Canceling My Rf 100-500mm Order...Or not?

[YuengLinger]

I've had the lens in my B&H shopping cart for about a month. Adorama also shows them backordered. Amazon, surprisingly, has them in stock--sold by Amazon. I hung in a little longer because of a $100 discount offer, but I think by next year such discounts will be back.

I'm glad I've had the extra time to think. The 100-500 is very expensive, especially considering that this would be more of a hobby lens for, not one for portraits and events.

What bothers me most about the lens design is the tele-extender limitation. And, yes, light as it is, the f/7.1 limitation is also something that seems to lower the value for me.

Interestingly, when I first started looking for comparisons online several months ago, most of the Sigma 150-600mm Contemporary reviews were not very positive, just concluding it was a decent lens at a bargain price. But lately my youtube "Recommended" feed has been showing older and newer reviews of the Sigma, and they are all much more positive about image quality and AF. Really hard to know what to believe without trying it for myself.

But my GAS is in a mellow state at the moment, and I realize I can wait to see if Sigma is going to announce plans for an RF version of the lens next year, or if Canon has plans to offer something a little faster and longer--even if it is heavier and a bit more expensive. As things stand, I just can't justify the 100-500mm price tag with its perceived limitations.

 

[tron]

+1 Nice post for us GAS-strikken people. To tell the truth 100-500 seems a versatile lens though.

 

[VegasCameraGuy]

But my GAS is in a mellow state at the moment, and I realize I can wait to see if Sigma is going to announce plans for an RF version of the lens next year, or if Canon has plans to offer something a little faster and longer--even if it is heavier and a bit more expensive. As things stand, I just can't justify the 100-500mm price tag with its perceived limitations.

I like my 100-500mm but so far the 70-200mm would have been a better choice for me. I don't do a lot of wildlife shooting but also have suffered from GAS most of my life. Once I get my electronic flash needs fulfilled, I'll probably start saving up for the 70-200mm Canon lens.

 

[AlanF]

I've had the lens in my B&H shopping cart for about a month. Adorama also shows them backordered. Amazon, surprisingly, has them in stock--sold by Amazon. I hung in a little longer because of a $100 discount offer, but I think by next year such discounts will be back.

I'm glad I've had the extra time to think. The 100-500 is very expensive, especially considering that this would be more of a hobby lens for, not one for portraits and events.

What bothers me most about the lens design is the tele-extender limitation. And, yes, light as it is, the f/7.1 limitation is also something that seems to lower the value for me.

Interestingly, when I first started looking for comparisons online several months ago, most of the Sigma 150-600mm Contemporary reviews were not very positive, just concluding it was a decent lens at a bargain price. But lately my youtube "Recommended" feed has been showing older and newer reviews of the Sigma, and they are all much more positive about image quality and AF. Really hard to know what to believe without trying it for myself.

But my GAS is in a mellow state at the moment, and I realize I can wait to see if Sigma is going to announce plans for an RF version of the lens next year, or if Canon has plans to offer something a little faster and longer--even if it is heavier and a bit more expensive. As things stand, I just can't justify the 100-500mm price tag with its perceived limitations.

Just flashed across my screen from Canon UK: We are delighted to tell you, your order has now been confirmed and is on its way. 1 x Canon RF 100-500mm F4.5-7.1L IS.

I've tried the Sigma 150-600mm C on the R5. The AF was slow, even after I updated the firmware. And, with the 1.4xTC, it was very slow. Get a used 100-400mm II - it works really well with the R5. I'll be using the 100-500mm bare.

 

[usern4cr]

I've had the lens in my B&H shopping cart for about a month. Adorama also shows them backordered. Amazon, surprisingly, has them in stock--sold by Amazon. I hung in a little longer because of a $100 discount offer, but I think by next year such discounts will be back.

I'm glad I've had the extra time to think. The 100-500 is very expensive, especially considering that this would be more of a hobby lens for, not one for portraits and events.

What bothers me most about the lens design is the tele-extender limitation. And, yes, light as it is, the f/7.1 limitation is also something that seems to lower the value for me.

Interestingly, when I first started looking for comparisons online several months ago, most of the Sigma 150-600mm Contemporary reviews were not very positive, just concluding it was a decent lens at a bargain price. But lately my youtube "Recommended" feed has been showing older and newer reviews of the Sigma, and they are all much more positive about image quality and AF. Really hard to know what to believe without trying it for myself.

But my GAS is in a mellow state at the moment, and I realize I can wait to see if Sigma is going to announce plans for an RF version of the lens next year, or if Canon has plans to offer something a little faster and longer--even if it is heavier and a bit more expensive. As things stand, I just can't justify the 100-500mm price tag with its perceived limitations.

