I have R7, I changed RF 100-400 to EF 100-400 II. And I will say this - I'm a bit disappointed with the autofocus speed. In my opinion, in RF lenses (even budget ones like RF 100-400), the detection of eyes in animals works much better. So I will probably get rid of it and buy the RF 100-500. Surprisingly, the budget RF is also much more accurate than its more expensive and older brother. You can simply see that these RF systems are dedicated to each other.

Great video! Recently got an r7 as a gift and I’ll be using your video to buy lenses. Many thanks 🦐

Most underrated channel ever

A good overview of the lenses.

i have the RF 100-400, just saw the ef 100-400 v2 used for 600usd. i don't do much wildlife and i like portability. tough sell but nice aperture range .

_Great_ video! I figured out how to enable digital zoom, but not how to actually use the zoom. Your video quickly showed how, and it provided additional info. Very informative. Well done.

Thats hell lot of work. Really appreicate this. Subscribed.

Note: KZbin failed to process this clip in HDR, despite being a straight upload (the following clip did successfully process - kzbin.info/www/bejne/ZpTFinZpg7uKerc). However, this still serves as evidence that video clips made with Canon's 10-bit HDR PQ do not need to be color graded like CLOG does.

thank you, you did a great job in this video

I’m trying to get into portrait photography and i’ve been looking at this lense but would it be good with the r50?

The greenish color is beautiful. The exterior have a nice aesthetic as well. I also return mine because of the zipper is catching when opening while hang on the shoulder as you have pointed out. I think that will shorten the life of te bag. Opening in the front to access the whole gear is not friendly to the clothes as well when you need to access in a muddy environment. Great review.

Good video. I would like to see how the Sigma does with the R10. Everyone on KZbin tests it with a R7, which has a higher Mpx sensor. The Sigma IQ was fantastic with my Rebel SL3, which has the same Mpx resolution as the R10.

❤❤❤

Nice review. On Canon R10 body, 100-400mm L ii is front heavy and a bit of a problem for handholding for long periods of time. Any noticeable difference with 100-500mm. I don't know if they carry some of the lens elements back with the new design. Thanks.

The scene is rather evenly lit so I don't think CLOG 3 will make a difference in this case. Probably need to go outdoors, or film out a window to see a difference.

SUPERBBBB Video i have a cannon R50 with a 35 mm rf 1.8 prime…considering getting this lense or considering selling the r50 and getting an R8 and skipping it.. i use it for gym videos and photos and KZbin content…I’m leaning to get the Sigma..

You may have a soft version of EF100-400 II even it's late production.

Dang, a lot of work was put into this video and I just want you to know I appreciated it. Thanks!

I think your direct critique of the product is good, honestly outling pros and cons. One technical error, you made, was the strap across the back is for securing to trolley type luggage and not for lifting when the bag is front down.

Just came across you whilst browsing 100-400 lens reviews. Excellent review and very much enjoyed how well presented with detailed analysis. I read on here that you can no longer get the parts from canon regards 100-400 Mk 1. The newer lighter very cheap brand new 100-400 is temping as seen some great deals on this lens but the 100-400 Mk 2 if found at the right price is also temping 🥳🥳

Great comparison! As a football photographer, I’m currently using the RF 100-400mm, but I’m really struggling with the f/8 aperture, especially in lower light conditions. I’m considering upgrading to the EF 100-400mm Mark II for its better aperture. Do you think it’s worth making the switch? I would sell the RF lens to fund the EF. Any advice would be much appreciated!

I can't assign the zoom function button on r62

I've been really enjoying your ambience uploads! I moved from Maryland to Los Angeles many years ago and I've been missing the cicada songs. Do you think you would ever consider making longer-format videos?

I have both the 100/400 Mk 2 and the new RF 100/400. and its really all about 2 things weight and price. Ive been using a 5D mk 4 and an 80D for the crop factor. Now Ive gone mirrorless and have an R8. and the crop sensor R100. The ONLY reason for me changing was the weight, im no 76 bad arthritis in both hands. The new RF combo against the old EF is H U G E , its half the weight and half the price. Now along with the MK2 70/200 f2.8 the 2 EF lenses are almost unbeatable by any other lens system. I have the ef/RF converters, but that defeats the weight problem as both lenses are heavy. Both the R8 and R100 are unbeleivably small, looking like toys by comparison, but the R8 packs in a huge amount of modern tech, Im not so worried about the R100 as basically i only use it for the crop factor increase with the 100/400. The weight diffference does make a difference in how often i will use it , its so easy to hand hold and can be used for much longer ( for me ). I did worry about the different aperture ranges and so far its not been a real factor , but im sure it will happen. The image stabilisation is great, more so on the new RF version. The real difference is chromatic abberation, which frankly on the new RF version is Terrible as is the shorter 24/105 version, even with lightroom i cant get rid of all of it. Image quality is excellent almost unbeatable with the EF version, even with the mk 3 1.4 converter fitted . Unfortunately it cant be used on the RF version, you need to buy that specific version ( expensive !) I went on a safari , a small group of 7 , 2 of which had the Canon mk 1 version 100-400, cant compete with the mk 2 and there is a huge improvement with the 1.4 converters between the mk 2. and. mk 3. I do do believe the mk 3 converter was designed with both the 70/200 f2.8 and the 100/400 mk 2 in mind. I cant tell the difference with it fitted or not. The newer RF 10-400 has more than acceptable quality , but is not comparible to the older EF version, which is staggering. At twice the price it should be. If your fit and weight is no problem there is no choice, Go for the EF .I found having to add the converter to the old EF lenses a bit unwieldly and wont fit attached in most camera bags. Now i have a few camera bags so yes it will fit in say my Lowpro 400, but i dont want that on a daily hike preferring the 300 version. The larger bags i use for getting to my destination, then transfer what i need to a smaller bag on a daily basis.

