Nah, 500 f/4+ 1.4x or 2x if necessary. Got some great results at 1000mm and much more affordable, and easier to travel and live with, etc. The amount of haze you get with this thing undermines all its reach.
Sure 🙂 I'm a bird photographer, so mostly small birds from 20-30 ft. What's funny, is that I have shot mostly at a 1280mm equivalent, using the 800 F11 on my crop body R7, but now, the 200-800. So the reach would be slightly less than I'm used to, but 1 full stop faster. And I could get that 1200mm on a full frame camera, so that's probably worth another full stop, maybe a little more. So it would be heavy, and not as versatile as my 200-800..... But if I were shooting in very low light, it could make the difference in no shots, and useable ones.
FINALLY!! A photographer that does not speak hysterically Polen like… this is a photo leader I want to go on a tour with, calm, knowledgable and with authority, love his voice!! Visiting Pangolin next year!
I don’t know anyone on TH-cam personally and I wish everyone well. So for sure I am not a hater. But that guy’s tone and pitch makes his reviews are so utterly unwatchable. Really, what’s wrong in being just calm, clear and concise? Why does he have to yell like a petulant child and then do a whole bunch of tomfoolery that just extends the video uselessly? Where is the respect for a viewer’s time?
Great review of the Canon RF 1200! Ignore those troll comments. It's amazing to see their perspective that there's no point in reviewing a lens they can't afford. It's precisely this reason that makes your video so valuable. Thanks for giving us insights into such high-end gear!
Great video Guts. Stood next to you while you shot with that monster while I had a 180-600 with a 1.4x. Abit of crop and i could get similar images. Already have several 20x30 prints hanging on the wall. For what I need from my photos, that was just fine, and far more versatile. I would take the money saved and go back to Svalbard with Pangolin and the R/V Kinfish instead !
Guts, that's an interesting video with some good photos. At around £22k UKP, that's a deposit for a house! Unless a long lost uncle leaves a large amount of cash in his will, I won't be buying one. Do keep the videos coming though 🙂 Regards Jeremy
Very interesting stuff. I'm an avid hobbyist, always looking to improve my technique, but even if I had that kind of disposable income, I'd have a very difficult time justifying such a purchase. However, I do appreciate when professionals demonstrate this kind of exotic equipment. For me, I'd be quite happy if the 200-800 RF would finally be available.
Having such focal length is certainly useful with such distant subjects, and you used it to great effect, some fantastic shots. An interesting optic to be sure - from what I gather, it's essentially a 600 F/4 with a 2x teleconverter permanently affixed. Would be intrigued to know how this lens compares against the OM System 150-400 - which, with its internal 1.25x TC engaged, gives 1000mm equivalent focal length, in a much more compact package. Its also compatible with the 1.4x and 2x TCs, though the effective aperture would be heavily affected.
Thanks so much for showing us this lens. I don't think that I will be needing this $20,000 USD lens, but it is great to know that it is out there should a need arise. Great review!
Hi Guts and Janine - thank you for this review. I'm planning to cruise Svalbard next June, at which time regulations will (I believe) require ships to stay 500m away from polar bears if onshore or near shore. I'll have my 600mm lens with T/Cs; but even with that kit, I'm not sure I'll be able to many of the polar bear shots I'm used to seeing from Svalbard. If not, hopefully the other wildlife and the landscapes will make up for it.
Okay, so you asked what I’d use it for 🙂 Well, 98% of my shooting as it is now, is done with a 1280mm equivalent. Which is the 800 F11 + my crop body R7. I don’t think it would really hurt me too much to “lose a little reach” dropping down to 1200mm 😀 lol So my typical subjects are Warblers, Hummers, and other small songbirds, and I typically shoot them from 20-25 feet. I’d use this lens for the same thing…. But it would be 1 full stop faster, and, it would still be 1200mm on a Full Frame camera…. Preferably the R5 Mk II, as the original R5 had some issues, which is why I sold it to “upgrade” to my R7’s 🙂 It would be cool to get the Full Frame advantage back, and still be able to shoot at 1200mm though. I know a lot guys would say I could do that with a 600 F4 + a 2X TC, which is true, but whether it was that, or this 1200 F8, I still don’t think I’d use it much (the rare exception would be in very low light) because of the lack of versatility, and the weight… price completely aside. For my purposes, the “slow” 200-800 on an improved R7 Mk II would be the holy grail.
