Canon RF 200-800 Initial Review
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 30 ธ.ค. 2023
- I had the chance to take the new Canon 200-800mm lens out for a couple of hours the other day. Here are some of my initial thoughts. (Apologies for the wind noise - I'll get my hands on a proper microphone.) If you've used it, how did you like it? If you haven't and you'd like some additional information, what would you like to know more about? I didn't mention the IS which I also found to be quite decent. This is not a low light lens unless you like shooting at higher ISO. But there are quite a number of circumstances where it would be a very practical piece of kit. #canonphotography
My back up drive on the road:
amzn.to/3SH5zDK
One of my drones (DJI Mini 4 Pro):
amzn.to/4eoNe8N
Micro SD card (128 GB):
amzn.to/3xnzIBC
Lens filters for the DJI Mini 4 Pro:
amzn.to/3VzDLCK
Newest trail camera I purchased (partly solar powered):
amzn.to/3zc4ttS
Power bank to charge accessories including drone:
amzn.to/4eriq7b
* Please note that the above links are Amazon Associate links. As such, I earn a small commission from your purchase at no extra cost to you.
You are the first person I've watched who gave an authentic representation of this lens. I had someone tell me a few days ago that "F/9 isn't a problem". And I said, "Then you would buy a 24-70 F/9 if someone made one?" Dead silence. Of course he wouldn't. No one would. But F/9 is F/9 is F/9. In higher latitudes it's a seasonal lens. Even in a sunny location, early mornings and late evenings are a challenge. I finally got my hands on one, and it's a good lens for the right use cases. And even though it's small and light... for an 800mm lens, that doesn't mean it's small and light. I would hate to lug it around all day and find that I never had the light I wanted to swap it for another lens. So, when it's the right situation, this is a good lens.
One thing I didn't have a chance to do was put it on an R7. I would like to see how much they are doing with lens correction on this lens, and if that's part of the reason why it lacks some sharpness on the R7. I don't think it behaves exactly the same between the R5 and the R7. Food for thought.
It's a nice video, but the main thing you did was make me trust you. The early adopter bandwagon really does a disservice to a lot of amateur photographers, especially.
Sorry, one more thing for people considering this lens. Watch some of the many rah-rah videos on YT right now. Pay close attention to the shadows. Look at the shadows of the reviewers, and then the shadows of the birds they photograph. I like it when things add up. One I watched earlier showed that he tood shots at 1/1,600, F/9, and an ISO of 400. And he kept showing shots that made it look like a sort of lower-light situation. Reach your own conclusions. But I REALLY appreciate hearing someone (finally) talk about what situations match the lens the best. Managing expectations is a big part of any purchase.
Thanks very much. I really appreciate this. Your statement ‘at higher latitudes, this is a seasonal lens’ is spot on. Around here I photograph short eared owls in flight during the winter months. I tend to photograph things that move. Given the number of cloudy days we have, this lens wouldn’t come with me often.
I haven’t tried it on a R7. Switched to full frame years ago and haven’t looked back. I did have both the 7D and 7D but I had challenges with their AF systems. Could entirely be the user of course. Anyhow, would also be interested to know how the lens is on a R7. A few friends have that camera and seem to like it.
It's nice to see you getting the views and subscribers that you've deserved for a while. Good on you!
A bit surprising. 😊 But thank you.
Living in a deeply wooded area, I've been very happy with the RF 800 with it's constant f/11 on both the R5 and R6. I've shot everything from humming birds to black bears and no complaits for me. I'm on the B&H waiting list for the RF200-800. .
I'm old and learned photography shooting Kodachrome 25. I shot many a high school night football game shooting TriX 400 and a fixed apreture 400mm lens on a Canon T90.
That is good to hear. Considering what you wrote, I’m sure you’ll like the 200-800. It’s a versatile lens but obviously there is no single tool for every situation. Once you’ve put the lens through its paces, it would be great to hear your feedback on it.
