@@kimtran2420 I was shooting for pleasure yesterday - on the drive back from my dad’s house in the Victorian High Country. But I’ve published other videos with images from that lens, and there will be lots more to come. 👍😉
I was keen to see which way you would go. I went for the 100-500mm lens, but that was last year, with no other option available. You made the right decision for landscape. I am keen on bird photography and don't regret going with the 500mm lens. It is not heavier or bigger than the EF lens, if you take the adapter into account (and I don't carry any tripod around).
Makes a lot of sense, Hans. I’d dearly love to have the 100-500, but I just don’t need it for my style of photography. If I started shooting aviation, wildlife of sports again, I wouldn’t hesitate.
@@peterfritzphoto Don't get me wrong, I think that your choice of the smaller 100-400mm lens is the best one for landscape photography! If you really need the 500mm reach, the 45MP from your sensor give you enough room to crop. Looking forward to hear your comments on using this lens! I myself will be very temped to get this lens as well, just because it is so much smaller and lighter than the 500mm version. I wish that Canon would come up with an RF 70-300mm soon. The EF version of that lens is my main lens for concert and other events photography. Starting to get tired of that lens adapter ....
@@hansweichselbaum2534 I know what you mean, Hans. I decided to take the lens out again today, just to test a few more things, and my respect for it has grown. I’ll have to finish the edit tomorrow, though, because I almost fell off the roof of my 4wd while filming, and my leg is blown up like a balloon. It hurts!
Hello, I have an R6, since I am currently traveling and interested in taking pictures of architectures, do you think this lens will do well in that situation? Or is it only good for wildlife? Thank you for your information
Hello. If you’re wanting to shoot close ups of architectural elements (vs a whole building from a short distance away), then yes. It’s fantastic for picking out small details in all sorts of things, whether they’re natural or man-made. It’s also very light and compact. And the R6 handles smaller apertures and low light extremely well, so it’s perfect for this lens. 👍
I bought this lens ready for an air show, it's going to be on ebay very soon, not what I hoped for, its good for lots of other scenarios defo, but I would say that I'm not disappointed, but it couldn't do what I hoped for, I did have better results with the 90D and the 70-300L, It's not an L series lens and it shows. It becomes very apparent when reviewing all the photo's that looked good on the viewfinder, on a decent sized screen it shows that it does not really deliver proper results. Its OK for fast stuff but not good enough for me.
@@peterfritzphoto Using low iso settings like 500 or less with aperture set to f9 and exposures of 1/1000 a lot of the images just aren't sharp as my old L lens, could be me of course! I'm using an R6. And yes I get very sharp pictures on things that aren't planes.
Hey, I hope you are well. I have seen all videos. Very well. I appreciate your work. I have sent an email by ifthekar robin, kindly check it out. and waiting for your reply. Thanks
Mate, I'm shocked this is even shipping at the moment, expected it to be months off! Very keen to see how it goes for you, as I'm in need of a good zoom like this, and it's hard to justify the 100-500. Keep on looking at a Sigma 150-600 second hand, but I'd like to get away from the adapter! On a side note, just picked up the Samyang 14mm myself, seems pretty good, I know you sold your's, but I'd be keen on how that and your 14-35mm compares. Thanking you from locked down Melbourne.
I think I was rather lucky to get this lens so soon. The Samyang RF 14 is very good, but the 14-35 allowed me to simplify my system. I’ll test the 100-400 within the next day or so. But early test shots in low light are very promising!
I'm waiting with bated breath for your follow up video now. Can't wait to see what the image quality is like. It will replace my old 400mm f5.6 prime and I was originally planning on getting the 100-500 for my RP, but that price difference is very appealing. It will be for wildlife most, but I backpack with my gear, so unless the image quality is much worse than the 100-500 it might be the better option regardless of price with that low weight.
The video is coming later today (AEST). It’s pretty bloody good. The eye detect on Lamas is impressive, especially given how their eyes tend to be obstructed by lots of wool - and sharpness and contrast is excellent at f8, 11 and 16. 👍
Mate, I kinda fell off the roof of my 4wd today while shooting some more clips for the full review and my leg is blown up like a balloon - so I’ll finish the edit tomorrow and release the review during the day. Sorry… 🥺
@@peterfritzphoto Mate you really don't have to feel bad about that. I just appreciate you are providing the service of a review as is, and I do appreciate the heads up on the slight delay as well. Get well mate and I look forward to the review when it does come :)
I love photographing wildlife but I only have the old EF 100-400mm Mark I. I am looking to upgrade but I can’t afford the RF 100-500mm. I have the EOS R6. What lens would you buy out of the new RF 100-400mm, the RF600mm or the RF800mm? Or something else? Thanks in advance for any advice given.