Hi Guts. Great review. Definitely a specialty lens. Question: If you were going to Svalbard again on a small ship for 10 days (I am in August 2025) and owned an RF 400 2.8, would you take it and your RF 1.4 & 2x TCs as your main super telephoto? Or, would it be better to rent the RF 200-800 or 600 f/4? I will also bring 2 R5 bodies and my RF 70-200 2.8 & RF 100-500. I don't want to mess up this trip by not having the proper super-telephoto lens. Thank you in advance.
This is an odd lens, it's just a RF600 F4 with a 2x teleconverter built in. I have the RF600 F4 and 2x TC but rarely use it, usually the 1.4 is enough when I need extra reach. The extra length is also an issue like you said, when I upgraded my EF to RF having that built in adapter added just enough length to make it real tight in my one carry on bag, it has to go in on and angle now with the 2x TC it wouldn't fit in either of my carry on bags.
Thanks a lot, can you mention which month of year you visited Svalbard and perhaps also the travel company (as I can see you are not at the time offering such a trip) 🙂
Weare waiting to see what the new rules will be like for next year. At the moment you wont be able to closer than 400m to a polar bear...tricky even for this lens!
The high potential for heat haze and just general vibration (don't breathe) being amplified would seem to work against the lens in all but the most exceptional cases. Slow moving bears at a far distance are one thing but fast moving subjects would be a challenge to locate in the viewfinder. Swing that lens as you follow a subject and nearby people might get hurt. Other than hiring an extra lens carrier to tote that thing around and getting someone else to pay for it, I can think of a few images that would be fun to take with it. Plus, at this focal length, are we not entering telescope territory?
It's a common mistake to think that you get a super telephoto to get more "reach", when you should get a super telephoto to get more "crop". That way, the most common issue with super teles (blur from heat haze) is almost never a problem. My standard "running around" lens is a 600 with 2x converter. Shots are always super crisp when used as above.
@@watchtherocks12 Most often people use super tele lenses to photograph subjects that are too far away for shorter lenses. That's not going to work due to heat haze/distortion, even in the arctic or antarctic. You should be shooting at close distances, where you will get a "good" shot with a shorter lens (e.g. 300mm-600mm) THEN use the super telephoto (800mm and longer) to get tighter shots. So, they aren't for more "reach", they're for a tighter crop. It's why many TH-cam "experts" say that teleconverters (or 800 & 1200mm lenses) aren't sharp, because they aren't using them properly.
An awesome lens for sure. For the money I would rather visit places and use my existing equipment and just be thankful to be at new places, and take in the moment. For sure I would love to do a Pangolin Safari - your houseboat was wonderful! - but the single supplement is a real killer - a shame you don't have the option of pairing up people to see if a share option is doable.
We do try but its quite tricky. We do try to keep the single supplements as low as possible. Maybe check out the Specials on our website as we sometimes get the opportunity to waive the, for last min travel. www.pangolinphoto.com/photo-safari-specials
@@PangolinWildlife thanks. I will do - and in future I will always just ask anyway. After all, you don't get if you don't ask (not that you get if you ask of course!)
