellent PF prime), not 600 F/4s

Sigma's 500 5/.6 is barely larger than the 100-500 in its collapsed state and weighs about the same. Likewise for Nikon's 500 5.6. You lose the zoom, but I can't say that's a huge tradeoff -- most people tend to use zooms at their extremes. The 200-600 and 180-600 lenses are indeed larger and heavier. But non-telescoping and better light gathering for a thousand bucks less.

I own the Canon 100-500. It's *okay* and I've gotten some good photos with it. But between its relatively dark image, long zoom throw, telescoping nature, and the teleconverter weirdness - I just don't enjoy it that much. 70-200 Z with the 2x tele basically replaced that lens for me. And unfortunately for anything longer, you pretty much have to step up to the big whites with Canon. The middle ground is lacking, unfortunately doesn't seem to be a big priority for Canon.

Now this hypothetical 300-600 could be interesting and maybe fill that niche, but I highly doubt it'll be much less than $10k.

Click to expand...

All of those 600 6.3 lenses are much bigger and heavier. And the Sigma is a fixed lens. You again forget that the 100-500 is meant to be a versatile lens, like a 70-200 with a longer focal length. Making it 2kg or a fixed prime would kill that design objective. Losing the zoom might not be a tradeoff for you but it would be for me and others.

I agree that Canon is lazy and feels like lost it's passion when it comes to lens designs. For example Nikon, (a much smaller company in worst financial situation) managed to design brand new 400 2.8 and 600 F4 primes with teleconverters and also a line of amazing 6.3 primes, taking over the telephoto lead. In the meantime, Canon managed to "solder" an RF adapter to the 6 year old EF designs. Canon used to be a leader in telephoto lenses, now it feel like they are lagging behind Nikon, Sony and even Sigma soon.

SvO2 said:

Okay, but the discussion is more around 500 / 5.6 and 600/6.3 lenses (latter being popular in recent zooms as well as Nikon's excellent PF prime), not 600 F/4s

Sigma's 500 5/.6 is barely larger than the 100-500 in its collapsed state and weighs about the same. Likewise for Nikon's 500 5.6. You lose the zoom, but I can't say that's a huge tradeoff -- most people tend to use zooms at their extremes. The 200-600 and 180-600 lenses are indeed larger and heavier. But non-telescoping and better light gathering for a thousand bucks less.

I own the Canon 100-500. It's *okay* and I've gotten some good photos with it. But between its relatively dark image, long zoom throw, telescoping nature, and the teleconverter weirdness - I just don't enjoy it that much. 70-200 Z with the 2x tele basically replaced that lens for me. And unfortunately for anything longer, you pretty much have to step up to the big whites with Canon. The middle ground is lacking, unfortunately doesn't seem to be a big priority for Canon.

Now this hypothetical 300-600 could be interesting and maybe fill that niche, but I highly doubt it'll be much less than $10k.

Click to expand...

All of those 600 6.3 lenses are much bigger and heavier. And the Sigma is a fixed lens. You again forget that the 100-500 is meant to be a versatile lens, like a 70-200 with a longer focal length. Making it 2kg or a fixed prime would kill that design objective. Losing the zoom might not be a tradeoff for you but it would be for me and others.

I agree that Canon is lazy and feels like lost it's passion when it comes to lens designs. For example Nikon, (a much smaller company in worst financial situation) managed to design brand new 400 2.8 and 600 F4 primes with teleconverters and also a line of amazing 6.3 primes, taking over the telephoto lead. In the meantime, Canon managed to "solder" an RF adapter to the 6 year old EF designs. Canon used to be a leader in telephoto lenses, now it feel like they are lagging behind Nikon, Sony and even Sigma soon.

alFR said:

You got quite a lot of useful feedback when you asked essentially the same question last December. Has something changed in the meantime that makes that advice no longer useful?

Click to expand...

Honestly, even in 3-4 months things can change, so imagine more than 5 months, and i didn't buy that time as i didn't save, and when i come again to check out i see some news, now with that R7II could be release and even R6III then i also can change plans, mostly i try to buy the latest i can buy of the year when i am ready, but when i wait always something new will come, but sometimes not everything new will be the best option anyway, for example R1 mark II or R10 markII won't be in my plan as one is most expensive and the other is the lowest or least model, but in the middle like R3 or R5 and R6/7 are all almost best option as price to performance.

Next year i believe R5 MarkII will not have a replacement so it is still there, and R1, while R7 and R3 and R6II are all due for replacement, if i buy a camera last year or this year definitely it will be either R5 or R6II or R7, while R3 although nice for sports i feel like it is too much expensive to be an option, and only last year by October i got new salary income so that change things, as i ignored photography and focused more on Table Tennis equipment and Astrophotography equipment, almost done in both so i am back to photography only to see few new things are coming, i will wait until maybe December or January to decide, will see what i will find out or decide, until then i asked again to be sure.

H2Oplanet said:

200-500mm L f4 or 300-600mm L f4 (w IQ of the 100-300mm L f2.8) please --- don't care how heavy or how much... enough with the pedestrian lenses please... I don't even consider the 100-500mm worthy of L designation based on image quality

Click to expand...

And the 100-500 has better image quality than 90% of the L lenses, including the 24-105 or 24-70. In that case, none of the L lenses deserve to be L.

AlanF said:

Are you sure it is a shadow? The edges are very well-defined and you can see a triangular region of white at the bottom left of the blue band which you would think would also be in shadow. We have yet to hear from the poster.

View attachment 225708

Click to expand...

It seems like a shadow to me as well, the feather pattern is visible even in the darker area.

Chig said:

If it's based on the $10,000 RF 100-300 f2.8 why would it be well below $10,000 ? Sounds like wishful thinking to me.

I'd much rather have a version ii of the 100-300mm f2.8 with builtin 1.4x and 2x extenders and I would expect to pay accordingly

Click to expand...

Well a good monopod takes care of the weight issue with the sigma…if only we could get an rf version. But the 100-300 went up $700, so is now $10,199. Zoom is wonderful and that was really the only way I could justify getting one was because it gives me a range that I can use for video too.

Pretty cool composition. I love the subject at 45 degrees like this.

Nemorino said:

Gasteruption
R5 + RF100L
View attachment 225558

R5 mk2 + RF100L
View attachment 225559

Click to expand...

When I saw Gasteruption I really expected to see pictures of TacoBell.
Nic pics though

You got quite a lot of useful feedback when you asked essentially the same question last December. Has something changed in the meantime that makes that advice no longer useful?

I really like the pose. Nicely done, MASH411

Very nice series, ISv.

frankchn said:

There are Sony E to Nikon Z mount adapters that retain AF capability (see https://petapixel.com/2025/07/22/me...unt-adapter-review-viable-but-not-vindicated/ for a review of one), though results may vary.

Click to expand...

Ah, thanks. I didn't expect that anyone offers a 2mm thin adapter ring...

I really like your series. Nicely done, ISv.

Great shots, ERHP.