My full review of the Canon RF 600 and 800mm super-telephoto lenses! Correction: Lens hoods NOT included. Check prices on the 600mm at B&H: bhpho.to/38RuoWB // WEX: bit.ly/2ZdL2MG Check prices on the 800mm at B&H: bhpho.to/2AMMdtc // WEX: bit.ly/2ZPEmn2 Buy Gordon a coffee: www.paypal.me/cameralabs Gordon's In Camera book: amzn.to/2n61PfI / Amazon uk: amzn.to/2mBqRVZ Cameralabs merchandise: redbubble.com/people/cameralabs/shop www.cameralabs.com/canon-rf-600mm-800mm-f11-review/ Music: www.davidcuttermusic.com / @dcuttermusic Which model to buy depends on the subjects you want to capture. I personally found the RF 600mm f11 the more flexible of the pair, suitable for large birds, and more sports and landscapes, while the shorter focal length and better stabilisation made it easier to aim and film; I also preferred its greater portability. But if you’re photographing smaller or more distant wildlife, Sea sports or the Moon, no lens is too big and the RF 800 will be your preferred choice. Both share similar image quality and come Highly Recommended so long as you understand and can work with their limitations.
Great review Gordon, I’m planning to replace my 5DSR with an R5 in the next few months and the 800mm looks a very tempting option to have in your backpack when out in the wilds. Clearly there are pros and cons to these lenses but for the price they look great value to me.
Great review Gordon, the best I have seen for these lenses. I have had the RF800mm for a month or so - using it with the entry level RP and have got some really good results (I mainly photograph birds). I normally shoot with a 600mm F4 II - but on days when I can't face lugging that around (or just want to enjoy a walk in the countryside) the RF800mm is wonderful. I have compared it in my own testing with the 100-400 II with a 1.4 and 2x extender and find the RF800mm resolves more detail, but of course you have the F11 to take into account. It just makes you think more about your settings and camera craft - in order to get decent results. Keep up the good work!
It's great to see the performance of the R6 and expect the R5 is a tad better on such weak aperture lenses gives me more confidence in their ability to track focus well on say my Canon 300mm f2.8LIS with teleconverters so I get 600mm F5.6 with a 2x or the Sigma 300-800mm @F5.6 but I see that these new lenses are more portable than the heavy sigmonster that I frequently leave behind. If I was going to take pics of the moon I would still use my 2700mm F15 skymax telescope. I already get great AF results at 600mm @f5.6 on my 7Dmk2 these new cameras should be amazing. Can't wait for their prices to drop a bit.
It's remarkable what Canon is doing here. Something truly not possible or at least not practical with a DSLR. At this price point you can get some supertele shots just not available any other way. A gateway in to birds and planes for people with less money. Very nice indeed. Pros and advanced ametures seem to choke on the aperture, but these lenses aren't necessarily targeted at them. And this is not the first review I've seen that concluded there is a lot more you can do with them than you'd think by just looking at a spec sheet. Good job and keep the reviews coming. Yours are the best!
Thanks, having an open mind is really important for new tech as things that we used to know were impossible or unworkable may be much more usable now. I was surprised just how usable these lenses were and the f11 aspect just got out of the way,
An innovative type of optics with fair performances, also reasonably priced, a very rare combination these days. Ability to rotate the camera to portrait orientation would be more than welcome.
i gave the 800mm a full bench run yesterday (last night) and this thing is incredible. the details in the pictures are astonishing. the looney-11 rule with this lens has to be modified though since the iso can't always be set to 100 or 200 or 125. to get the best results it has to be set at 400 or 800 iso with a 1/125 timing
Nice review as always Gordon!! These lens are more suited for the R6 because of the better AF and ISO in low light and the diffration limit impact less than on the R5. The Lens Hood ET-101 help a lot to keed the lens clean and it is not incuded with the 800 lens in Canada (and very hard to find!).
I think these would have been much better if they were f8. I know the modern camera has great ISO performance but for sports and wildlife you do need to able to isolate subjects for most shots which could be difficult with f11 unless you're really close to your subject. Some nice samples Gordon.
Every stop of aperture is nice to have but literally makes them larger, heavier and MUCH more expensive. I'm glad they went for a light, budget option as there are lots of faster alternatives.
@@cameralabs F8 sums up in 2kg nobody will carry, 2,000 quid nobody will pay. No, those lenses are made to open a market which no FF manufacturer is serving. They will bring a lot of people into birding, sports, .... with the RF system. The "F8-segment" is already partly filled with the 100-500 RF. More to come in near future ...
Gordon Laing an 800 f/8 would not be much heavier just eat into the market of the expensive télés Canon makes. Which is why it will never see the light of day. also the old EF Long lenses will eventually appear in RF Format so canon is trying to milk the old line for as long as it can. I just hope 3rd parties like sigma n Tamron give it a bloody nose with their new line in long Rf télés prime n zooms.
@@dimitristsagdis7340 800 f8 is four times the glass needed compared to f11, much more issues with chromatic aberration & sharpness. The simplicity of those f11 would be gone (i.e. this nice sliding in for storage). The f 8 market is served by this crazy good 100 to 500L and possibly next year with a non L counterpart 100-400 capable taking TC as well. I would love to see a super light 5.6 500 or 600, only Nikon is providing, you know the price point. There is no free lunch when it comes to premium optics, and yes 3rd party manufacturers will hold the market fresh. If any company is milking an old line: Sony with the outdated mount not being able to compete. BTW making it a hard time for 3rd party manufacturers not being able to use optical formulas taking advantage of R/Z/L mount and having a Sony version as well.
Good review Gordon, as to these two lenses they seem amazing value for money and very 'brave or imaginative' of Canon to offer them though I am sure some will complain about the lack of dual card slots :)
I was struggling to decide which I would like better, the 600 or the 800, but I got the 600 since I'm using it on the r10 so I would get 960mm equivalent. That sounds safer for a fixed focal length for birds/birds in flight than 1280mm plus I will be more willing to carry it places. I also got it for $595 on a labor day sale which wasn't available for the 800 lens so that makes it feel more economical haha.
Totally agree with your review. I have an old 500mm L mark 1 and its hard to move around. With that lens it is hard to chase what you are shooting. I love these new lenses! I can fir them with a couple landscape wide angles in my pack and have great day out.
I know it’s asking too much/nitpicking, but I just wonder how much bigger/more expensive they really would have been if they’d gone with f/8 or f/9. I know it works at f/11, but especially with the TC’s I just can’t get over that insane stop down to f/22. I guess we just can’t have our cake and aperture, too.
Even one stop brighter would make it larger, heavier and much more expensive. They already have a bunch of brighter lenses, don't forget the 100-500 + 1.4x - so I'm glad they stuck with something different here.
Gordon Laing the 100-500 is very expensive and slow. Esp with 1.4x not very useable and it only takes you to 700mm. Which is 100mm a big deal less than the 800. And all this for a stop of light. Plus the 100-500 will not go below 300mm once an extender is fitted.
I think these are amazing lenses for beginners and people who are new to these focal lengths. Especially when paired with the R6 or R5. I’d love it if Canon would update the AF for the RP and R.
An excellent in depth review as always. Thanks a lot Gordon for taking the time to review these really exciting lenses. These might be the lenses that would convince me to step into mirrorless systems, particularly if they work well with extension tubes. On the topic of aperture and depth of field, would you know by any chance if step down rings would give good results in day time to close down the aperture on these lenses?
I gave this a quick test a half hour ago hence my previous comment. I'm hoping for good weather conditions tomorrow night to fully test this thing out. This lense serves 2 strict functions either astrophotography ie moon and other planets and/or wild life photography. This isn't designed to be your every day or every night lens.
Your technical reviews are pretty much the only ones I take any notice of now really Gordon. Good solid factual reviews, no sensationalism, no clickbate, no BS 😉❤️.... Keep up the great work.. JP
Gordon when using either the 600 or the 800 F 11.0 lenses did you have a chance to use an extension tube to try to bring in mainly birds A lot closer .