I will be joining you in Kasane in January, I originally thought I would bring the RF 100-500L because it is such a great lens, but then opted for the RF 200-800 for the extra reach, thoughts? I am bringing the EF 70-200 2.8L III, the EF 16-35 f4 IS for landscapes and 85 1.4L IS for portraits, but I still have time to pack the 100-500L instead). Do you find the same issues with the 600 f4L that you did with the 1200? I see that a number of the Pangolin photographers actually use the 500 f4L as their prime, so maybe you haven't had the opportunity to use the 600 f4L. Given my current lens collection, I think I would prefer the 600 over the 500, for the added reach for football and airshows, having used the 600 f11 to shoot the Thunderbirds. I have the EF 400 f4 DO and the Sigma 100-300 f2.8. The price point of the RF 800 and RF 1200 is a bit crazy for my limited use scenario, and rental would make more sense for me. The reason I ask is, that I had the opportunity to get the EF 600 f4L from Canon USA for a good price, kinda kicking myself. Had a used copy of the EF 200-400 1.4x f4L from B&H that I end up returning as it had been used hard, (slightly scuffed up, had a slight grind to it changing focal lengths and a lot of internal dust), too much for the 7K price tag, obviously prior use/condition is a major concern with buying the big whites used. I may watch for 200-400 1.4x f4L to go on sale at Canon USA with rumors of the RF 200-500 4L looming in the not so distant future. Also, what did you think of the soft case, I like the hard "suitcase" lens cases of the big whites, miss that now that they have gone to the equally pricey soft case. Thanks Guts, Jeff
I had both the RF 600mm and the EF 200-400mm with me for four weeks in Africa (including a three-night stay at Pangolin's lodge) last year. I used both lenses extensively (the 600mm often with a 1.4 T/C). I also used the EF 200-400mm on two previous trips to Africa. As you may know from having tried it out, the EF 200-400mm is slightly shorter than the RF 600mm but is far heavier and less well-balanced. I can hand-hold both; but whereas the 600mm is a pleasure, the 200-400mm is a pain. If I were starting a new lens collection today, I would not buy the EF 200-400mm (not even at a good discount). There are many other good options now (one of which, you seem already to have). However, I'm anxiously awaiting the RF 200-500mm f/4! Sadly, development seems to be stalled, and I may be waiting a long time.
@@samsgaardstonestorm2029 Thanks. After watching a ton of videos, I see many going with the shorter focal lengths, choosing faster f-stops over reach, so I continue to ponder the best lens selection. The boat on the Chobe River gets closer than I expected to the wildlife, weight factors in with airline restrictions, so much to think about)
The price would have to be much better than a combo of a 600mm F4 and a 2x teleconverter, as I'm sure it's essentially those two items fused together, but the ability to remove the TC would make the combo much more usable.
@@PangolinWildlife take your R5 in your right hand by the grip. The tip of your right ring finger will hit a button on the front of the body that you’re not using. Go into the menu and program that button for crop mode. This button will switch you instantly in and out of crop mode. When you push the button in your eye is looking through the EVF, it will pull up a menu in the EVF or on the back of the screen. Use the scroll button on the top of the camera body with your right index finger to scroll from among the choices you’re given in that pop-up screen. Once you’ve scrolled to the right setting, take your right thumb and push the inner button on the back of the body. This will lock in your selection. You might need to program your camera to be able to use the scroll button in order to switch from mode to mode, when you pop up the menu. If you need to do that, let me know. This is the best feature in the world with the R5. It works because you have a large sensor and I hope it will work on the Mark2. Most of the photographers won’t use this feature because they say they can crop and post. This has nothing to do with cropping in post. Using this feature in the field to take images will give you a better view and more reach and it will certainly help in your animal eye detection auto focusing. Try it out.
Once you make your selection as to what mode you want to shoot in, you don’t even have to press the inner button on the back center wheel of the body. Using back button auto focus or front auto focus, just press one of your rear back button auto focus buttons or halfway to press your front shutter button, and it will move you back into shooting mode. Your crop or non-crop mode will be automatically selected.
Once you pull up the internal menu for shooting modes in and out of crop mode, you might have trouble advancing from frame to frame in that menu. The ideal way to do it is your right index finger on top of the body using the scroll. The default setting in your camera might be to use the FN button on the top of the body near the front shutter button. I find that inconvenient. I found the setting in the camera to use the scroll. Go to the pink menu selection, screen four, AF method selection control. Select the M - N button and select the scroll button. This should do it.
I'd love to try it but at the price I think I'd prefer to try and get closer to the subject. The optics may be incredible but so far out of the reach of the majority of serious photographers. I don't seriously see it as a practical piece of kit. I think Canon may have created a lens for lens sake.
The perfect thing about Guts testing this lens in Svalbard is that new regulations restrict how close ships can get to polar bears. There may be a good case for having long reach there now. However, as others have said, it would seem more flexible and less expensive to bring a 600mm f/4 and pair it with a T/C to get to 840mm or 1200mm equivalent.
