Issues with RF100-500

kimster

EOS M50
Jul 9, 2020
40
42
I think I mentioned it was the R5 and that at one point canon Virginia wanted the R5 to “fine tune” it with the lens. However, I sent them more raw images as requested, using a link they sent. For some reason they decided to send the lens back to me before reviewing them. I am still to receive my lens! I have been without it for 4 weeks now and still no closer to a resolution (pardon the pun). After shipping my lens they finally reviewed the raw files and agreed that there is an issue. Who knows where my lens actually was? Canon service is shocking and as far as the R system goes, I don’t think they know what they are doing. I hate to do it but I will be selling the lens to KEH and buying a new copy.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Del Paso

AlanF

Stay at home
CR Pro
Aug 16, 2012
7,748
8,462
Why would it have poor AF on an R? Other than the fact the R doesn’t have animal eye AF, is there some other limitation?
As I wrote, all the reviews so far state that the AF of the 100-500mm on the R is poor, and we know that in general AF on the R is relatively slow for action.
 

JPAZ

If only I knew what I was doing.....
CR Pro
Sep 8, 2012
1,048
166
Here is an example of my disappointment with the RF100-500. About 50% crop, animal Eye AF was locked on, ISO 1000, 500mm, f8, 1/2000 sec.
By comparison I am attaching an image from my RF800. 75% crop (I mean the image is about 25% of original), ISO 1000, f11 obvs, 1/2000 sec.
BTW, that shot with the RF 800 bears mentioning. I am trying to come to terms with whether that lens is worth getting. My EF 100-400 with 1.4x and adapter or my EF 300 f/2.8 ii with 2x and adapter can give spectacular results but is quite a big setup to carry.

Let us know how the 100-500 repair or replacement works out.
 
Last edited:

Ramage

EOS R5
CR Pro
Aug 27, 2019
484
965
@kimster

Why would you sell a lens to KEH that you suspect is no good? Canon should be making you whole.

Seems pretty dishonest to me.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AlanF

Rule556

I see no reason for recording the obvious. -Weston
Dec 19, 2019
99
100
Seattle
www.flickr.com
As I wrote, all the reviews so far state that the AF of the 100-500mm on the R is poor, and we know that in general AF on the R is relatively slow for action.
I mean, I've heard this too, but as an R owner who has the 100-500mm on his list at some point, I'm wondering if it's just that the camera isn't getting the most out of the lens due to the fact it has slower AF acquisition across the board, or if there's a specific limitation inherent with the combination of R and the 100-500mm. I mean, if I purchase this lens will it behave worse than my RF 70-200mm f/2.8, or will it just be that the lens has more ability that the camera can't really access due to it not having the latest AF capability of the R5? Because if that's the case, I'll wait a couple of years until I decide to upgrade my R. If it's the camera, then I can still find many applications for this lens that don't require super fast animal and human eye AF for BIF and action sports.

TLDR: The R is generally adequate for my use, but I do run up against its limitations occasionally. Will this lens be worse, or will it work just as well as my other RF lenses in terms of AF acquisition.

Thanks for the response.
 

Czardoom

EOS 90D
Jan 27, 2020
178
398
I think I mentioned it was the R5 and that at one point canon Virginia wanted the R5 to “fine tune” it with the lens. However, I sent them more raw images as requested, using a link they sent. For some reason they decided to send the lens back to me before reviewing them. I am still to receive my lens! I have been without it for 4 weeks now and still no closer to a resolution (pardon the pun). After shipping my lens they finally reviewed the raw files and agreed that there is an issue. Who knows where my lens actually was? Canon service is shocking and as far as the R system goes, I don’t think they know what they are doing. I hate to do it but I will be selling the lens to KEH and buying a new copy.
If Canon finally agreed there is an issue, then you need to either get a replacement or a refund. Knowing there is an issue and then selling it to KEH is not the solution - someelse will be getting a bad lens and it will be your fault. Presumably, your lens is under warranty. You should not have to buy a new one.
 