I well remember mirror lenses! I bought one, a 500mm F8 Vivitar a little over 20 years ago. It was very soft, so I sold it, losing about £65 and gaining only frustration, some poor pictures and ... well ... some experience. Many years later I learned that Vivitar, Bower, Rokinon and Opteca, along with half a dozen other names, are all the same, and all made by Samyang. Considering how super sharp many of their traditional glass optics are, I find it surprising how poor the image quality of their mirror lenses are. And I believe they still make them to this day, and as soft as ever. They’re called “bamboo lenses” by some - a somewhat derisive term perhaps, but in this case well deserved in my opinion. About these F11 super telephoto lenses, I don’t find them terribly exciting. Not only because they’re only available in RF mount which I’m not likely to ever buy into. But simply because I find the third party 150-600mm zooms much more attractive.
Yes, those 150-600s are very good, but often large and heavy. The price and weight of these two are very compelling. PS - that photo I showed of a mirror lens at the end is a current model as you probably know, and yes, there is a Samyang version that looks identical, so I guess they do make them for several companies! I wouldn't mind getting one to try out just to see.
@@cameralabs I’ve been told that the different names of Samyang lenses are just a marketing thing: certain names are believed to sell better in certain places. By the way, “large and heavy” are relative terms. Yes, mine is about twice the weight of the RF 600 f11. But the latest Canon EF 600 f4 boasts that “The lens’s lightweight design makes it easier to transport at just 3050 g it’s the world’s lightest 600 mm f/4”. My Sigma 150-600c weighs only 1930 g, so that makes it super lightweight, doesn’t it?
@@cameralabs Christopher Frost reviewed an 800mm mirror lens a few years ago, in case you’re interested. I think they’re made in 500, 600, ... all the way up to 1100mm. Beware that above a certain focal length they have inbuilt teleconverters which introduce chromatic aberration, which is something you wouldn’t normally expect to see in mirror lenses.
These are cool, but I wonder why they didn’t try a mirror lens. It might’ve been sharper and have less chromatic aberration, as well as theoretically be more compact. Maybe the bokeh.
You can use full-frame lenses on a cropped APSC camera, and the crop will effectively multiply the focal length by 1.6x on Canon's system. So these would become 960 and 1280 equivalent respectively on R10 and R7.
Sure but again 600 and 800 primes for less than 1k which WILL still autofocus well enough for sports and wildlife. And that reduced area is still roughly similar to a DSLR viewfinder.
@@JoeMaranophotography my reply was about the Sony lens, not the Pannie one! But i am fond of the Pannie lens as well and the G9 is a steal although for refocusing on action it's not as good as the Canon and Sony bodies.
Hi Gordon, I’m wondering whether to jump ship for low end wildlife photography from Fuji to Canon, but I’m a bit confused. Am I going to get the benefit of full frame and the canon’s Af with these lenses, because the alternatives for canon for anything above 400mm full frame, are really expensive and canon are dropping third party support. But on the other side some reviewers have called the new Fuji’s AF on the XH1 and XH1s, to be so inconsistent as to be unusable? Any advice please, thanks.
Do you mean the XH2 and XH2S? You can see my results in my reviews of those, I can't comment on what others have said. You're right to price-up the cost of a body and lens to deliver the field of view you desire. Fujifilm has a fairly low cost 150-600, which with the XH2S makes for a really nice wildlife setup. Sony also has a good 200-600 zoom at a reasonable price. Canon's only really lower cost big zoom is the RF 100-400 or of course the primes you're watching here. Certainly the R6 or R5 with one of these is a nice system, but the possibility of a stacked APSC sensor is also tempting. Really the AF systems vary hugely depending on subject and background, and one person may get great results when another fails. I'd strongly recommend renting or trialling a system in your environment so you can see how they perform for your kind of subjects and conditions. let me know how you get on.
Thanks Godfrey! The 100-500 is a higher quality lens with the added flexibility of being a zoom, but it's also much more expensive, so it depends on your budget.
To be honest at such focal length atmospheric distortion should start slightly crawling into the image. As I have no RF mount camera and no specific purpose for such focal length, I'll stick to my Sigma 150-600 :D
Gordon, would you comment on why someone with the RF 100-500 would find it beneficial to have either the RF 600 or 800? Is there anything these lenses could do that you couldn't achieve with the 100-500 with a teleconverter? Thank you.
Thanks for another wonderful review, Gordon. I'm struggling to find an affordable path forward for a longer lens that's also easy to carry, and potentially an upgrade from my current Canon RP. How would these lenses pair with the R7?
They work well, and the smaller AF area due to their aperture takes up more of the frame on the cropped R7 - so you get more AF coverage with them than you would on full-frame.
@@markmcdonough9748 the 100-400 is a great choice for the R7 and would give you a lot of reach plus the chance to crop those high res files. I haven't tried it with TCs. Canon has lots of RF TC restrictions, so check with any lens you're thinking of using one on. I'd say on a cropped body, you won't need TCs on a lens like this unless you're shooting the Moon. Remember the AF and image quality will reduce with them, so unless you have a pro-grade bright aperture lens, I'd be wary of relying on them. Maybe occasionally, but not regularly with standard lenses.
Do you considder making a comparison between the Canon 600mm f/11 RF vs. the EF 400mm f/5.6 with a 1.4 Canon extender and the EF/RF adapter? The old EF combination is relatively widely used and should make a point of reference to many.
@@cameralabs Using the 400mm f/5.6 lowers the Frames Per Second to 6.8/mechanical shutter on the R6 (& probably R5 too). It's noted in the digital version of the R6 manual in the table on p. 429 where the meanings for the colors and blinking of the H and H+ continuous shooting icons (when lenses are mounted) are given in FPS (or shots per second). For example, when I set the R6 to H+ continuous shooting, and mount the 400mm f5.6, the H+ icon flashes white in the display. According to the table, this indicates 6.8 FPS. In H mode, it is only 3.8 FPS, and 4.9 electronic (1st curtain). This is with fully charged battery. I don't have an extender so am not sure what the possible effect would be on FPS, if any. If anyone knows I am interested!
I have been a serious amateur photographer for years. Thinking about starting to sell my photographs. I do not have experience with the canon big glass. Would you pick the new RF 800 F 11 $1,000 or a generation I 600 F4 for $4,500 US dollars? I will be shooting at very distant wildlife. Mostly during the day but sometimes early evening or morning. I cannot afford to the newest generation 600 F4.
How can you use these lenses at the shutter speeds necessary to capture fast-moving animals and the ISOs necessary for even semi-clean images on anything other than a sunny day? Canon could have at least made the 600mm lens f8 instead of f11. They might have turned out the same size!
Hi Gordon, I finally got my eos r6 after two months waiting. First one I got in end of Sep is a faulty camera then I bring it back and exchanged a good one. Currently I'm using a RF 24-70 f/2.8lens. It's a quite good lens for multi purposes. RF 50 1.8 and RF 70-200 f4 should come soon later. I will pick the 50 1.8 as a easy carry lens but I'm not sure which long lens I should buy. Would you recommend 70200 f4? The size is quite compact that just like a tin of coca. If I want to pick a telephoto lens between rf 600 and 800, which one would you recommend? Like to take photo of aircrafts and moon or long distance architectures. Thanks!
Sounds like you're shooting very distant subjects, so probably the 800 over the 600. I can't comment on the others as nothing has been officially announced yet.
@@MzuMzu-nx1em where are you getting 25 from? If you mean 25mm, then that certainly isn';t close to the magnification of a human eye. 50 is closer. But either way, people don't generally quote x figures for fixed lenses.
I really missed the comparison with the Canon ef 4.0 300 with extenders and your Canon rf 100-500. It would be so much more interesting if you did, can you in future make a real comparison? Greetings Onno Nugteren The Netherlands.
Which model to buy depends on the subjects you want to capture. I personally found the RF 600mm f11 the more flexible of the pair, suitable for large birds, and more sports and landscapes, while the shorter focal length and better stabilisation made it easier to aim and film; I also preferred its greater portability. But if you’re photographing smaller or more distant wildlife, Sea sports or the Moon, no lens is too big and the RF 800 will be your preferred choice. Both share similar image quality and come Highly Recommended so long as you understand and can work with their limitations.
The images I have seen on the internet out of these lenses lack the 'pop' one expects out of a prime. Maybe I haven't seen enough samples but I think a 20 year old 400mm f5.6L or even a 300mm f4L EF mount lens with an adapter & extender will be better than any of these lenses.