🇵🇹 I have an R5 with a 100-500mm lens. When I need a bigger tele, I use the 1.6 crop that the R5 provides and the 1.4x converter. This way I save money and get a 1,120mm tele. 800mm f/7.1 and 1120mm f/10
you definitely need a tripod or a mono pods for one of these expensive heavy canon 1200MM F8 lens and the lens would cost you around £8.000 to £15.000 to buy
A bit too niche for me, I think I'd prefer the 600mm F4 and have 1.4 & 2 x converters, which would still be cheaper and more flexible. Either way I most probably need to work on my bank robbing skills first 😊
I would have to become a CIA subcontractor when one of their Keyhole satellites goes down to pay for the lens - assuming that I could develop the required technique to use it properly!
From what I've read this lens is effectively a 600mm f/4 with a calibrated 2 x extender fitted. I'd rather buy the RF 600mm f/4 and a 1.4 x and 2 x extender and save thousands...
@@PangolinWildlife I watched reviews on the lens when it was announced, where is where I got the info from... Its definitely an interesting bit of kit :) but not interesting enough to drop that amount of money on.....
If only money was not the deciding factor yes .. but not a lens that would get much use for the photographer who spends time in the African wilderness taking wildlife photos in a woodland that will compromise your distance . I don’t think you need more than a 600mm prime . Especially in areas of Africa . Unless it’s open plains like you find in Tanzania or Kenya .
@@PangolinWildlife I have seriously thought about it and would love to, but as a solo traveller the single supplement fee is just too much, it's almost as much as another trip elsewhere! It would be great if you could add smaller rooms (even basic, as I don't need luxury) for solo travellers.
Great if you rob a bank, only it isn't that impressive, it is a 300mm f2.8 with 2 - 2x extenders. I don't see the point of reviewing a lens that hardly anyone can afford and is impractical in the real world. In Africa there is going to be so much heat haze images will be useless.
I’m sorry, but this is a $20.000 lens! Seems lately all Pangolin is showing is hugely expensive lenses. Like that’s the only way to make great pictures. Absolutely fine of course, but if that’s the audience you focus on, I will have to stop following…..
We took this to Svalbard specifically because the bears tend to be quite far away….what lens would you ideally like us to review…lets see if we can do that!
If you had the budget would you consider this lens and if so what would you hope to photograph with it?
Nah, 500 f/4+ 1.4x or 2x if necessary. Got some great results at 1000mm and much more affordable, and easier to travel and live with, etc. The amount of haze you get with this thing undermines all its reach.
No, I think at the end of day it ia very impractical
Sure 🙂 I'm a bird photographer, so mostly small birds from 20-30 ft. What's funny, is that I have shot mostly at a 1280mm equivalent, using the 800 F11 on my crop body R7, but now, the 200-800. So the reach would be slightly less than I'm used to, but 1 full stop faster. And I could get that 1200mm on a full frame camera, so that's probably worth another full stop, maybe a little more.
So it would be heavy, and not as versatile as my 200-800..... But if I were shooting in very low light, it could make the difference in no shots, and useable ones.
FINALLY!! A photographer that does not speak hysterically Polen like… this is a photo leader I want to go on a tour with, calm, knowledgable and with authority, love his voice!! Visiting Pangolin next year!
I don’t know anyone on TH-cam personally and I wish everyone well. So for sure I am not a hater. But that guy’s tone and pitch makes his reviews are so utterly unwatchable. Really, what’s wrong in being just calm, clear and concise? Why does he have to yell like a petulant child and then do a whole bunch of tomfoolery that just extends the video uselessly? Where is the respect for a viewer’s time?
Great review of the Canon RF 1200! Ignore those troll comments. It's amazing to see their perspective that there's no point in reviewing a lens they can't afford. It's precisely this reason that makes your video so valuable. Thanks for giving us insights into such high-end gear!
Great video Guts. Stood next to you while you shot with that monster while I had a 180-600 with a 1.4x. Abit of crop and i could get similar images. Already have several 20x30 prints hanging on the wall. For what I need from my photos, that was just fine, and far more versatile. I would take the money saved and go back to Svalbard with Pangolin and the R/V Kinfish instead !