I had the RF 100-500 on order from both B&H (with $100 discount) and CPW (Canon Price Watch, with an even bigger discount). After a very long wait I got the lens from B&H, but it was delivered with an appreciably crushed box. B&H was very helpful in allowing me to return it and have another ordered. But it still took forever with no lens delivery. Then CPW called me and told me there was an order cancellation of a single new lens and if I wanted it I could get it. So I did. It arrived well packaged from CPW's authorized dealer and it works beautifully! I'll show you a photo I took with it:


R5 & RF 100-500 f4.5-7.1L
500mm, f6.7, 1/90", ISO 50, handheld with animal eye AF (Yes, the exif does say f6.7 and 500mm for some reason)
(note: there was a little subject motion at 1/90", so I should have used ISO 400 to get a 8x shorter shutter speed. Now I know for next time)

If I were you, I would wait until you can get this RF 100-500 lens. It is superb! The friction-adjust ring allows you to make the zoom barrel as easy-to-stiff as you want and that is really a huge improvement over the RF 70-200mm f2.8L lens (which I also have). I suggest you call CPW as well as B&H or other authorized dealers, and I also sometimes see offers for immediate limited stock at MSRP if you order right away. I really suggest you get this lens, as you will be so happy you did!

 

[unfocused]

Smart choice. Unless you are an avid wildlife or outdoor sports photographer I don’t see any reason to rush into this lens. It will come down a bit in price once supplies balance out with demand, plus canon is going to be releasing a lot of new products next year, so no need to rush if you aren’t certain it’s the best lens for you.

 

[unfocused]

An additional thought...this is one reason why Canon needs to break tradition and issue a road map. With the DSLR and EF system, the pace of introductions was incremental, so when a new product came out, people could consider it and decide if it was what they wanted. But as Canon hurries to build out the R system, it can be a bit head spinning and frustrating to decide whether to buy or to wait and see what the next product coming round the corner might be. I know, I am sitting on my money right now to wait to see what 2021 brings and I suspect lots of other people are doing the same, especially since the supply chain has been so severely disrupted. I think Nikon was smart to release their lens roadmap and I think Canon would benefit from doing the same.

 

[AlanF]

Smart choice. Unless you are an avid wildlife or outdoor sports photographer I don’t see any reason to rush into this lens. It will come down a bit in price once supplies balance out with demand, plus canon is going to be releasing a lot of new products next year, so no need to rush if you aren’t certain it’s the best lens for you.

The Canon Store leads off the description of the lens with: "When you demand the very best quality images for wildlife and sports photography, the RF 100-500mm F4.5-7.1L IS USM super telephoto zoom, with its 100-500 mm focal length range and 5-stop image stabilisation, makes perfect sense. " So, if you are not into wildlife or/and sports, this lens is indeed not aimed at you. If you are, then you have a lightweight package that is giving excellent images of birds, BIF etc that are adorning various forums posted by enthusiasts. I'm not buying an RF 50/1.2, but I'm not posting a thread to say I'm not since my views are irrelevant to those who would find that lens useful.

 

[Nelu]

The R5 with the RF 100-500 F4.5-7.1 L IS feels like a pocket camera for me, compared to the 1DX Mark III and the Canon 600mm f/4 L IS II.
It's a very handy, flexible, less expensive and high quality configuration but of course, with much less "WOW!" factor than the super-tele lens.

If I want ultimate quality, I'll take the big gun, no matter what.
If I want to be able to walk more and still be able to take some great shots, I'll take the RF 100-500.

As a note, lately I only take wildlife photos. For any kind of indoor shooting, the RF 100-500 is not the optimum solution, regardless how good the R5 is at high ISO.

 

[privatebydesign]

An additional thought...this is one reason why Canon needs to break tradition and issue a road map. With the DSLR and EF system, the pace of introductions was incremental, so when a new product came out, people could consider it and decide if it was what they wanted. But as Canon hurries to build out the R system, it can be a bit head spinning and frustrating to decide whether to buy or to wait and see what the next product coming round the corner might be. I know, I am sitting on my money right now to wait to see what 2021 brings and I suspect lots of other people are doing the same, especially since the supply chain has been so severely disrupted. I think Nikon was smart to release their lens roadmap and I think Canon would benefit from doing the same.

The trouble with a road map is it commits you to a path before you have all the data you might use to determine that path.

For instance Canon will make another DSLR if they believe there is the demand, if there isn’t they won’t, how can they commit to anything in this time of extreme transition? Sure RF is the future, but given the worldwide uncertainty how quickly will people transition, what people do transition earlier will impact the best lens selection for that group of users, or it might push development in other lens areas to entice more people to transition.