Every stop of aperture is nice to have but literally makes them larger, heavier and MUCH more expensive. I'm glad they went for a light, budget option as there are lots of faster alternatives.
600mm F4 (3kg) and 800mm F5.6 (4.5kg) are available in EF mount, having perfect performance adapted to RF cameras. For a price of a couple of kidneys :D Yet if you know how to use 'em properly, hardly anyone will be able to tell the difference ;) Tho I prefer my Sigma 150-600mm.
Eww!! horrible looking things, and very impractible ! After watching your channel and a few others, I now realise what a good lens I bought for my 750D a few months ago, the L series F2.8 70 - 200mm, I now understand the F numbers, and 2.8 is very good, and should really suit my R6 , when I get it at the end of the month, I shuddered when you said F 22 :-)
You shuddered because you're used to a DSLR. As I illustrated in my sample photos and videos, these lenses work just fine on mirrorless bodies at f11 to f22 and are much cheaper than an f2.8 L zoom, and much longer too. They're different lenses for a different market. You can't use them anyway on your 750D, so it doesn't matter.
@@cameralabs I beg to differ , I have a copy of the convertor, don't think I will use it though, as Canon is bundling their R to Eos convertor with the purchase !
@@ChrisColeman1962 hang on, the 70-200 you bought is being bundled with an EOS R adapter? I'd not seen that happening, they must be keen to convert DSLR owners... where did you get it?
@@ChrisColeman1962 ah yes, some of the R bodies are bundled with one. You had me confused throughout this thread. AT first i thought you were a DSLR-only owner, then i thought your 70-200 had come with an RF adapter.
The lens is either a hit or miss when holding it by hand. This lens needs a tripod or a monopod at the very least due to the sheer weight of it to get accurate pictures. But when it does get accurate pictures it really gets accurate pictures. This is the equivalent of canon's 400mm 5.6 with a 2x teleconverter on it to get the 800mm f11 aperture. Instead of people being so focused on the aperture being f11 they should be more concerned about the sheer weight of this thing
Weeeeell, the Olympus lens currently costs $2900, so is four times more than the RF 600 and over three times more than the 800, so very different products. It's heavier too.
@@cameralabs Buuuuut, you can get Olympus newest sensor in a camera for about 1k, the 300mm is also available used already and 1 stop brighter... (+weathersealing, better stabilization). And i doubt the system is gonna be heavier in total (E-M5 iii + 300mm vs Eos R6 + 600mm)
Okay, did some quick calculating canon r6 + 600mm is about 200g lighter than E-M5 III + 300mm... But therefor the latter is smaller in use (no extension). I think these "systems" differ in a lot of points, but in total they are more similar then it might seem.
I purchased the RF 800 and haves used it on my R6 with beautiful results. Under moderate conditions it delivers sparkling clean results. It’s not for everything but it feels almost weightless. Combined with the amazing auto focus, it’s a clear winner.
Excellent review Gordon...thank you. It's good to see Canon producing low cost RF "kit" lenses, but some look so "big bertha butttt ugly"...just my opinion. In this price range, the Sigma 150-600 offers better quality, functions, options, firmware updates. Always enjoy your unbiased reviews!
I’ve had the 800mm for several weeks now, using on the R, while I wait for my R5 to arrive. I have been very impressed with the images I get and tbh, at the price it is great value. I simply wouldn’t spend the money needed to get a faster lens, and neither would I want to be carrying such a lens around all day, something you can do with ease with the f11 lens.
I shoot now with a 100-400 L II on an R5 while my 11 year old inherited my R with a 600 f 11. I was shocked that on the very first outing he was nailing birds in flight with this kit. All hand held. The results after post processing were very good. This is in great part due to the light weight of this lens. I used to own an EF 300mm f2.8 L IS. It was, to this date, the best lens I had ever own. But did it yielded the best images? It is probably 6th or 7th on my personal list. Because it was such a pain to travel, carry and shoot with it. Size and weight were a big problem. The best quality lens is useless if you have to leave it at home most of the time.
@@JuanPerez-sv8qs that’s a fantastic endorsement that your 11 year old was having such success. You’re absolutely right about portability. There’s no way I would be bothered taking a large heavy lens about with me on my daily walk, which I am quite happy to do with the 800mm f11. In fact today I was out on a headland in very windy conditions, and whilst it does get blown about, I still managed sharp images. I’m very happy with the lens.
There was a time I didn’t mind carrying heavy equipment. But as I got older that slowly changed. I’m almost 71, and carrying the lenses I used to is now out of the question. Later this year I’ll get the R5, and the 800 will be one of the lenses I’ll be getting.
@@melgross I think you'll be really impressed with what you can achieve for the size and weight of this combo. PS - if you're ordering online, please do consider using my price-check links here or in my reviews at cameralabs.com thanks!
The 150-600mm lenses from Sigma and Tamron seems to be a better deal. Let's a lot more light in and aren't too big. Hope they'll make mirrorless versions of those lenses at some point.
@@419tommy yes, you can adapt any EF lens to the EOS R system and they work pretty well. But Sigma's latest native mirrorless lenses work even better.
I'd much prefer the lenses to extend out from the front in the traditional way. Extending from the rear the way they go makes it look very ugly lol. Interesting lenses non the less, on paper they seem a very odd choice by Canon but no doubt they will appeal to many particularly at the price.
Hey Gordon, longtime follower/reader. Great review - valuable insights, great photo examples, fun video clips. I can tell you had fun with the lenses and putting the video together :) Keep up the great work!
I guess if you're coming from an APS-C sensor the depth of field isn't too drastic with f11 is roughly equivalent to f7.1. On the Tamron 150-600 G2 I generally stopped down to f8-9 anyways due to softness at the long end. Sadly the Tamron G2 currently has unreliable AF on the R6 so I picked up the 800 f11 recently. The one quirk I have noticed is that the stabilization seems to struggle with slow panning, I was photographing ducks swimming and had quite a few blurry shots between sharp ones when they stayed still (shooting at 1/400-1/800).
Excellent pair of lenses. I opted for the 600 for the R7 and it’s so light I forget it’s there. Waiting for the weather to turn. Thanks for the double review
Can’t even afford to R6 atm lol. I’m currently using a Canon 5d mk4 which I’ve been quite happy with but now . . . These lenses sound good but at f11 it’s a deal breaker as much of my usage will be in less than ideal light. I only own two zoom lenses. Both Canon L glass. 24-70 & 70-200. All my other lenses are fast primes so I suppose I’m a little spoilt lol. I think I’d probably wait to see if Sigma comes up with a suitable telephoto in their Art series as I already use several Art series primes and have found them to be excellent. I have a Sigma 85 1.4 Art and the more expensive Canon 85 1.4 and tbh, it’s the Sigma I will reach for unless light levels demand IS. It just produces much high IQ in every respect. Loving these reviews btw. Can’t think how I missed them previously. Straight forward. To the point and informative. Thank you.
Using on the RP. Really want the R6 but want some experience (size, weight, muscle memormory) with the lens before biting off the R6 price. High fps, faster focus, eye focus are calling to me. Circumstances have limited the use this fall but shooting herons hand held with crisp results is a lot of fun. Have purchased an extension tube to use on tiny birds at the bird feeder. Hoods are an accessory in the US. Enjoy the review. You have slowed your rapid fire speech to a more understandable pace. Thanks for that.
Durring my forced confinement it has alleviated many hours of "down time"! As soon as I can get the vaccine for covid I am going to be replacing all my gear that got destroyed in a house fire last November. I had been waiting for Cannons new lineup, and the I got grounded be covid, so now I just wait! LOL Your reviews have really been informative, and I loved that you actually did a review of the R5 and R6 for photographers!
Great review! How do these lenses compare to the Olympus 100-400 f5-6.3? It's a 200-800 f10-12.6 ff equivalent so the same kind of range and aperture even if it's another sensor format. It would be a very interesting comparison on the field.
It could be interesting... I have reviewed that lens, so you could check my sample images for it as I try and include some similar shots in my reviews.
I can't help but think that over time the barrel extension will wear out, maybe not a lot, but little by little I think lens elements will go out of alignment.
