Review: Canon RF 100-500mm f/4.5-7.1L IS USM by TDP

Bert63

What’s in da box?
CR Pro
Dec 3, 2017
982
2,185
probably not in my near future buy, I have a 150-600 Sigma.. seems like less range, is the image quality that much better?

For me? Yes. Most folks are saying that it’s better than the 100-400L II and that lens is already better than the Sigma IMO.

I prefer the 100-400L II and a teleconverter, or the 100-400L II naked and a crop to anything I’ve ever seen come out of the Sigma. Just my opinion.

I’ve also read that the Sigma isn’t actually 600mm on the long end - it’s closer to 550mm, but I haven’t verified that myself so YMMV.
 
Last edited:

AlanF

Stay at home
CR Pro
Aug 16, 2012
7,510
7,549
For me? Yes. Most folks are saying that it’s better than the 100-400L II and that lens is already better than the Sigma IMO.

I prefer the 100-400L II and a teleconverter, or the 100-400L II naked and a crop to anything I’ve ever seen come out of the Sigma. Just my opinion.

I’ve also read that the Sigma isn’t actually 600mm on the long end - it’s closer to 550mm, but I haven’t verified that myself so YMMV.
The focal lengths of the zooms increase with distance as focus breathing gets less. I have data to calculate some focal lengths at a distance of 19.5m, which is getting close to the maximum, which I have just done. You are right about the Sigma, but the Canon also falls short.
100-400mm II............................374mm
100-400mm II + 1.4xTC............505mm
100-400mm II + 2.0xTC............704mm
Sigma 150-600mm C @400.....382mm
Sigma 150-600mm C 600.........543mm
 

Bert63

What’s in da box?
CR Pro
Dec 3, 2017
982
2,185
The focal lengths of the zooms increase with distance as focus breathing gets less. I have data to calculate some focal lengths at a distance of 19.5m, which is getting close to the maximum, which I have just done. You are right about the Sigma, but the Canon also falls short.
100-400mm II............................374mm
100-400mm II + 1.4xTC............505mm
100-400mm II + 2.0xTC............704mm
Sigma 150-600mm C @400.....382mm
Sigma 150-600mm C 600.........543mm

My reading led me to the conclusion that the 100-400L II was 383, but close enough.
 

Squawk3000

R5 + RF100-500
CR Pro
Sep 14, 2020
3
4
Canada
www.flickr.com
Are you get sharp IS shots with mechanical or FC shutter? Mine on an R5 can't take a sharp shot at any speed except with electronic shutter. Canon CPS support says they are hearing of problems (Ken Rockwell has reported) and hope for a firmware solution. I'll also be attentive to developments prior to my 30-day purchase window.
I've been having issues with Firmware 1.1.1 R5 and 100-500 in Mode 2 with any shutter mode, while panning, 1/400-1/2000 and continuous shooting above 300mm

Sometimes it's just the beginning of the sequence, it seems like the IS takes a few moments to "free" the horizontal IS and allow the panning motion.
Sometimes everything seems blurry.
Sometimes it's the entire sequence.

If I turn off the IS then the only issues are me being in sync with the object I'm panning. But I miss alot fewer shots.

Static photos are fine. Anytime I'm following something that moves there are issues.
 
  • Like
Reactions: YuengLinger

lawny13

EOS M6 Mark II
Mar 6, 2019
93
65
This lens won’t be as popular as the 100-400 mk1 and 2... because of this huge price step again....
I can buy the mk2 for ~1300€ in 2nd market and for around 2k€ new. Sometimes with cashback of 200+€.

yeah it’s sharp, light but not that bright as I espected. Maybe for 1500€ but not for >3.000€!

True true... but that argument will never work to convince manufacturers to drop the price.

Or rather... if you are selling a lens used you better not be asking for the price of a new and the lastest tech lens around!!

I never get this logic. Like why buy into the RF system at all? Compared to the R5 + 100-500, you can get a 5DIV and a 100-400 on the used market for HALF the price!!! Tsk tsk, what is canon thinking asking those prices for the former combo?? :p