At this point the only thing I have seen that RF does better than EF is AF, but my EF AF rarely is an issue.

 

[Nelu]

At this point the only thing I have seen that RF does better than EF is AF, but my EF AF rarely is an issue.

You know this is might be a trigger for yet another DSLR vs Mirrorless debate, right ?

For me, the main mirrorless advantages are:

1. no need for the darn AF micro adjustment
2. no need for reading glasses to playback photos or access menus in the EVF because of the diopter adjustment
3. the AF points cover pretty much the entire screen, unlike the DSLR's where they're clustered in the middle
4. the R5 mechanical shutter noise is a whisper compared to the 1DX Mark III
5. the photo and the histogram visible in the EVF before you even take the shot
6. way better ergonomics for shooting videos (EVF vs back LCD)...although I don't really shoot much video

So, that's a tiny bit more than just the AF and NONE of the above mentioned points is something you can have on a DSLR.

 

[YuengLinger]

I see the 100-500 as a lens of many intelligent compromises, but I've lost interest for now.

Part of the reason is I'm lining up a little bit of work, some headshots for the end of this month, and some interior lifestyle/environmental for next month.

I did enjoy my 100-400mm II very much, and often regret selling it. On the other hand, I remember being frustrated in some of my favorite light with f/5.6--but that was with the 5DIV's sensor. I'm sure the R5 is great at f/7.1.

Still, it is encouraging to hear, for when I reconsider, that those who are actually using the 100-500mm are appreciating it so much!

 

[AlanF]

I see the 100-500 as a lens of many intelligent compromises, but I've lost interest for now.

Part of the reason is I'm lining up a little bit of work, some headshots for the end of this month, and some interior lifestyle/environmental for next month.

I did enjoy my 100-400mm II very much, and often regret selling it. On the other hand, I remember being frustrated in some of my favorite light with f/5.6--but that was with the 5DIV's sensor. I'm sure the R5 is great at f/7.1.

Still, it is encouraging to hear, for when I reconsider, that those who are actually using the 100-500mm are appreciating it so much!

If you were in the UK, I'd offer you my second copy of the 100-400mm II at a knockdown price.

 

[Bdbtoys]

I'm really impressed with the 100-500 (although, I admit I never had anything longer than 200mm in full frame before). Now that I have it, I can't see not having it.

I wanted a long range lenses on RF mount so my choices were 100-500, 600, or 800 (with 1.4x/2x if need be). I chose to skip the 600/800 for the versatility of the 100-500 (and extend if needed). However the use of the extenders are odd to say the least. 300-600 doesn't sound bad... until you realize you're almost fully extended for that range, so you're basically walking around with an extended barrel if you decide to use it. However given the choice of carrying around 1 lens + 1 or 2 extenders to go from 100-1000 sounded nice (vs multiple lenses). Also, I really like the lens in general... I have not used the Sigma.. but I would look at the native again when you really are in the market for it.

But I totally get where you are coming from with 'selective GAS'. I want a wide angle lens (yes I'm looking at you 13-35 2.8)... but I don't currently see an immediate need to shoot under 24mm. So it's sit on my wish list (not my need list). Also wouldn't mind getting the 24-105 again (kind of regret selling that one) for a carry around to pair with the 100-500 (24-1000 w/ 2 lenses and a 2x converter seems nice on trail)... but again, I already have 24-105 covered with other lenses (in better fstop) so it's more convenience than need... so that one waits as well (I would get the wide angle first).

 

[privatebydesign]

You know this is might be a trigger for yet another DSLR vs Mirrorless debate, right ?

For me, the main mirrorless advantages are:

1. no need for the darn AF micro adjustment
2. no need for reading glasses to playback photos or access menus in the EVF because of the diopter adjustment
3. the AF points cover pretty much the entire screen, unlike the DSLR's where they're clustered in the middle
4. the R5 mechanical shutter noise is a whisper compared to the 1DX Mark III
5. the photo and the histogram visible in the EVF before you even take the shot
6. way better ergonomics for shooting videos (EVF vs back LCD)...although I don't really shoot much video

So, that's a tiny bit more than just the AF and NONE of the above mentioned points is something you can have on a DSLR.

I don't disagree that there are many differences between DSLR's and MILC's, my point was purely from a photographic consideration the only 'better' metric is AF, eye AF is a killer feature and is a reason for many to change systems immediately.

But there are advantages in the user experience the other way too, I still struggle to look through an EVF for hours at a time, I am used to batteries that last all day of actual shooting, not a few hundred shots, I am invested in CFast cards to the tune of several thousand dollars, etc etc, none of these change the actual images out of the cameras, they just give a different user experience, eye AF gives an appreciably better keeper rate for many disciplines.