I love this video! Great Analysis and Footage Guts 🙂
Guts, that's an interesting video with some good photos.
At around £22k UKP, that's a deposit for a house!
Unless a long lost uncle leaves a large amount of cash in his will, I won't be buying one.
Do keep the videos coming though 🙂
Regards Jeremy
Its certainly pricey...hope that uncle appears for you!
Me too!
Beautiful trip…. Wish I was there with you two! Nice long range. But you are right, such a specialized lens….
It was indeed a stunning trip.
Very interesting stuff. I'm an avid hobbyist, always looking to improve my technique, but even if I had that kind of disposable income, I'd have a very difficult time justifying such a purchase. However, I do appreciate when professionals demonstrate this kind of exotic equipment. For me, I'd be quite happy if the 200-800 RF would finally be available.
Having such focal length is certainly useful with such distant subjects, and you used it to great effect, some fantastic shots.
An interesting optic to be sure - from what I gather, it's essentially a 600 F/4 with a 2x teleconverter permanently affixed.
Would be intrigued to know how this lens compares against the OM System 150-400 - which, with its internal 1.25x TC engaged, gives 1000mm equivalent focal length, in a much more compact package. Its also compatible with the 1.4x and 2x TCs, though the effective aperture would be heavily affected.
Thanks so much for showing us this lens. I don't think that I will be needing this $20,000 USD lens, but it is great to know that it is out there should a need arise. Great review!
I don't really have a use case or a budget for this lens, but your review was a lot of fun, and very balanced.
great shots
Thanks
Wonder , wonderful . I definitely would like to wander with such a monster of the world of photography .
Hi Guts and Janine - thank you for this review. I'm planning to cruise Svalbard next June, at which time regulations will (I believe) require ships to stay 500m away from polar bears if onshore or near shore. I'll have my 600mm lens with T/Cs; but even with that kit, I'm not sure I'll be able to many of the polar bear shots I'm used to seeing from Svalbard. If not, hopefully the other wildlife and the landscapes will make up for it.
Wonderful shots! I would be a nervous wreck, worrying about dropping it or being mugged for my lens.
No many muggers in Svalbard…apart from envious guests!!
Stunning images ❤❤❤
When are you going to allow 3rd party rf full frame lenses ?
Okay, so you asked what I’d use it for 🙂
Well, 98% of my shooting as it is now, is done with a 1280mm equivalent. Which is the 800 F11 + my crop body R7.
I don’t think it would really hurt me too much to “lose a little reach” dropping down to 1200mm 😀 lol
So my typical subjects are Warblers, Hummers, and other small songbirds, and I typically shoot them from 20-25 feet.
I’d use this lens for the same thing…. But it would be 1 full stop faster, and, it would still be 1200mm on a Full Frame camera…. Preferably the R5 Mk II, as the original R5 had some issues, which is why I sold it to “upgrade” to my R7’s 🙂
It would be cool to get the Full Frame advantage back, and still be able to shoot at 1200mm though.
I know a lot guys would say I could do that with a 600 F4 + a 2X TC, which is true, but whether it was that, or this 1200 F8, I still don’t think I’d use it much (the rare exception would be in very low light) because of the lack of versatility, and the weight… price completely aside.
For my purposes, the “slow” 200-800 on an improved R7 Mk II would be the holy grail.
Thank you Chris. Great info there!
Hi Guts. Great review. Definitely a specialty lens. Question: If you were going to Svalbard again on a small ship for 10 days (I am in August 2025) and owned an RF 400 2.8, would you take it and your RF 1.4 & 2x TCs as your main super telephoto? Or, would it be better to rent the RF 200-800 or 600 f/4? I will also bring 2 R5 bodies and my RF 70-200 2.8 & RF 100-500. I don't want to mess up this trip by not having the proper super-telephoto lens. Thank you in advance.