AlanF

Stay at home
CR Pro
Aug 16, 2012
7,748
8,462
I mean, I've heard this too, but as an R owner who has the 100-500mm on his list at some point, I'm wondering if it's just that the camera isn't getting the most out of the lens due to the fact it has slower AF acquisition across the board, or if there's a specific limitation inherent with the combination of R and the 100-500mm. I mean, if I purchase this lens will it behave worse than my RF 70-200mm f/2.8, or will it just be that the lens has more ability that the camera can't really access due to it not having the latest AF capability of the R5? Because if that's the case, I'll wait a couple of years until I decide to upgrade my R. If it's the camera, then I can still find many applications for this lens that don't require super fast animal and human eye AF for BIF and action sports.

TLDR: The R is generally adequate for my use, but I do run up against its limitations occasionally. Will this lens be worse, or will it work just as well as my other RF lenses in terms of AF acquisition.

Thanks for the response.
It's something you will have to try for yourself. Here are a couple of reviews:
 

Rule556

I see no reason for recording the obvious. -Weston
Dec 19, 2019
99
100
Seattle
www.flickr.com
It's something you will have to try for yourself. Here are a couple of reviews:
Thank you, I hadn't seen the second link you shared. Gordon's review didn't really answer the question. Frankly I think it's more of "you won't get the most out of it until you upgrade your body" situation rather than a specific issue that makes the lens a non-starter with an R. It's obviously meant to really shine with the animal eye AF of the R5 and R6, but I have a hard time believing that it wouldn't work just fine for applications like telephoto landscapes and aviation photography. I mean, I could do decent aviation photography with my 6D and my EF 70-300mm non L lens, so I can't imagine this would be more limiting than that.

Edited to add: Just started reading the second link, and apparently there was some sort of issue. I'll keep looking to see if that issue has been resolved with firmware, or I'll just wait until it's time to upgrade my R. Disappointing really.
 

koenkooi

EOS 5D Mark IV
CR Pro
Feb 25, 2015
1,537
1,359
I had missed that the OP hadn't mentioned which R it is. Reviewers all write that the 100-500mm has poor AF on the R and RP. Well spotted.

FWIW, when I used the 100-500 on my RP it didn't show any new AF issues, it behaved just like other tele lenses. The sensor in the RP is a lot slower than the R one, so I suspect the slowness hides a lot of issues the R runs into.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rule556

kimster

EOS M50
Jul 9, 2020
40
42
So I got my lens back after 4 weeks. Put it on a tripod, used single shot. Awful, soft images. RF70-200 hand held for the same shot is sharp.
I told canon and now they have sent me a fedex label for me to send in the R5 and send the RF100-500 back. They are talking about fine tuning.
I have no faith and wonder how long I will be without my camera and lens this time.
At this point I wish I had not traded up from my 5DIV yet. I guess this may be my final lesson about being an early adopter.
PS - my RF lens came back with two pages from the 5D manual about lens settings!
 

Ramage

EOS R5
CR Pro
Aug 27, 2019
484
965
So I got my lens back after 4 weeks. Put it on a tripod, used single shot. Awful, soft images. RF70-200 hand held for the same shot is sharp.
I told canon and now they have sent me a fedex label for me to send in the R5 and send the RF100-500 back. They are talking about fine tuning.
I have no faith and wonder how long I will be without my camera and lens this time.
At this point I wish I had not traded up from my 5DIV yet. I guess this may be my final lesson about being an early adopter.
PS - my RF lens came back with two pages from the 5D manual about lens settings!
You might be better off selling the R5 and getting a new 5DIV, you will for sure be able to sell it and maybe in a year or so after Canon has worked out all the bugs you can try again.

Win some lose some.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Del Paso

kimster

EOS M50
Jul 9, 2020
40
42
Today I sent my R5 and RF100-500 back to Canon in Virginia. We will see what they come up with.
When I previously mentioned selling the RF100-500 to KEH it was because I know that KEH test lenses before they pay you and it would be my independent check of the lens.
 