Hi Kelly. After using the RF 100-400 for a couple of weeks, now, I can’t recommend it enough. The results it delivers are just as good as the EF 100-400 II, but in a much lighter package. Unless you really need the reach of the 600 or 800mm lenses (which are both excellent from what I’ve seen and read), you will love this lens. Also, the R6 performs really well at high ISOs, so you could always add the 1.4X extender and still have a 600 mm f11 lens, but with a lot more versatility.
I'm really surprised I got it so soon, too. I took some quick test shots tonight at high ISO if very low light, and it was REALLY good. Proper test (my version, anyway) coming before the weekend is over. :-)
@@robertklein5398 You won’t be disappointed. It’s REALLY good. Trying to get the review up tonight, but I half fell off the roof of my 4wd this afternoon and my leg is extremely sore… It’ll be up no later than tomorrow morning AEST.
@@robertklein5398 Thanks, Robert. Trying very hard to finish the edit now and get it uploaded, but it's almost 10:00pm, and I think I need to elevate this leg and rest a bit.
Looks like a great lens for long walks, surprised by the size of it for a 100-400, a good choice for landscape photography. Good review mate - hope you feel 100% again soon.
Thanks, mate. I'm about to head out with it, now. I took a few shots in the front yard late yesterday (pretty much dusk), and was really impressed. Feeling better this morning, despite only a few hours of sleep and a face like a busted arsehole...
![[TH] FS vs BME - VCT Ascension Pacific - Lower Bracket Final](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/wnygqsR2Fig/mqdefault.jpg)
Love your video Peter. You help me decide to get this lens.
Wonderful! Thx, Kim. You won’t regret it. I’m using mine today. 👍
@@peterfritzphoto can’t wait to see you post the video of your photos. Hopefully you will post your pictures too.
@@kimtran2420 I was shooting for pleasure yesterday - on the drive back from my dad’s house in the Victorian High Country. But I’ve published other videos with images from that lens, and there will be lots more to come. 👍😉
I was keen to see which way you would go. I went for the 100-500mm lens, but that was last year, with no other option available. You made the right decision for landscape. I am keen on bird photography and don't regret going with the 500mm lens. It is not heavier or bigger than the EF lens, if you take the adapter into account (and I don't carry any tripod around).
Makes a lot of sense, Hans. I’d dearly love to have the 100-500, but I just don’t need it for my style of photography. If I started shooting aviation, wildlife of sports again, I wouldn’t hesitate.
@@peterfritzphoto Don't get me wrong, I think that your choice of the smaller 100-400mm lens is the best one for landscape photography! If you really need the 500mm reach, the 45MP from your sensor give you enough room to crop. Looking forward to hear your comments on using this lens!
I myself will be very temped to get this lens as well, just because it is so much smaller and lighter than the 500mm version. I wish that Canon would come up with an RF 70-300mm soon. The EF version of that lens is my main lens for concert and other events photography. Starting to get tired of that lens adapter ....
@@hansweichselbaum2534 I know what you mean, Hans. I decided to take the lens out again today, just to test a few more things, and my respect for it has grown. I’ll have to finish the edit tomorrow, though, because I almost fell off the roof of my 4wd while filming, and my leg is blown up like a balloon. It hurts!
Hello, I have an R6, since I am currently traveling and interested in taking pictures of architectures, do you think this lens will do well in that situation? Or is it only good for wildlife? Thank you for your information
Hello. If you’re wanting to shoot close ups of architectural elements (vs a whole building from a short distance away), then yes. It’s fantastic for picking out small details in all sorts of things, whether they’re natural or man-made. It’s also very light and compact. And the R6 handles smaller apertures and low light extremely well, so it’s perfect for this lens. 👍
I bought this lens ready for an air show, it's going to be on ebay very soon, not what I hoped for, its good for lots of other scenarios defo, but I would say that I'm not disappointed, but it couldn't do what I hoped for, I did have better results with the 90D and the 70-300L, It's not an L series lens and it shows. It becomes very apparent when reviewing all the photo's that looked good on the viewfinder, on a decent sized screen it shows that it does not really deliver proper results. Its OK for fast stuff but not good enough for me.
Hi Mike. I’ve used mine almost entirely for landscapes, plus a handful of birds. Where did it fail to impress for you?
@@peterfritzphoto Using low iso settings like 500 or less with aperture set to f9 and exposures of 1/1000 a lot of the images just aren't sharp as my old L lens, could be me of course! I'm using an R6. And yes I get very sharp pictures on things that aren't planes.
Awesome! I think you’re gonna love it👍 Get better soon💉🧬😀
LOL - thanks, Pete. Gonna try and get out with it today.