But actual photographic metrics, DR, iso performance, etc are not game changing between EF and RF that I have seen, just better keeper rates because of the eye AF.

 

[unfocused]

The trouble with a road map is it commits you to a path before you have all the data you might use to determine that path.

Canon certainly knows what they plan to release over the next 12-18 months and probably longer. If you prefer a different term, then maybe "planned releases" would be more suitable. Many of the "rumors" reported by Canon Rumors Guy could easily be confirmed by Canon simply saying that over the next 18 months they plan to bring three new RF mount cameras to market, a flagship, an APS-C and a high resolution. If any of those cameras are going to come out in the next year or so, Canon already has them well under development and may even be in the final stages of testing.

For instance Canon will make another DSLR if they believe there is the demand, if there isn’t they won’t, how can they commit to anything in this time of extreme transition? Sure RF is the future, but given the worldwide uncertainty how quickly will people transition, what people do transition earlier will impact the best lens selection for that group of users, or it might push development in other lens areas to entice more people to transition.

I never mentioned DSLRs in my post. But, on that topic. Nikon already has sufficient data to warrant them developing additional new DSLRs and DSLR lenses. Certainly Canon has access to the same or similar data.

 

[privatebydesign]

Canon certainly knows what they plan to release over the next 12-18 months and probably longer. If you prefer a different term, then maybe "planned releases" would be more suitable. Many of the "rumors" reported by Canon Rumors Guy could easily be confirmed by Canon simply saying that over the next 18 months they plan to bring three new RF mount cameras to market, a flagship, an APS-C and a high resolution. If any of those cameras are going to come out in the next year or so, Canon already has them well under development and may even be in the final stages of testing.



I never mentioned DSLRs in my post. But, on that topic. Nikon already has sufficient data to warrant them developing additional new DSLRs and DSLR lenses. Certainly Canon has access to the same or similar data.

I'm not saying it wouldn't be nice to know, what I'm saying is Canon don't see it as a worthwhile option. If they did they would do it regularly, but as has been pointed out they never do. Maybe they are not 100% sure what they will actually commit to production given these uniquely uncertain times, maybe they don't want to telegraph their intentions to their competitors, I don't know the reason they don't, but in general they don't.

I'd take a lead from Nikon as an almost certain confirmation that Canon won't, unfortunately! They are like two contrary children arguing, if one mounts a lens clockwise the other does it counter clockwise, if one has dials move one way the other does it the other way...

 

[Del Paso]

After having used my 100-400 II bought immediately after its introduction, pixelpeeping it with a wide smile each time, I still cannot see a reason to buy the RF 100-500. (Even though I'm convinced the RF 100-500 is a bit better).
Of course, had I started with mirrorless, things could be different.
But the limited used of extenders is a real drawback...

 

[YuengLinger]

Update: GAS prevailed, I couldn't pull the trigger for the Sigma 150-600mm, I was instantly overruled by my wife when I showed her the ef 500mm f/4 II refurbished on sale, and so I'm back on the 100-500mm waiting list.

Looks like holidays are going to be de facto lockdown. Neighbors' kids have been sent home because of Covid in their classes, so my kids, who are luckier, are going to have only the old man to play with for three weeks. I'm blessed! Truly, they are good kids, not too demanding, and will patiently hike for hours.

The older one has a Canon G12 (?) that her mom doesn't use, so she can pretend to be a photographer too! The younger one will just collect things. All kinds of things when we hike. I really hope I can be there with camera ready next time my wife discovers a toad in a pants pocket.

 

[AlanF]

Update: GAS prevailed, I couldn't pull the trigger for the Sigma 150-600mm, I was instantly overruled by my wife when I showed her the ef 500mm f/4 II refurbished on sale, and so I'm back on the 100-500mm waiting list.

Looks like holidays are going to be de facto lockdown. Neighbors' kids have been sent home because of Covid in their classes, so my kids, who are luckier, are going to have only the old man to play with for three weeks. I'm blessed! Truly, they are good kids, not too demanding, and will patiently hike for hours.

The older one has a Canon G12 (?) that her mom doesn't use, so she can pretend to be a photographer too! The younger one will just collect things. All kinds of things when we hike. I really hope I can be there with camera ready next time my wife discovers a toad in a pants pocket.

The Sigma 150-600mm C is an excellent lens for the money. However, the 100-500mm out-resolves and has better contrast than the Sigma at 600mm on the R5 although being 100mm shorter, and the AF is much faster. So, when the pain of spending nearly $3000 has subsided, you won't regret the quality gear you have bought and it's about a lb lighter.