This is an odd lens, it's just a RF600 F4 with a 2x teleconverter built in. I have the RF600 F4 and 2x TC but rarely use it, usually the 1.4 is enough when I need extra reach. The extra length is also an issue like you said, when I upgraded my EF to RF having that built in adapter added just enough length to make it real tight in my one carry on bag, it has to go in on and angle now with the 2x TC it wouldn't fit in either of my carry on bags.
Imagine putting 2xTC on this thing that already has fixed TC in it. 2400mm...
Quite long then? Need an assistant to hold the far end ;-)
If you upgraded the ef 600 mkiii lens to RF all you done is buy the same lens again with an RF mount tacked onto it........
Thanks a lot, can you mention which month of year you visited Svalbard and perhaps also the travel company (as I can see you are not at the time offering such a trip) 🙂
Weare waiting to see what the new rules will be like for next year. At the moment you wont be able to closer than 400m to a polar bear...tricky even for this lens!
Suddenly that Olympus lens looks amazing value! F9 (F4.5) VERSUS F8
Half size, half weight, half price, much better IS. No doubt.
Hmmm, bigger is not always better..... Great video!
The high potential for heat haze and just general vibration (don't breathe) being amplified would seem to work against the lens in all but the most exceptional cases. Slow moving bears at a far distance are one thing but fast moving subjects would be a challenge to locate in the viewfinder. Swing that lens as you follow a subject and nearby people might get hurt. Other than hiring an extra lens carrier to tote that thing around and getting someone else to pay for it, I can think of a few images that would be fun to take with it.
Plus, at this focal length, are we not entering telescope territory?
You can in fact buy a lens-to-camera adapter that allows you to place a telescope on a camera body.
good video
It's a common mistake to think that you get a super telephoto to get more "reach", when you should get a super telephoto to get more "crop". That way, the most common issue with super teles (blur from heat haze) is almost never a problem. My standard "running around" lens is a 600 with 2x converter. Shots are always super crisp when used as above.
@kelvinaitken9020 "That way, the most common issue with super teles (blur from heat haze) is almost never a problem." what do you mean?
@@watchtherocks12 Most often people use super tele lenses to photograph subjects that are too far away for shorter lenses. That's not going to work due to heat haze/distortion, even in the arctic or antarctic.
You should be shooting at close distances, where you will get a "good" shot with a shorter lens (e.g. 300mm-600mm) THEN use the super telephoto (800mm and longer) to get tighter shots. So, they aren't for more "reach", they're for a tighter crop.
It's why many TH-cam "experts" say that teleconverters (or 800 & 1200mm lenses) aren't sharp, because they aren't using them properly.
An awesome lens for sure. For the money I would rather visit places and use my existing equipment and just be thankful to be at new places, and take in the moment. For sure I would love to do a Pangolin Safari - your houseboat was wonderful! - but the single supplement is a real killer - a shame you don't have the option of pairing up people to see if a share option is doable.
We do try but its quite tricky. We do try to keep the single supplements as low as possible. Maybe check out the Specials on our website as we sometimes get the opportunity to waive the, for last min travel. www.pangolinphoto.com/photo-safari-specials
@@PangolinWildlife thanks. I will do - and in future I will always just ask anyway. After all, you don't get if you don't ask (not that you get if you ask of course!)
I will be joining you in Kasane in January, I originally thought I would bring the RF 100-500L because it is such a great lens, but then opted for the RF 200-800 for the extra reach, thoughts? I am bringing the EF 70-200 2.8L III, the EF 16-35 f4 IS for landscapes and 85 1.4L IS for portraits, but I still have time to pack the 100-500L instead).
Do you find the same issues with the 600 f4L that you did with the 1200? I see that a number of the Pangolin photographers actually use the 500 f4L as their prime, so maybe you haven't had the opportunity to use the 600 f4L. Given my current lens collection, I think I would prefer the 600 over the 500, for the added reach for football and airshows, having used the 600 f11 to shoot the Thunderbirds. I have the EF 400 f4 DO and the Sigma 100-300 f2.8. The price point of the RF 800 and RF 1200 is a bit crazy for my limited use scenario, and rental would make more sense for me. The reason I ask is, that I had the opportunity to get the EF 600 f4L from Canon USA for a good price, kinda kicking myself. Had a used copy of the EF 200-400 1.4x f4L from B&H that I end up returning as it had been used hard, (slightly scuffed up, had a slight grind to it changing focal lengths and a lot of internal dust), too much for the 7K price tag, obviously prior use/condition is a major concern with buying the big whites used. I may watch for 200-400 1.4x f4L to go on sale at Canon USA with rumors of the RF 200-500 4L looming in the not so distant future. Also, what did you think of the soft case, I like the hard "suitcase" lens cases of the big whites, miss that now that they have gone to the equally pricey soft case.