These lenses seem promising but I am concerned about the long term durability with the extendable lens body and the lack of apparent moisture and dust sealing. I will wait and see how they hold up in others' hands before I give them a try. Besides, I'm still waiting for my 100-500mm to arrive and I am loathe to purchase either of these lenses if the zoom telephoto and an extender does everything I would ask of the fixed FL lenses.
@@cameralabs Unfortunately, my local shop checked with the Canadian distributor and was told these lenses are on backorder and aren't expected until end November.....but at least my order is on the waiting list.....yay for me.....
Thanks for this Gordon. Massively useful review as always. I am getting an R3 delivered tomorrow and was originally planning to use it paired with my 100-400 mark ii, and maybe buying a 2 x converter, but now seeing a native RF 800mm is making me think I should just buy that instead of the converter. What would be your thoughts on image quality in these 2 scenarios? They would both end up at F11 I guess but I was assuming the L glass would have the edge on image quality? Many thanks. Mark
One of your best reviews Gordon. I became frustrated by Canon's lack of development in mirrorless and seitched first to Olympus and then added a Sony system. In comparison to the EM1MK3 with 300mm f4 I'm guessing from your review the Canon R6/600mm combination has about a two thirds stop noise advantage over the Olympus combination? But I'm not sure about focussing ability since Olympus only includes bird recognition in the EM1X?
Thanks! I've used the Olympus 300mm f4 and it's a really nice lens, but it is a lot more expensive than these, and heavier too. A side-by-side would be interesting. My gut feeling is the Canon will be a little cleaner, but the decisive aspect will be the AF tracking which for BIFs on the Canon is amazing. Plus the weight and price differences too, which may actually fall in favour of the Canon.
And weighs an absolute ton to haul around and by all accounts with the 2x tc not as good definition and detail as the 800mm. I own the combo you have and walking around with it for a day is an absolute pain due to the weight.
No other company would even bother to make these lenses cause they actually care about things that really matter. High noise has always been an issue with Canon and these F11 lenses go to show that Canon really don't care. As long as they can make money out of it... 99% of shots will be useless with these lenses cause high ISO will ruin it. The only possibility is to hope for decent quality in very high contrast situations (maximum sunlight) that already is sub-par conditions to get the best photos of subjects that you would need these 600 or 800 to get in the first place.
@@cameralabs I will have to see the RAW files to evaluate the quality of your pictures. I'm a Canon shooter and know very well the issues of recovering details from shadows at higher ISOs. Even on the R5 and R6. I shoot pictures of wildlife quite a lot - birds in flight, foxes, seals and reindeers so I know pretty well the difference to shooting moving target vs none moving in real-life wild-life situations. And I'm from Iceland so right now I would not have enough light for more than 1 - 2 hours to shoot F11 on the very best days. Personally - I would never pick those lenses for anything portfolio related or print-worthy images. And even tho Ai - noise reduction software has come a long way in the past few years - it's still an extra hassle to add that into the workflow. If people are really spending money on an R6 or R5 camera - they should also spend the money on a decent glass to shoot with. The 100-500mm RF is the only real native option atm. I would look to adapt - even the Sigma 150-600mm F5-6.3 to save money rather than go high in ISO on Canon camera. And still waiting on a decent 200-600mm lens from Canon btw ;) Sony made a decent one now. And for a fair price too :) As for none moving wild-life images or videos in bright situations. You can get light gear already to take decent photos on something like the Samsung S20 Ultra zoom that is acceptable on social media ;) th-cam.com/video/rYXmfGDWGFw/w-d-xo.html
👍🏻👍🏻Thanks for this review Gordon. I wish Canon would have built the 600mm with an f/8 apperture. I am sure they could have done this while keeping its size similar to the 800mm f/11 🤔 I know it would be a more expensive option but it would be interresting to see a comparison of the new RF 100-400mm and 100-500mm + 1.4 and 2x TC vs the 600mm and 800mm f/11 🙄
A 600/800mm at f/11?? Not for professional photographers, and the early amateur photographers will soon learn that f/11 isn't for low light action images. Canon could have done better than this-look more at the Sigma 60-600mm f/4.5-6.3 for value and quality, though you will need to add the RF adapter ring.
My full review of the Canon RF 600 and 800mm super-telephoto lenses! Correction: Lens hoods NOT included.
Check prices on the 600mm at B&H: bhpho.to/38RuoWB // WEX: bit.ly/2ZdL2MG
Check prices on the 800mm at B&H: bhpho.to/2AMMdtc // WEX: bit.ly/2ZPEmn2
Buy Gordon a coffee: www.paypal.me/cameralabs
Gordon's In Camera book: amzn.to/2n61PfI / Amazon uk: amzn.to/2mBqRVZ
Cameralabs merchandise: redbubble.com/people/cameralabs/shop
www.cameralabs.com/canon-rf-600mm-800mm-f11-review/
Music: www.davidcuttermusic.com / @dcuttermusic
Which model to buy depends on the subjects you want to capture. I personally found the RF 600mm f11 the more flexible of the pair, suitable for large birds, and more sports and landscapes, while the shorter focal length and better stabilisation made it easier to aim and film; I also preferred its greater portability. But if you’re photographing smaller or more distant wildlife, Sea sports or the Moon, no lens is too big and the RF 800 will be your preferred choice. Both share similar image quality and come Highly Recommended so long as you understand and can work with their limitations.
Great review Gordon, I’m planning to replace my 5DSR with an R5 in the next few months and the 800mm looks a very tempting option to have in your backpack when out in the wilds. Clearly there are pros and cons to these lenses but for the price they look great value to me.
Great review Gordon, the best I have seen for these lenses. I have had the RF800mm for a month or so - using it with the entry level RP and have got some really good results (I mainly photograph birds). I normally shoot with a 600mm F4 II - but on days when I can't face lugging that around (or just want to enjoy a walk in the countryside) the RF800mm is wonderful. I have compared it in my own testing with the 100-400 II with a 1.4 and 2x extender and find the RF800mm resolves more detail, but of course you have the F11 to take into account. It just makes you think more about your settings and camera craft - in order to get decent results. Keep up the good work!
Thanks Chris, and that's some great info about comparing it to the 100-400 + 2x.
It's great to see the performance of the R6 and expect the R5 is a tad better on such weak aperture lenses gives me more confidence in their ability to track focus well on say my Canon 300mm f2.8LIS with teleconverters so I get 600mm F5.6 with a 2x or the Sigma 300-800mm @F5.6 but I see that these new lenses are more portable than the heavy sigmonster that I frequently leave behind. If I was going to take pics of the moon I would still use my 2700mm F15 skymax telescope. I already get great AF results at 600mm @f5.6 on my 7Dmk2 these new cameras should be amazing. Can't wait for their prices to drop a bit.
It's remarkable what Canon is doing here. Something truly not possible or at least not practical with a DSLR. At this price point you can get some supertele shots just not available any other way. A gateway in to birds and planes for people with less money. Very nice indeed. Pros and advanced ametures seem to choke on the aperture, but these lenses aren't necessarily targeted at them. And this is not the first review I've seen that concluded there is a lot more you can do with them than you'd think by just looking at a spec sheet. Good job and keep the reviews coming. Yours are the best!
Thanks, and you absolutely understand what they're trying to do!
I love that you make a good argument for things I had not considered.
Thanks, having an open mind is really important for new tech as things that we used to know were impossible or unworkable may be much more usable now. I was surprised just how usable these lenses were and the f11 aspect just got out of the way,
An innovative type of optics with fair performances, also reasonably priced, a very rare combination these days. Ability to rotate the camera to portrait orientation would be more than welcome.
i gave the 800mm a full bench run yesterday (last night) and this thing is incredible. the details in the pictures are astonishing. the looney-11 rule with this lens has to be modified though since the iso can't always be set to 100 or 200 or 125. to get the best results it has to be set at 400 or 800 iso with a 1/125 timing
Just a note, the lens hoods aren't supplied. Canon offers them, but they don't come with the lenses.
Nice review as always Gordon!! These lens are more suited for the R6 because of the better AF and ISO in low light and the diffration limit impact less than on the R5. The Lens Hood ET-101 help a lot to keed the lens clean and it is not incuded with the 800 lens in Canada (and very hard to find!).
Thanks, yes, I'm being told now that it's an optional accessory, but mine was supplied with one in the box, grrr.