Anyone who "grew up" shooting film will know how to shoot this lens without a problem. We cut our eye teeth on 5.6 telephotos and 100 or 200 speed Kodachrome or Fuji chrome film. Occasionally we might have bitten the bullet and bought a roll or two of 400, heaven forbid! Somehow, we managed to get some pretty good images on slides! F9 is only 1 and 1/3 stops slower than 5.6, and today almost any camera on the market can easily take low noise images (especially with the assistance of programs like Topaz, On1 and other fine noise reduction softwares), at 3200, 5000 and some even higher! That's at least 3 stops improvement over the old films we used to shoot! Not to mention the excellent image stabilization in today's cameras! I think digital photography has spoiled us. Sure, you are not going to shoot fast action at dawn, but this lens will still provide the user with some incredible opportunities.
Very nice short video, I have one on order and I can’t wait to get my hands on it.
I also live in Sunny Sunny Australia so 10 months of the year it will be fantastic for this lens.
I have watched loads of videos about cameras and lens and you did this one very well.
Thank you. 👍😀
Thanks Joseph. For living in Oz, I think you’ll be very happy with this - particularly if you do video as well. Appreciate you stopping by here for a look. Spent 6 months your way years ago. Will never forget it.
Thanx for your video ... information and examples.
Thanks for watching. 😊
Thanks Henrik, nice to see a review in weather similar to here in the UK and certainly food for thought. I will say that I've had some fairly decent results in overcast conditions using the RF600mm f11 on an R6 but then again I'm a very amateur hobbyist who's easily pleased! Look forward to checking out more of your videos.
Appreciate it Jack. Nice to get some feedback on the 600 f11. I tend to photograph things that move and often in low light - so fast lenses come in handy. Having said that, I can absolutely see circumstances where slower lenses work just fine. There are always trade offs I suppose.
Beautiful fotos and very interesting presentation.
Thank you kindly.
Great unbiased review
Appreciate that, thank you.
Nice Video I am very happy with mine love how sharp it is. It is amazing for Video. Love the 800 reach on this Canon 200-800
You also make for an excellent director, producer and editor. Thank you. 😊
Always the best content, Henrik. Based on the shots and video you’ve shared, you’re gear opinions are always welcomed. Thanks!
Don’t laugh, but which Arcteryx jacket is that?
Much appreciated, thank you. 😊. Jacket is the Beta AR.
Most interesting. Thanks Henrik. I have considered this lens as an option for when I am guiding in a boat and can't heft around a big 500 or 600...but since I work on the coast I am pretty hesitant about the narrow apertures for photos. But, as you say, it certainly has more appeal for video.
You know, I'm right on the fence for this lens. I can see many instances where it'd be fantastic for video. For still, a bit less appealing but still darn tempting.
@@love4wildlife If I could rent one to test it out, I would, but neither Canon or Vistek have them yet.
Great hones you. Great.and honest video. Just waiting for mine. I live in NY and Colorado so lots of sun. Especially in the desert. Thanks. I'm subscribing.
Definitely a very versatile lens. I’m sure you’ll get lots of use out of it.
Your review is spot on. For enthusiasts, the 200-800 is probably the only choice no matter where you live to get up to 800mm with reasonable image quality. Bad luck it completely fails in lowish light situations, but what would be the alternative? I just love it and when it's cloudy I turn to turtles, snails, chameleons or landscape photography. Plus and knowing I'll never be able nor willing to shell out 15-20k for a prime lens, the availability of an absolutely crazy zoom range is fantastic.
“….but what would be the alternative”. This is a good point. And as you said, there really isn’t one. As long as the buyer is aware of the limitations, I think the lens definitely has a place in many people’s camera bag. It is reasonably priced, relatively light, a decent size for travel/carry and it is incredibly versatile.