AlanF

Stay at home
CR Pro
Aug 16, 2012
7,748
8,462
Today I sent my R5 and RF100-500 back to Canon in Virginia. We will see what they come up with.
When I previously mentioned selling the RF100-500 to KEH it was because I know that KEH test lenses before they pay you and it would be my independent check of the lens.
I found it difficult to believe that KEH or any used lens dealer (other than lensrentals) would check with any rigour, if at all, the sharpness of a lens, which was the fault that your lens has, so I checked - and they don't. (They leave things like that to the buyer under their return policies, and there aren't manufacturers' specs for sharpness). This is what they do:

Lenses - KEH tests​

  1. Visually inspect the physical condition of the lens including grips, mount area, filter ring threads, hood locking tabs and more.
  2. Thoroughly examine the glass from the front, rear and sides with a bright light, checking for any anomalies throughout the lens like haze, dust, fungus, scratches, cleaning marks or damage.
  3. Mount the lens to a test camera body.
  4. Rotate the focus, zoom and aperture rings through their full range for stiffness, loose areas, and roughness or grit.
  5. Test autofocus accuracy both near and far if applicable, taking note of any squeaks or sounds.
  6. Check aperture response at widest and smallest, taking note of any sticky apertures or oil spots.
  7. Activate image stabilization if applicable to confirm proper engagement.
  8. Test lens shutter speeds if applicable from 1 second to the fastest speed, making sure that the shutter opens smoothly and completely.
  9. Test any buttons or switches on the lens including focus hold, depth of field preview or zoom locks.
  10. Note any problems, damage, wear, loose or missing pieces and confirm grade before sending to the next step.

I have bought excellent used lenses from reputable dealers, but also several that had poor sharpness, decentering etc and otherwise cosmetically good.
 
Last edited:

Czardoom

EOS 90D
Jan 27, 2020
178
398
I had missed that the OP hadn't mentioned which R it is. Reviewers all write that the 100-500mm has poor AF on the R and RP. Well spotted.
I haven't read those reviews, so I may be mistaken, but I would imagine the difference between the R and the newer R5 and R6 would mainly be with moving targets as those cameras have better tracking. I rented the RF 100-500 and using my R camera, had no AF issues with static subject whatsoever. I am not experienced with a tele zoom with a reach of 500mm, but every shot the AF was extremely fast and accurate. So, not sure what the deal is with the R, but personally I found the AF to be excellent on my R for non-moving targets.
 
  • Love
Reactions: Rule556

AlanF

Stay at home
CR Pro
Aug 16, 2012
7,748
8,462
I haven't read those reviews, so I may be mistaken, but I would imagine the difference between the R and the newer R5 and R6 would mainly be with moving targets as those cameras have better tracking. I rented the RF 100-500 and using my R camera, had no AF issues with static subject whatsoever. I am not experienced with a tele zoom with a reach of 500mm, but every shot the AF was extremely fast and accurate. So, not sure what the deal is with the R, but personally I found the AF to be excellent on my R for non-moving targets.
They are interesting reviews and well worth reading.
 

kimster

EOS M50
Jul 9, 2020
40
42
My RF100-500 and R5 are going back to Canon again today.
The previous "repair" seemed to make the lens worse!
Canon reviewed images I sent them and agreed that there is an issue.
Yesterday I went out and took a number of images with both the 100-500 and RF70-200. Same subjects, same lighting and settings.
The RF100-500 images are appreciably worse in every case, actually unusable.
I have effectively been unable to take any decent bird pictures for 4 months.
Canon have requested that I send the SD card along with the camera and lens.
This will be the third time that the lens has gone back, second time for the camera.
I have to say that my confidence in Canon service is extremely low.
 

Fischer

EOS RP
Mar 17, 2020
237
171
Sad to hear your story. Good luck. I do not have good memories of Canon service myself.

I actually just saw this 2 minutes after happily ordering the lens after I got a very rare 15% discount offer - and the seller still had one lens in stock :love: . Now I'm in doubt if it was wise to be lured by the otherwise excellent reviews. :eek:

Crossing fingers for us both.
 

kimster

EOS M50
Jul 9, 2020
40
42
Sad to hear your story. Good luck. I do not have good memories of Canon service myself.

I actually just saw this 2 minutes after happily ordering the lens after I got a very rare 15% discount offer - and the seller still had one lens in stock :love: . Now I'm in doubt if it was wise to be lured by the otherwise excellent reviews. :eek:

Crossing fingers for us both.
Everything I see from others shows that the lens design is excellent. I think I was unlucky to get a bad lens. I was doubly unlucky to get the service techs that looked at my lens and don't seem to know what they are doing. I asked them for the test images they made after my repair. They said they don't keep them! Hmmmmmmmmm
 
  • Haha
Reactions: YuengLinger
<-- start Taboola -->