Hey, I hope you are well. I have seen all videos. Very well. I appreciate your work. I have sent an email by ifthekar robin, kindly check it out.
and waiting for your reply.
Thanks
Alrighty then (unless you’re a scammer...). Thx, Robin.
@@peterfritzphoto waiting for your reply
@@robinmike5018 Checked yesterday. Haven’t received anything.
Can I use the lens on the EOS 2000D
@@petralist8803 Sorry, no. It’s not an RF lens mount on your camera. You’ll need one of Canon’s R-series cameras for this lens.
Mate, I'm shocked this is even shipping at the moment, expected it to be months off! Very keen to see how it goes for you, as I'm in need of a good zoom like this, and it's hard to justify the 100-500. Keep on looking at a Sigma 150-600 second hand, but I'd like to get away from the adapter! On a side note, just picked up the Samyang 14mm myself, seems pretty good, I know you sold your's, but I'd be keen on how that and your 14-35mm compares. Thanking you from locked down Melbourne.
I think I was rather lucky to get this lens so soon. The Samyang RF 14 is very good, but the 14-35 allowed me to simplify my system. I’ll test the 100-400 within the next day or so. But early test shots in low light are very promising!
I'm waiting with bated breath for your follow up video now. Can't wait to see what the image quality is like.
It will replace my old 400mm f5.6 prime and I was originally planning on getting the 100-500 for my RP, but that price difference is very appealing.
It will be for wildlife most, but I backpack with my gear, so unless the image quality is much worse than the 100-500 it might be the better option regardless of price with that low weight.
The video is coming later today (AEST). It’s pretty bloody good. The eye detect on Lamas is impressive, especially given how their eyes tend to be obstructed by lots of wool - and sharpness and contrast is excellent at f8, 11 and 16. 👍
Mate, I kinda fell off the roof of my 4wd today while shooting some more clips for the full review and my leg is blown up like a balloon - so I’ll finish the edit tomorrow and release the review during the day. Sorry… 🥺
@@peterfritzphoto Mate you really don't have to feel bad about that.
I just appreciate you are providing the service of a review as is, and I do appreciate the heads up on the slight delay as well.
Get well mate and I look forward to the review when it does come :)
I love photographing wildlife but I only have the old EF 100-400mm Mark I. I am looking to upgrade but I can’t afford the RF 100-500mm. I have the EOS R6. What lens would you buy out of the new RF 100-400mm, the RF600mm or the RF800mm? Or something else? Thanks in advance for any advice given.
Hi Kelly. After using the RF 100-400 for a couple of weeks, now, I can’t recommend it enough. The results it delivers are just as good as the EF 100-400 II, but in a much lighter package. Unless you really need the reach of the 600 or 800mm lenses (which are both excellent from what I’ve seen and read), you will love this lens. Also, the R6 performs really well at high ISOs, so you could always add the 1.4X extender and still have a 600 mm f11 lens, but with a lot more versatility.
@@peterfritzphoto Thank you so much, I really appreciate the feedback. Looks like I will be pre-ordering the new RF 100-400mm 😁
@@kellyburgess1024 Pleasure, Kelly. 🙂👍
Wow!! I just pre-ordered the lens the other day. I didn't even know it had started shipping. Can't wait to see your videos using this lens.
I'm really surprised I got it so soon, too. I took some quick test shots tonight at high ISO if very low light, and it was REALLY good. Proper test (my version, anyway) coming before the weekend is over. :-)
@@peterfritzphoto - Nice, great to hear.
Hi unboxing.. So far so good.. Please make a review in the real world situation.. 😉👍📷
It’s coming tomorrow. 👍
@@peterfritzphoto i have orderd it in Germany from Canon Achatzi. I will get it in 3 weeks
@@robertklein5398 You won’t be disappointed. It’s REALLY good. Trying to get the review up tonight, but I half fell off the roof of my 4wd this afternoon and my leg is extremely sore… It’ll be up no later than tomorrow morning AEST.
@@peterfritzphoto oh that's not good. I hope you will feel better as soon as possible.
@@robertklein5398 Thanks, Robert. Trying very hard to finish the edit now and get it uploaded, but it's almost 10:00pm, and I think I need to elevate this leg and rest a bit.
Nice sharing 👌
Looks like a great lens for long walks, surprised by the size of it for a 100-400, a good choice for landscape photography. Good review mate - hope you feel 100% again soon.
Thanks, mate. I'm about to head out with it, now. I took a few shots in the front yard late yesterday (pretty much dusk), and was really impressed. Feeling better this morning, despite only a few hours of sleep and a face like a busted arsehole...
I can't believe you got one! I'm really interested in seeing how you enjoy it.
I’m equally shocked! I should have an outdoor review of it ready by tomorrow. 👍