How does it "completely fail" in low light? Twenty years ago I was shooting in low light with 400 speed Ektachrome and a 5.6 telephoto. Still have the slides to prove it! F9 is 1 and 1/3 stops slower, and I have a camera that is easily capable of shooting at 3200, 5000 or 6400 ISO with pretty low noise, and what little there is can easily be removed in post with any of a dozen excellent programs! Not to mention, I have up to three or four stops of image stabilization! No, I'm not going to be shooting a lot of fast action at dawn, but not everything I shoot is fast action. I have an f4 600 for when I need it, but this lens can be carried a lot of places I may not want to lug the bigger lens!
@@alansach8437 You provide the answers yourself - you take a fast prime or don't shoot action in low light or throw AI at it. :-) When its aperture is sufficient it's a phantastic lens.
Hi neighbour,that was a good review.I'd love to give it a try but i'd have to rent it or something like that first,I can't afford buying just to try.I'm using a Sigma 150-600mm and days like today ,I was shooting at f9 most of the day (using a 1.4x III).I found you because I was looking reviews for this lens,I subed so I can watch more from you....cheers from Burnaby!
Hey all the way from North Van. Thanks for stopping by. How do you like the Sigma?
@@love4wildlife It did a great job with the 90D,then I made the mistake of trying a mirrorless ,sold the 90D and bought a R10 (budget descision) ,the R10 is alot more fun than the 90D.It's great in low light but now I feel like the Sigma isn't exactly able to keep up with how fast the R10 is.I still get really good shots,more keepers than the 90D ,I just bought a 1.4X III T/C from a friend and it does unexpectedly works with both but I'm sure the RF200-800,being that it's meant to work on RF mounts would be much better than one that wasn't meant for mirrorless cameras.
I would agree with all of that. Switched to full frame cameras with the 5D Mark III and have never looked back.@@CJC051
Hi Buddy, HNY, I just came across this amazing knowledgeable video. thanks so much for the insight.
Hey pal. Thanks. Got your other message and have replied. 🙂
What camera are you using it with. Great photos. I am also on the island and love it here. How do you think it would do on the water in summer time. Will be on a boat taking pics of whales most of the season and was considering this lens but worry about haze off the water Thoughts. And if not this lens any recommendations for a longer lens on a boat. Have the 100-500 with 1.4 tele. But we always want more Thanks for the video
Hi Penny. I used it with a R5. Lens should do ok in the summer on the water assuming you’ll have decent light. With a rocking boat and moving subjects, you naturally need to maintain a higher shutter speed. The good news is that most recent cameras can tolerate higher ISO and there are some good noise reduction programs available for post processing.
I took my copy (on an R6II) out to Magnuson Park in Seattle on a drizzly morning a few days after Christmas. Not my lifetime best shots, no, but still at least as good as I can get from the RF 100-500 under similar lighting.
An 89mm entrance pupil is slightly smaller than the Nikon/Sony's 95mm, but it's close enough that the extra 200mm easily carries the day. For comparable reach, your only better options are going to be the discontinued EF 500/4 (125mm) or one of the Great Whites (150mm).
I think it really comes down to personal preferences. Seattle gets much of the same weather as we do here. On a day like the one you described, there is no way I could get useable, for example, short eared owls in flight. But not everyone shoots short eared owls in flight. For static or slow moving shots, the lens would likely be fine - particularly with cameras capable of good output at higher ISO. So my comment on this isn’t intended to be a right vs wrong but merely as a FYI as to what the limitations of the lens might be. Appreciate your thoughts. I’d be curious to know how you use the lens (photo, video, both) and what, if any, other limitations you’ve come across. I’m tempted to get one for video use.
@@love4wildlife Yep, owls in flight would be a no-go in PNW Grey Season. Eagles, gulls, or herons on an overcast mid-day should be doable. One of my favorite shots ever was a bald eagle raiding the heron rookery on an overcast spring day at the Chittenden locks, and I got that with the 800/11 on an RP.
I might be able to swing $3k for a refurbished 500/4 (extending to 700/5.6 or 1000/8), but short of used-car prices I'm not sure what lens could capture short-eared owls in flight without really cranking the ISO.