@@cameralabs It's not a mistake, maybe Canon UK is more generous with accessories!!
I think these would have been much better if they were f8. I know the modern camera has great ISO performance but for sports and wildlife you do need to able to isolate subjects for most shots which could be difficult with f11 unless you're really close to your subject. Some nice samples Gordon.
Every stop of aperture is nice to have but literally makes them larger, heavier and MUCH more expensive. I'm glad they went for a light, budget option as there are lots of faster alternatives.
@@cameralabs F8 sums up in 2kg nobody will carry, 2,000 quid nobody will pay. No, those lenses are made to open a market which no FF manufacturer is serving.
They will bring a lot of people into birding, sports, .... with the RF system.
The "F8-segment" is already partly filled with the 100-500 RF.
More to come in near future ...
Gordon Laing an 800 f/8 would not be much heavier just eat into the market of the expensive télés Canon makes. Which is why it will never see the light of day. also the old EF Long lenses will eventually appear in RF Format so canon is trying to milk the old line for as long as it can. I just hope 3rd parties like sigma n Tamron give it a bloody nose with their new line in long Rf télés prime n zooms.
@@dimitristsagdis7340 800 f8 is four times the glass needed compared to f11, much more issues with chromatic aberration & sharpness. The simplicity of those f11 would be gone (i.e. this nice sliding in for storage).
The f 8 market is served by this crazy good 100 to 500L and possibly next year with a non L counterpart 100-400 capable taking TC as well.
I would love to see a super light 5.6 500 or 600, only Nikon is providing, you know the price point.
There is no free lunch when it comes to premium optics, and yes 3rd party manufacturers will hold the market fresh.
If any company is milking an old line: Sony with the outdated mount not being able to compete. BTW making it a hard time for 3rd party manufacturers not being able to use optical formulas taking advantage of R/Z/L mount and having a Sony version as well.
Not a huge difference in backgound blur between F8 and F11. I shoot wildlife and birds at F10 and 560mm mostly. F10 is my default F.
Good review Gordon, as to these two lenses they seem amazing value for money and very 'brave or imaginative' of Canon to offer them though I am sure some will complain about the lack of dual card slots :)
I was struggling to decide which I would like better, the 600 or the 800, but I got the 600 since I'm using it on the r10 so I would get 960mm equivalent. That sounds safer for a fixed focal length for birds/birds in flight than 1280mm plus I will be more willing to carry it places. I also got it for $595 on a labor day sale which wasn't available for the 800 lens so that makes it feel more economical haha.
Totally agree with your review. I have an old 500mm L mark 1 and its hard to move around. With that lens it is hard to chase what you are shooting. I love these new lenses! I can fir them with a couple landscape wide angles in my pack and have great day out.
I know it’s asking too much/nitpicking, but I just wonder how much bigger/more expensive they really would have been if they’d gone with f/8 or f/9. I know it works at f/11, but especially with the TC’s I just can’t get over that insane stop down to f/22.
I guess we just can’t have our cake and aperture, too.
Even one stop brighter would make it larger, heavier and much more expensive. They already have a bunch of brighter lenses, don't forget the 100-500 + 1.4x - so I'm glad they stuck with something different here.
Gordon Laing the 100-500 is very expensive and slow. Esp with 1.4x not very useable and it only takes you to 700mm. Which is 100mm a big deal less than the 800. And all this for a stop of light. Plus the 100-500 will not go below 300mm once an extender is fitted.
love the moon shots - which I use my 800mm for. I've also had success with 120 fps surfer videos here in Huntington Beach, CA.
Any idea how the 800mm compares with the 110-400 with a 2.0 extender? Many thanks in advance to whoever might be in a position to opine on this.
That's a god question a d I'm getting lots of requests for some tests vs the 100-400 with a TC, so I'll try and sort one ut in the future.
I think these are amazing lenses for beginners and people who are new to these focal lengths. Especially when paired with the R6 or R5. I’d love it if Canon would update the AF for the RP and R.
If you have the skills to buy a R5... will you really go with a F11 lens 🤔
@@Skye_the_toller that’s all I will have money for after I buy it hahaha
An excellent in depth review as always. Thanks a lot Gordon for taking the time to review these really exciting lenses. These might be the lenses that would convince me to step into mirrorless systems, particularly if they work well with extension tubes. On the topic of aperture and depth of field, would you know by any chance if step down rings would give good results in day time to close down the aperture on these lenses?
You would really need the aperture at the mount-end fr it to work well, so sadly not at the front.
Thank you for your honest review. I think I'll stick with the tamron 150-600 😅
The hoods are optional extras. At least for my lenses.
Oh! They didn't tell me that, I'll check. EDIT - yes, they supplied them without telling me they were optional, grr.
I gave this a quick test a half hour ago hence my previous comment. I'm hoping for good weather conditions tomorrow night to fully test this thing out. This lense serves 2 strict functions either astrophotography ie moon and other planets and/or wild life photography. This isn't designed to be your every day or every night lens.
Your technical reviews are pretty much the only ones I take any notice of now really Gordon. Good solid factual reviews, no sensationalism, no clickbate, no BS 😉❤️.... Keep up the great work.. JP
Thanks!
Thanks again Gordon! ☕️
You're welcome! And thankyou for the coffee, very much appreciated!
Excellent examples Gordon. Were you able to get many keepers handheld?
I'm surprised that you didn't mention the tripod and tripod head as a possible purchase.
Gordon when using either the 600 or the 800 F 11.0 lenses did you have a chance to use an extension tube to try to bring in mainly birds A lot closer .
An extension tube or a teleconverter?
So given the two choices and the teleconverters which would you buy?
I well remember mirror lenses! I bought one, a 500mm F8 Vivitar a little over 20 years ago. It was very soft, so I sold it, losing about £65 and gaining only frustration, some poor pictures and ... well ... some experience. Many years later I learned that Vivitar, Bower, Rokinon and Opteca, along with half a dozen other names, are all the same, and all made by Samyang. Considering how super sharp many of their traditional glass optics are, I find it surprising how poor the image quality of their mirror lenses are. And I believe they still make them to this day, and as soft as ever. They’re called “bamboo lenses” by some - a somewhat derisive term perhaps, but in this case well deserved in my opinion.
About these F11 super telephoto lenses, I don’t find them terribly exciting. Not only because they’re only available in RF mount which I’m not likely to ever buy into. But simply because I find the third party 150-600mm zooms much more attractive.
Yes, those 150-600s are very good, but often large and heavy. The price and weight of these two are very compelling. PS - that photo I showed of a mirror lens at the end is a current model as you probably know, and yes, there is a Samyang version that looks identical, so I guess they do make them for several companies! I wouldn't mind getting one to try out just to see.
@@cameralabs I’ve been told that the different names of Samyang lenses are just a marketing thing: certain names are believed to sell better in certain places.
By the way, “large and heavy” are relative terms. Yes, mine is about twice the weight of the RF 600 f11. But the latest Canon EF 600 f4 boasts that “The lens’s lightweight design makes it easier to transport at just 3050 g it’s the world’s lightest 600 mm f/4”. My Sigma 150-600c weighs only 1930 g, so that makes it super lightweight, doesn’t it?
@@cameralabs Christopher Frost reviewed an 800mm mirror lens a few years ago, in case you’re interested. I think they’re made in 500, 600, ... all the way up to 1100mm. Beware that above a certain focal length they have inbuilt teleconverters which introduce chromatic aberration, which is something you wouldn’t normally expect to see in mirror lenses.
These are cool, but I wonder why they didn’t try a mirror lens. It might’ve been sharper and have less chromatic aberration, as well as theoretically be more compact. Maybe the bokeh.
Sadly, Canon USA would seem to indicate that hoods for the 600mm and 800mm are a $60 and $68 accessory respectively.
You're right I'm afraid. I was supplied with them so made the mistake of assuming they were included. Sadly they are not. ONLY on the L series.
Since it's a full frame lens, does it mean it won't be suitable for the R7 which is a apsc mirror less.
You can use full-frame lenses on a cropped APSC camera, and the crop will effectively multiply the focal length by 1.6x on Canon's system. So these would become 960 and 1280 equivalent respectively on R10 and R7.