Thanks Guts, Jeff
That is an extraordinary collection of lenses….envy is us. We hope to test more lenses in the coming months so stay tuned. See you in Jan!
I had both the RF 600mm and the EF 200-400mm with me for four weeks in Africa (including a three-night stay at Pangolin's lodge) last year. I used both lenses extensively (the 600mm often with a 1.4 T/C). I also used the EF 200-400mm on two previous trips to Africa.
As you may know from having tried it out, the EF 200-400mm is slightly shorter than the RF 600mm but is far heavier and less well-balanced. I can hand-hold both; but whereas the 600mm is a pleasure, the 200-400mm is a pain. If I were starting a new lens collection today, I would not buy the EF 200-400mm (not even at a good discount). There are many other good options now (one of which, you seem already to have).
However, I'm anxiously awaiting the RF 200-500mm f/4! Sadly, development seems to be stalled, and I may be waiting a long time.
@@samsgaardstonestorm2029 Thanks. After watching a ton of videos, I see many going with the shorter focal lengths, choosing faster f-stops over reach, so I continue to ponder the best lens selection. The boat on the Chobe River gets closer than I expected to the wildlife, weight factors in with airline restrictions, so much to think about)
The price would have to be much better than a combo of a 600mm F4 and a 2x teleconverter, as I'm sure it's essentially those two items fused together, but the ability to remove the TC would make the combo much more usable.
Agreed... 600 w/ converter would be better as it's more flexible and is basically the same thing.
The best option would be to buy both the 400 mm F:2.8 and the 1200mm with both converters 1.4 and 2.0x to use on both lenses!😊
$20K! Are the glasses of this lens coated with gold!?
Different tool for different situations
Indeed
What fjallraven jacket is that?
Looks like and older maybe discontinued jacket???
Are you saying Guts is going vintage? ;-)
@@PangolinWildlife haha not at all. I just know my Fjällräven jackets fairly well and I don’t recognise this one so just asking which one it is?
You can switch in and out of crop mode in the R5 without reverting to the menu.
How do you do that?
@@PangolinWildlife take your R5 in your right hand by the grip. The tip of your right ring finger will hit a button on the front of the body that you’re not using. Go into the menu and program that button for crop mode. This button will switch you instantly in and out of crop mode.
When you push the button in your eye is looking through the EVF, it will pull up a menu in the EVF or on the back of the screen. Use the scroll button on the top of the camera body with your right index finger to scroll from among the choices you’re given in that pop-up screen. Once you’ve scrolled to the right setting, take your right thumb and push the inner button on the back of the body. This will lock in your selection.
You might need to program your camera to be able to use the scroll button in order to switch from mode to mode, when you pop up the menu. If you need to do that, let me know.
This is the best feature in the world with the R5. It works because you have a large sensor and I hope it will work on the Mark2. Most of the photographers won’t use this feature because they say they can crop and post. This has nothing to do with cropping in post. Using this feature in the field to take images will give you a better view and more reach and it will certainly help in your animal eye detection auto focusing. Try it out.
Once you make your selection as to what mode you want to shoot in, you don’t even have to press the inner button on the back center wheel of the body. Using back button auto focus or front auto focus, just press one of your rear back button auto focus buttons or halfway to press your front shutter button, and it will move you back into shooting mode. Your crop or non-crop mode will be automatically selected.
Once you pull up the internal menu for shooting modes in and out of crop mode, you might have trouble advancing from frame to frame in that menu. The ideal way to do it is your right index finger on top of the body using the scroll.
The default setting in your camera might be to use the FN button on the top of the body near the front shutter button. I find that inconvenient.