Ahhh, good stuff. I use a 600 f4 often with a 1.4x during winter. Took some serious savings to get. For flight shots, it still has to be cranked up as you mentioned but it does get you opportunities that other lenses won’t. I suppose that’s the trade off. A friend uses the 400 2.8 which, although shorter focal length, he uses with great success. Of course, not cheap either. @@drmathochist06
thanks.... the 200-800 have nice video specs 🙂
It sure does.
Hello Henrik, great content !! In your opinion , which is better , canon R7 wit 100-500 or canon r6 mk2 with 200-800 for bird photography ? thank you !
It’s a good question. I went full frame years ago and have never looked back. So my bias would be towards the R6 II with the 200-800.
The R7 has a diffraction limit of about f/6.3 and the R6 f/11 and the R5 f/9 . I would not use the new 200-800 on an R7 and expect sharp results at the long end. With the 100-500 on an R7 you are getting an crop equivalent of 800mm and you are just outside the limit of visible diffraction effects so it should not be too much an issue. The 100-500 has dual motors to focus quickly, but has more trouble on crop sensors in low light. The R6 II is going to be better in lower light in terms of ISO performance and autofocus capability and has a better diffraction limit. If you want the best images in lower light, get the full frame and the lower aperture lenses. I have the R5 and R3, and use the 100-500mm. I sold my R7 as I was just not happy with the end results. Just not worth the hassle in low light. Sometimes reach is not worth the decrease in image quality and enjoyment of photography. The have the 1.4x teleconverter, but do not use it on the 100-500mm, only on my recently reacquired 600mm prime for pretty much the same reason.
Hi , is the canon EF 100. -500 mm or this lens better for my canon r 10, I currently own a canon EF 600 mm f11
Great video
It’s hard to say without knowing more information. But generally if you shoot predominantly in a sunny and bright area and/or you do video, I’d go with the 200-800.
Isn't there a ring to adjust the smoothness of the zoom?
And I always don't get it, why mention that a zoom lens is getting longer while zooming. Thats for most lenses, except the old EF 70-200 and I think only one wideangle lens (EF16-35 f/4). The majority of the lenses does extend. And the difference you can see, if you compare RF 70-200 and the EF 70-200. The RFs are much shorter due to external zoom... and I like that a lot. Propably you can design such a lens also to not extend, and then it would be always ... what 50cm long? And I think the weather sealing has rubber on this zoom mechanism too.
But you shot very remarkable pics here, thank you.
I too like that an external zoom lens collapses to a shorter length than would be possible with an internal zoom. Of course there are tradeoffs, one of which is less secure weather and dust sealing, but reasonable precautions can make up for that, and it's not like there is no sealing.
Yes, as you correctly mentioned, there is a ring to adjust the smoothness. Even with that adjusted all the way, it is not a smooth zoom. However, that doesn’t necessarily matter much on the photo side. For video however, it does. Having said that, it’s certainly not a deal breaker. The zoom length will also matter for tripod use (balancing). Weather sealing is likely pretty good but not at the L series level. For its price point, this is a great and incredibly versatile lens. Appreciate your thoughtful input.
Buy it? How did you even get one? They are back ordered for months everywhere.
A good friend of mine was one of the first to receive it and he was kind enough to lend it to me.
Henrick I've seen many reviews on this lens I'm still not convinced that it's a very good one , why can't Canon make a good long zoom range lens like Nikon and Sony .
That didnt make sense. The Canon RF 200-800 is a 4x zoom. The Sony 200-600 is only a 3x zoom. What are you talking about ? Nikon dont make anything comparable either.
If you're considering it, why not rent it for a few days to see how you like it? While it won't be for everyone, I can certainly see circumstances where it'd fit the bill just fine. I might just buy it for video,. Given how I shoot stills (often in low light), I would not buy it for that solely.
Olle Nilsson dad?????
Haha. No. Not related that I know of.