Kinda sucks that the autofocus only works in the center unfortunately, as small as they are you lose a bit of flexibility with tracking fast subjects
Sure but again 600 and 800 primes for less than 1k which WILL still autofocus well enough for sports and wildlife. And that reduced area is still roughly similar to a DSLR viewfinder.
The Sony 200-600mm f5.6-6.3 G OSS FE is still the most versatile and budget friendly lens for telephoto shooters out there at £1685 in the UK.
True but then you have to pair it with a decent body hence why I have stayed with my G9 and 100-400 combo. Cheap as chips!
I'm very fond of that Sony lens, but remember it costs more than these ones.
@@cameralabs Less than the Sony mentioned here Gordon. I looked into it but picked my G9 at a steal of £599 instead 😉😏
@@JoeMaranophotography my reply was about the Sony lens, not the Pannie one! But i am fond of the Pannie lens as well and the G9 is a steal although for refocusing on action it's not as good as the Canon and Sony bodies.
@@cameralabs I can testify to that! Sadly money talks because of it was purely photography I think I would take the Sony.
Some should compare that 600 mm to Sony RX10 Mark IV. They have same reach and almost same aperture size: 600 mm / 11 = 54.5 mm. 220 mm / 4 = 55 mm.
Comparison between those vs. the Sigma 150-600C would be great :) !
Thanks!
Hi Gordon,
I’m wondering whether to jump ship for low end wildlife photography from Fuji to Canon, but I’m a bit confused. Am I going to get the benefit of full frame and the canon’s Af with these lenses, because the alternatives for canon for anything above 400mm full frame, are really expensive and canon are dropping third party support. But on the other side some reviewers have called the new Fuji’s AF on the XH1 and XH1s, to be so inconsistent as to be unusable?
Any advice please, thanks.
Do you mean the XH2 and XH2S? You can see my results in my reviews of those, I can't comment on what others have said. You're right to price-up the cost of a body and lens to deliver the field of view you desire. Fujifilm has a fairly low cost 150-600, which with the XH2S makes for a really nice wildlife setup. Sony also has a good 200-600 zoom at a reasonable price. Canon's only really lower cost big zoom is the RF 100-400 or of course the primes you're watching here. Certainly the R6 or R5 with one of these is a nice system, but the possibility of a stacked APSC sensor is also tempting. Really the AF systems vary hugely depending on subject and background, and one person may get great results when another fails. I'd strongly recommend renting or trialling a system in your environment so you can see how they perform for your kind of subjects and conditions. let me know how you get on.
Gordon, great review sent you a cup of tea money.
Just wondering which setup you would go for:
RF 100-500mm with 1.4x TC or the 800 rf f11 prime
Thanks Godfrey! The 100-500 is a higher quality lens with the added flexibility of being a zoom, but it's also much more expensive, so it depends on your budget.
Money is always the ISO killer! Thanx G definitely worth testing out for the weekend warrior.
I think it's amazing hw good modern cameras can look at 25600 ISO, making lenses like these practical options.
cant wait for this video mate and glass. Time to pop the kettle on
To be honest at such focal length atmospheric distortion should start slightly crawling into the image.
As I have no RF mount camera and no specific purpose for such focal length, I'll stick to my Sigma 150-600 :D
Great 👍 if I owned an Eos R I’d definitely have that 800mm
Gordon, would you comment on why someone with the RF 100-500 would find it beneficial to have either the RF 600 or 800? Is there anything these lenses could do that you couldn't achieve with the 100-500 with a teleconverter? Thank you.
If you already have the 100-500, a TC would make sense, but beware the compatibilities.
Thanks for another wonderful review, Gordon. I'm struggling to find an affordable path forward for a longer lens that's also easy to carry, and potentially an upgrade from my current Canon RP. How would these lenses pair with the R7?
They work well, and the smaller AF area due to their aperture takes up more of the frame on the cropped R7 - so you get more AF coverage with them than you would on full-frame.
@@cameralabs Might be crazy but would an RF 100-400 Ff/5.6-8 with a teleconverter be a another option?
@@markmcdonough9748 the 100-400 is a great choice for the R7 and would give you a lot of reach plus the chance to crop those high res files. I haven't tried it with TCs. Canon has lots of RF TC restrictions, so check with any lens you're thinking of using one on. I'd say on a cropped body, you won't need TCs on a lens like this unless you're shooting the Moon. Remember the AF and image quality will reduce with them, so unless you have a pro-grade bright aperture lens, I'd be wary of relying on them. Maybe occasionally, but not regularly with standard lenses.
Do you considder making a comparison between the Canon 600mm f/11 RF vs. the EF 400mm f/5.6 with a 1.4 Canon extender and the EF/RF adapter? The old EF combination is relatively widely used and should make a point of reference to many.
I'd like to
@@cameralabs Using the 400mm f/5.6 lowers the Frames Per Second to 6.8/mechanical shutter on the R6 (& probably R5 too). It's noted in the digital version of the R6 manual in the table on p. 429 where the meanings for the colors and blinking of the H and H+ continuous shooting icons (when lenses are mounted) are given in FPS (or shots per second). For example, when I set the R6 to H+ continuous shooting, and mount the 400mm f5.6, the H+ icon flashes white in the display. According to the table, this indicates 6.8 FPS. In H mode, it is only 3.8 FPS, and 4.9 electronic (1st curtain). This is with fully charged battery. I don't have an extender so am not sure what the possible effect would be on FPS, if any. If anyone knows I am interested!
@@Flanan yes, there are lots of gotchas with these bodies and only the latest EF lenses will support the fastest burst speeds on them.
Hey Gordon, which song specifically was this from David cutters library?
oop found it, thank goodness for sound search!
"Snakes"
I have been a serious amateur photographer for years. Thinking about starting to sell my photographs. I do not have experience with the canon big glass. Would you pick the new RF 800 F 11 $1,000 or a generation I 600 F4 for $4,500 US dollars? I will be shooting at very distant wildlife. Mostly during the day but sometimes early evening or morning. I cannot afford to the newest generation 600 F4.
How can you use these lenses at the shutter speeds necessary to capture fast-moving animals and the ISOs necessary for even semi-clean images on anything other than a sunny day?
Canon could have at least made the 600mm lens f8 instead of f11. They might have turned out the same size!
I show and explain in the video what they can and can't do.
The way these lenses look they remind me of Rollei SLX lenses.
Hi Gordon, I finally got my eos r6 after two months waiting. First one I got in end of Sep is a faulty camera then I bring it back and exchanged a good one. Currently I'm using a RF 24-70 f/2.8lens. It's a quite good lens for multi purposes. RF 50 1.8 and RF 70-200 f4 should come soon later. I will pick the 50 1.8 as a easy carry lens but I'm not sure which long lens I should buy. Would you recommend 70200 f4? The size is quite compact that just like a tin of coca. If I want to pick a telephoto lens between rf 600 and 800, which one would you recommend? Like to take photo of aircrafts and moon or long distance architectures. Thanks!
Sounds like you're shooting very distant subjects, so probably the 800 over the 600. I can't comment on the others as nothing has been officially announced yet.
@@cameralabs Thanks Gordon! RF 50mm has been ordered. Will order a 800 soon.
Could you please state the effecive zoom capabilities? 26 and 32 ?
You mean if you want to say '50x'? Generally 1x is 50mm, so 800 would be 16x
@@cameralabs there is also the usual 25mm 600÷25= 24
@@MzuMzu-nx1em where are you getting 25 from? If you mean 25mm, then that certainly isn';t close to the magnification of a human eye. 50 is closer. But either way, people don't generally quote x figures for fixed lenses.
I really missed the comparison with the Canon ef 4.0 300 with extenders and your Canon rf
100-500. It would be so much more interesting if you did, can you in future make a real comparison? Greetings Onno Nugteren The Netherlands.
I don't have access to the old 300 f4, sorry!
Very helpful and and well reviewed
Thanks!
Well, I'm gonna get one of them - yet I haven't chosen which of the two.
Which model to buy depends on the subjects you want to capture. I personally found the RF 600mm f11 the more flexible of the pair, suitable for large birds, and more sports and landscapes, while the shorter focal length and better stabilisation made it easier to aim and film; I also preferred its greater portability. But if you’re photographing smaller or more distant wildlife, Sea sports or the Moon, no lens is too big and the RF 800 will be your preferred choice. Both share similar image quality and come Highly Recommended so long as you understand and can work with their limitations.