I found the setting in the camera to use the scroll. Go to the pink menu selection, screen four, AF method selection control. Select the M - N button and select the scroll button. This should do it.
I'd love to try it but at the price I think I'd prefer to try and get closer to the subject. The optics may be incredible but so far out of the reach of the majority of serious photographers. I don't seriously see it as a practical piece of kit. I think Canon may have created a lens for lens sake.
Proof of concept!
The perfect thing about Guts testing this lens in Svalbard is that new regulations restrict how close ships can get to polar bears. There may be a good case for having long reach there now. However, as others have said, it would seem more flexible and less expensive to bring a 600mm f/4 and pair it with a T/C to get to 840mm or 1200mm equivalent.
2:46 WOW, how to set to F4 on an F8 lens?
RF 600mm f4 - 13K, RF 1200 f8 - 20K. 7K for 2x TC which is not removable? I don't think so
Good point!
🇵🇹
I have an R5 with a 100-500mm lens. When I need a bigger tele, I use the 1.6 crop that the R5 provides and the 1.4x converter. This way I save money and get a 1,120mm tele.
800mm f/7.1 and 1120mm f/10
And you can spend it by coming on safari with us!! Perfect
I certainly believen thuis is a fantastic lens however I prefer reviews of lenses Thatcher the ordinary photograher canon afford. Best regards, Ben F.
Stay tuned….more coming soon.
you definitely need a tripod or a mono pods for one of these expensive heavy canon 1200MM F8 lens and the lens would cost you around £8.000 to £15.000 to buy
A bit too niche for me, I think I'd prefer the 600mm F4 and have 1.4 & 2 x converters, which would still be cheaper and more flexible. Either way I most probably need to work on my bank robbing skills first 😊
I would have to become a CIA subcontractor when one of their Keyhole satellites goes down to pay for the lens - assuming that I could develop the required technique to use it properly!
Sspectacular shots! But that lens is not for me; I'm much more of a generalist. :)
It is quite niche.
From what I've read this lens is effectively a 600mm f/4 with a calibrated 2 x extender fitted. I'd rather buy the RF 600mm f/4 and a 1.4 x and 2 x extender and save thousands...
Interesting point you make. Thanks
@@PangolinWildlife I watched reviews on the lens when it was announced, where is where I got the info from... Its definitely an interesting bit of kit :) but not interesting enough to drop that amount of money on.....
If only money was not the deciding factor yes .. but not a lens that would get much use for the photographer who spends time in the African wilderness taking wildlife photos in a woodland that will compromise your distance . I don’t think you need more than a 600mm prime . Especially in areas of Africa . Unless it’s open plains like you find in Tanzania or Kenya .
Might not be a good idea to rest that lens on the ship's railings - too much vibration.
I'd rather spend that kind of money on lots of trips.
Good idea!! With us i hope!
@@PangolinWildlife I have seriously thought about it and would love to, but as a solo traveller the single supplement fee is just too much, it's almost as much as another trip elsewhere! It would be great if you could add smaller rooms (even basic, as I don't need luxury) for solo travellers.
@@OrcaT-j1y+1 to this. Travelling solo seems unfeasible.
I did a 30 full day birding road trip this year, everything but food included, for $1500 ! 😉
He is a professional photographer. He writes it off as a business expense.
I'd rather get a teleconverter for my 100-500 and spend the extra money on going to places like svaalbard, Africa, etc.
Ideally with us!
Pass me my Z8 and Z 180-600 f5.6-6.3 VR Lens. want 900mm f6.3 go DX @ 22 M Pixels
Great if you rob a bank, only it isn't that impressive, it is a 300mm f2.8 with 2 - 2x extenders. I don't see the point of reviewing a lens that hardly anyone can afford and is impractical in the real world. In Africa there is going to be so much heat haze images will be useless.
I’m sorry, but this is a $20.000 lens! Seems lately all Pangolin is showing is hugely expensive lenses. Like that’s the only way to make great pictures. Absolutely fine of course, but if that’s the audience you focus on, I will have to stop following…..
We took this to Svalbard specifically because the bears tend to be quite far away….what lens would you ideally like us to review…lets see if we can do that!