@@cameralabs I think I'm going to measure my camera bag. Maybe the 800 is out right away :-D
Wait until they release a 700 mm…
The images I have seen on the internet out of these lenses lack the 'pop' one expects out of a prime. Maybe I haven't seen enough samples but I think a 20 year old 400mm f5.6L or even a 300mm f4L EF mount lens with an adapter & extender will be better than any of these lenses.
What was the minimum ISO you used? Thanks.
I discuss this in the video.
Would’ve been nice if it was faster but given the cost and the range you’re getting, I guess something has got to give.
Every stop of aperture is nice to have but literally makes them larger, heavier and MUCH more expensive. I'm glad they went for a light, budget option as there are lots of faster alternatives.
600mm F4 (3kg) and 800mm F5.6 (4.5kg) are available in EF mount, having perfect performance adapted to RF cameras. For a price of a couple of kidneys :D
Yet if you know how to use 'em properly, hardly anyone will be able to tell the difference ;)
Tho I prefer my Sigma 150-600mm.
SmashEX Entertainment Heh, with the exception of the Sigma and the 100-400/150-600 zooms, those fast teleprimes are way out of my reach to buy.
Well done.
Arrrgh. Camera left out in the rain! I won’t be able to sleep tonight!
No cameras were harmed in the making of this video.,
Inspired work by Canon - long toms without the cost and weight. 😎😎😎
🙏🏾
canon eos rp and 800m lens and you can spy on yuor neighborhood dirty wifes :D chears
Eww!! horrible looking things, and very impractible ! After watching your channel and a few others, I now realise what a good lens I bought for my 750D a few months ago, the L series F2.8 70 - 200mm, I now understand the F numbers, and 2.8 is very good, and should really suit my R6 , when I get it at the end of the month, I shuddered when you said F 22 :-)
You shuddered because you're used to a DSLR. As I illustrated in my sample photos and videos, these lenses work just fine on mirrorless bodies at f11 to f22 and are much cheaper than an f2.8 L zoom, and much longer too. They're different lenses for a different market. You can't use them anyway on your 750D, so it doesn't matter.
@@cameralabs I beg to differ , I have a copy of the convertor, don't think I will use it though, as Canon is bundling their R to Eos convertor with the purchase !
@@ChrisColeman1962 hang on, the 70-200 you bought is being bundled with an EOS R adapter? I'd not seen that happening, they must be keen to convert DSLR owners... where did you get it?
@@cameralabs The purchase of the R6 entitles me to the official convertor lol .
@@ChrisColeman1962 ah yes, some of the R bodies are bundled with one. You had me confused throughout this thread. AT first i thought you were a DSLR-only owner, then i thought your 70-200 had come with an RF adapter.
The lens is either a hit or miss when holding it by hand. This lens needs a tripod or a monopod at the very least due to the sheer weight of it to get accurate pictures. But when it does get accurate pictures it really gets accurate pictures. This is the equivalent of canon's 400mm 5.6 with a 2x teleconverter on it to get the 800mm f11 aperture. Instead of people being so focused on the aperture being f11 they should be more concerned about the sheer weight of this thing
F11 sounds not very impressive.
But did you watch the review and see my images and see what it can do? Is it still unimpressive for the money?
I would be interested in a comparison to the Olympus 300mm f4 (+TC 1.4x & 2x)... Wondering how they'll do against that :)
Weeeeell, the Olympus lens currently costs $2900, so is four times more than the RF 600 and over three times more than the 800, so very different products. It's heavier too.
@@cameralabs Buuuuut, you can get Olympus newest sensor in a camera for about 1k, the 300mm is also available used already and 1 stop brighter... (+weathersealing, better stabilization). And i doubt the system is gonna be heavier in total (E-M5 iii + 300mm vs Eos R6 + 600mm)
Okay, did some quick calculating canon r6 + 600mm is about 200g lighter than E-M5 III + 300mm... But therefor the latter is smaller in use (no extension). I think these "systems" differ in a lot of points, but in total they are more similar then it might seem.
@@jonathanorleyi6600 Just consider when these guys start popping up used, that 800mm will be like $600. Amazing!!!!
I know the design of a lens isn’t a priority but I’m not a fan of the design!
I agree, they're not that attractive, but I like what they're offering.
I purchased the RF 800 and haves used it on my R6 with beautiful results. Under moderate conditions it delivers sparkling clean results. It’s not for everything but it feels almost weightless. Combined with the amazing auto focus, it’s a clear winner.
Excellent review Gordon...thank you. It's good to see Canon producing low cost RF "kit" lenses, but some look so "big bertha butttt ugly"...just my opinion. In this price range, the Sigma 150-600 offers better quality, functions, options, firmware updates. Always enjoy your unbiased reviews!
I’ve had the 800mm for several weeks now, using on the R, while I wait for my R5 to arrive. I have been very impressed with the images I get and tbh, at the price it is great value. I simply wouldn’t spend the money needed to get a faster lens, and neither would I want to be carrying such a lens around all day, something you can do with ease with the f11 lens.
Glad to hear you're enjoying it!
I shoot now with a 100-400 L II on an R5 while my 11 year old inherited my R with a 600 f 11. I was shocked that on the very first outing he was nailing birds in flight with this kit. All hand held. The results after post processing were very good. This is in great part due to the light weight of this lens. I used to own an EF 300mm f2.8 L IS. It was, to this date, the best lens I had ever own. But did it yielded the best images? It is probably 6th or 7th on my personal list. Because it was such a pain to travel, carry and shoot with it. Size and weight were a big problem. The best quality lens is useless if you have to leave it at home most of the time.
@@JuanPerez-sv8qs that’s a fantastic endorsement that your 11 year old was having such success. You’re absolutely right about portability. There’s no way I would be bothered taking a large heavy lens about with me on my daily walk, which I am quite happy to do with the 800mm f11. In fact today I was out on a headland in very windy conditions, and whilst it does get blown about, I still managed sharp images. I’m very happy with the lens.
There was a time I didn’t mind carrying heavy equipment. But as I got older that slowly changed. I’m almost 71, and carrying the lenses I used to is now out of the question. Later this year I’ll get the R5, and the 800 will be one of the lenses I’ll be getting.
@@melgross I think you'll be really impressed with what you can achieve for the size and weight of this combo. PS - if you're ordering online, please do consider using my price-check links here or in my reviews at cameralabs.com thanks!
The 150-600mm lenses from Sigma and Tamron seems to be a better deal. Let's a lot more light in and aren't too big. Hope they'll make mirrorless versions of those lenses at some point.
yes, they've already made 100-400, but we need the bigger guns!
Can't you use them with the EF adapter
@@419tommy yes, you can adapt any EF lens to the EOS R system and they work pretty well. But Sigma's latest native mirrorless lenses work even better.
I'd much prefer the lenses to extend out from the front in the traditional way. Extending from the rear the way they go makes it look very ugly lol. Interesting lenses non the less, on paper they seem a very odd choice by Canon but no doubt they will appeal to many particularly at the price.
Hey Gordon, longtime follower/reader. Great review - valuable insights, great photo examples, fun video clips. I can tell you had fun with the lenses and putting the video together :) Keep up the great work!
Thanks, yes I did enjoy this one!
I guess if you're coming from an APS-C sensor the depth of field isn't too drastic with f11 is roughly equivalent to f7.1. On the Tamron 150-600 G2 I generally stopped down to f8-9 anyways due to softness at the long end. Sadly the Tamron G2 currently has unreliable AF on the R6 so I picked up the 800 f11 recently. The one quirk I have noticed is that the stabilization seems to struggle with slow panning, I was photographing ducks swimming and had quite a few blurry shots between sharp ones when they stayed still (shooting at 1/400-1/800).
Excellent pair of lenses. I opted for the 600 for the R7 and it’s so light I forget it’s there. Waiting for the weather to turn. Thanks for the double review
You're welcome, hope you have fun with it!
Great review!
Great products!
Thanks!
Can’t even afford to R6 atm lol. I’m currently using a Canon 5d mk4 which I’ve been quite happy with but now . . . These lenses sound good but at f11 it’s a deal breaker as much of my usage will be in less than ideal light. I only own two zoom lenses. Both Canon L glass. 24-70 & 70-200. All my other lenses are fast primes so I suppose I’m a little spoilt lol. I think I’d probably wait to see if Sigma comes up with a suitable telephoto in their Art series as I already use several Art series primes and have found them to be excellent. I have a Sigma 85 1.4 Art and the more expensive Canon 85 1.4 and tbh, it’s the Sigma I will reach for unless light levels demand IS. It just produces much high IQ in every respect.
Loving these reviews btw. Can’t think how I missed them previously. Straight forward. To the point and informative. Thank you.
Using on the RP. Really want the R6 but want some experience (size, weight, muscle memormory) with the lens before biting off the R6 price. High fps, faster focus, eye focus are calling to me. Circumstances have limited the use this fall but shooting herons hand held with crisp results is a lot of fun. Have purchased an extension tube to use on tiny birds at the bird feeder. Hoods are an accessory in the US. Enjoy the review. You have slowed your rapid fire speech to a more understandable pace. Thanks for that.
Another outstanding review!!! Thank you Gordon.
Do you know these two lens do not support camera inbody image body stabilisation.
wow nice lens sir..i love it..but its expensive..one day i will buy it..amazing cameras R5 and R6...nice clicks
i'm still blown away by this lens. the level of detail is like none other. buy this lens you won't regret it.
Also, got your book, great stuff! Thanks!
Thankyou, I hope you find it useful!
Durring my forced confinement it has alleviated many hours of "down time"! As soon as I can get the vaccine for covid I am going to be replacing all my gear that got destroyed in a house fire last November. I had been waiting for Cannons new lineup, and the I got grounded be covid, so now I just wait! LOL Your reviews have really been informative, and I loved that you actually did a review of the R5 and R6 for photographers!
@@KeithCarmichaelInFL thanks, and I hope you can rebuild your kit again soon. I'll be posting my RF 85mm f2 macro review soon.
great video
Awesome as always
Thanks!
Would you recommend the 800mm or the 100-500 with a 1.4 teleconverter for birding and wildlife photography?
I think you know the answer to that - do the birds vary in distance and size significantly? if so, get the zoom.
Great review! How do these lenses compare to the Olympus 100-400 f5-6.3? It's a 200-800 f10-12.6 ff equivalent so the same kind of range and aperture even if it's another sensor format. It would be a very interesting comparison on the field.
It could be interesting... I have reviewed that lens, so you could check my sample images for it as I try and include some similar shots in my reviews.
Awesome!!
I can't help but think that over time the barrel extension will wear out, maybe not a lot, but little by little I think lens elements will go out of alignment.
Only time will tell...
Won’t be buying this however great reviews as usual Gordon thank you.
Thanks!
These lenses seem promising but I am concerned about the long term durability with the extendable lens body and the lack of apparent moisture and dust sealing. I will wait and see how they hold up in others' hands before I give them a try. Besides, I'm still waiting for my 100-500mm to arrive and I am loathe to purchase either of these lenses if the zoom telephoto and an extender does everything I would ask of the fixed FL lenses.
I think you'll be very happy with the 100-500, it's a much higher-end product.
@@cameralabs Unfortunately, my local shop checked with the Canadian distributor and was told these lenses are on backorder and aren't expected until end November.....but at least my order is on the waiting list.....yay for me.....
Thoughts on these vs panasonic 100-400? Seem equivalent in aperture and reach
By saying 100-400 that's already a big advantage.... Flexibility. Also size difference and weight as well as much better close focusing distance.
@@JoeMaranophotography 2x crop means 200-800 f9-12.6
@@1fareast14 Yes. That's correct.
Thanks for this Gordon. Massively useful review as always. I am getting an R3 delivered tomorrow and was originally planning to use it paired with my 100-400 mark ii, and maybe buying a 2 x converter, but now seeing a native RF 800mm is making me think I should just buy that instead of the converter. What would be your thoughts on image quality in these 2 scenarios? They would both end up at F11 I guess but I was assuming the L glass would have the edge on image quality? Many thanks. Mark
Hmm good question, I'd be tempted to use the 100-400, although maybe with a 1.4x, as 2x TCs can result in a big quality hit.
@@cameralabs many thanks Gordon, much appreciated. Might try the 800 out at Wex, alongside the converter and take it from there!
One of your best reviews Gordon. I became frustrated by Canon's lack of development in mirrorless and seitched first to Olympus and then added a Sony system. In comparison to the EM1MK3 with 300mm f4 I'm guessing from your review the Canon R6/600mm combination has about a two thirds stop noise advantage over the Olympus combination? But I'm not sure about focussing ability since Olympus only includes bird recognition in the EM1X?
Thanks! I've used the Olympus 300mm f4 and it's a really nice lens, but it is a lot more expensive than these, and heavier too. A side-by-side would be interesting. My gut feeling is the Canon will be a little cleaner, but the decisive aspect will be the AF tracking which for BIFs on the Canon is amazing. Plus the weight and price differences too, which may actually fall in favour of the Canon.
@@cameralabs That's scary! At least the Olympus gear is good at repelling water, as you have demonstrated in the past.
They are very niche lenses. A canon 100-400 II is much more versatile with 2x teleconverter, you get 100-800 f4.5-f11
If they do a 600f8 like the old mirrorflex lens, would be more interesting.
And weighs an absolute ton to haul around and by all accounts with the 2x tc not as good definition and detail as the 800mm. I own the combo you have and walking around with it for a day is an absolute pain due to the weight.
No other company would even bother to make these lenses cause they actually care about things that really matter. High noise has always been an issue with Canon and these F11 lenses go to show that Canon really don't care. As long as they can make money out of it... 99% of shots will be useless with these lenses cause high ISO will ruin it. The only possibility is to hope for decent quality in very high contrast situations (maximum sunlight) that already is sub-par conditions to get the best photos of subjects that you would need these 600 or 800 to get in the first place.
Do you think my sample images shown in this video are ruined by poor quality?
@@cameralabs I will have to see the RAW files to evaluate the quality of your pictures. I'm a Canon shooter and know very well the issues of recovering details from shadows at higher ISOs. Even on the R5 and R6. I shoot pictures of wildlife quite a lot - birds in flight, foxes, seals and reindeers so I know pretty well the difference to shooting moving target vs none moving in real-life wild-life situations. And I'm from Iceland so right now I would not have enough light for more than 1 - 2 hours to shoot F11 on the very best days. Personally - I would never pick those lenses for anything portfolio related or print-worthy images. And even tho Ai - noise reduction software has come a long way in the past few years - it's still an extra hassle to add that into the workflow.
If people are really spending money on an R6 or R5 camera - they should also spend the money on a decent glass to shoot with. The 100-500mm RF is the only real native option atm. I would look to adapt - even the Sigma 150-600mm F5-6.3 to save money rather than go high in ISO on Canon camera. And still waiting on a decent 200-600mm lens from Canon btw ;) Sony made a decent one now. And for a fair price too :)
As for none moving wild-life images or videos in bright situations. You can get light gear already to take decent photos on something like the Samsung S20 Ultra zoom that is acceptable on social media ;) th-cam.com/video/rYXmfGDWGFw/w-d-xo.html
@@ChristianHeid7 I completely agree that if you are shooting in very dim conditions, then these are not the lenses for you.
👍🏻👍🏻Thanks for this review Gordon. I wish Canon would have built the 600mm with an f/8 apperture. I am sure they could have done this while keeping its size similar to the 800mm f/11 🤔 I know it would be a more expensive option but it would be interresting to see a comparison of the new RF 100-400mm and 100-500mm + 1.4 and 2x TC vs the 600mm and 800mm f/11 🙄
Lots of requests for a 100-400 + TC comparison, so I'll consider it for a future video!
I'd love to see you do a video with these lenses mounted to the R and RP!
I did try them on the R briefly and they worked fine.
Gordon Laing good to hear. Contemplating one of these lenses for my RP so I was curious how they’d do especially since the R and RP don’t have IBIS.
A 600/800mm at f/11?? Not for professional photographers, and the early amateur photographers will soon learn that f/11 isn't for low light action images. Canon could have done better than this-look more at the Sigma 60-600mm f/4.5-6.3 for value and quality, though you will need to add the RF adapter ring.