Holy hell, give this man his Play Button already KZbin! Add some music and you're going to give Christopher Frost a run for his money.

Fantastic review. Thank you so much! Excellent in every way.

You got a Link or What's the product called for the Wind Cover on top of camera microphone?

Great info! I think as a newbie hobbyist to DSLR, 100-400 gen 1 should be good enough.

Yo pensaba que el sigma 18 35 era muy superior a las lentes rfs por ser de la linea art ... estaba pensando en adquirirlo pero ahora no se si sea una buena opción 😢

Good work. Thanks for the job

Circle of life

poor caterpillar

Wow - this is an exceptional review of these lenses, the best of all the others I have ever reviewed. It is an excellent guide to anyone seeking to buy any of these lenses. I own the RF 100-400, it was a good way to start BIF, but I ultimately bough the EF100-400 MK II for the fabulous build quality, AF and lens stabilization. The inability to use and travel with the RF100-500 using extenders was unacceptable. It would be a painful daily hassle to constantly having to mount and remove extenders when needed. The EF 100-400 MK II has no such problem, and you can leave the extenders mounted during travel. Thank you for the wonderful work, I have clicked LIKE and Subscribe because you have done such an excellent job.

Thanks for sharing! What ef adapter did u used - Commlite? I also wonder, does R7 IBIS works well with old Ef s zooms like Tamron 17-50 or Sigma? And off course how it works with Speedbooster and 16-35 ii?

Interesting timing. I just purchased my first vintage "bargain" lens from KEH last week. I've avoided buying anything but top condition lenses from KEH in the past because you can't see photos of the exact lens, but in this case, they had the precise lens I wanted and nobody else did. I got pretty much what you did. Moderate, acceptable, wear on the lens body and very clean optics. I'm thrilled with it. And, there was simply no way that lens would have been in my budget in better condition. A year or so ago, I ordered an "ugly" spot meter attachment for my Sekonic light meter, after calling and asking if they had any information on exactly what was wrong with it. I crossed my fingers and bought it - and it came up in absolutely mint condition - there is a dark spot in the center of the image, but it's part of the design, not an optical flaw. So ... I got a win there for sure.

Those are some really good close ups you have. Beautiful birds and squirrel

Fast question for Canon R8 RF100-400 or EF100-400 Mark 1? Footbal and 1-2 times in year airshow.

Pity though that the RF 100-500 4.5-7.1 is now selling for 3349 euro, of the equivalent of about 3650 US$. It is a great little machine, but not sure of they are *that* great. They are even becoming gradually more expensive with time. No fun anymore.

This digital zoom only work for video? Can i used digital zoom in Photography too?

Very useful information, and well documented. Can't an extender be used with the "RF 100-400mm f/5.6-8 IS USM" model? Can only crop mode be used on a Cano R as a way of expansion?

Thanks for this well balanced review. I was struggling between the used copy of EF100-400 II and RF100-500, and I already have the RF100-400 which I enjoy using for birds around my living quarters. The problem with the RF100-400 is that when it rains, I don't dare to bring it out as it lacks the water sealing, and that the other two has a small advantage of letting in a little more light, besides a lot better built wiith weather protection. With your review, I am more inclined to get the EF100-400 II

Laptop???

Truly excellent work. Thank you. I have the RF 100-400 f/5.6-8 - a local vendor had a sale going, and I got a used one for $400 US. 'nuff said. I also find the size/weight shockingly good. The one time I've had an issue was shooting an osprey at the limit of the lens's range wide open on an R7. There was enough "glow" that I didn't care for any of the shots. Later testing showed me that stopping down from f/8 to f/11 gave me razor clarity - and in bright sunlight, that was OK. That issue was not apparent at all with the less dense sensor on the EOS-R I used to use the lens with. At that price, I have less than nothing to complain about! At some point, I might go for one of the more expensive options, but whenever I think I'm going to pull the trigger on that, I keep coming back to that light weight and small size. So far, I'm still using it.

In the last experiment comparing optical zoom to digital zoom, it would be fun to adjust the iso to keep the same exposure level on both cameras and see how similar they are. I bet they are very close. it looks like canon is cropping the sensor to achieve the zoom which is good because it means up until about 4x zoom, it's still optical zoom in a way. Also, there goes the only advantage of having an APS-C camera against a full frame camera. Well done canon!

Can you compare them with the sigma ef 150-600???

Hay quá anh ỏi👍👏🇻🇳🔔🇻🇳🔔

For birding, I love my R7 with RF 100-500 zoom. While I can't speak to the Canon EF lenses, I experienced "focus pulsing" with the EF 100-400 Vi DC from Tamron and the 150-600C from Sigma, and others have described similar with some older Canon lenses, perhaps because the AF has trouble keeping up? In any case, I am thrillred with my setup for birds and wildlife: the dual focus motors are fast and accurate, the OIS works well with the R7 IBIS, the minimum focus distance (MFD) is less than 1m at all focus lengths, and the image quality is simply spectacular. In my experience, the 1.4x TC doesn't compromise AF, image quality, or MFD, and the weather resistance is a comfort. If you can manage the price, I am sure you will be pleased,

Excellent work. My take, if you have a R7 or similar and are on a budget, get the RF100-400. If you have loads of dough, get the RF 100-500. The end. And thank you for doing this!

I drove by it today, I think the ship's name is Gary I. Gordon. Very cool video with a great view of a ship passing under the Key Bridge that is now gone.

Great review and all fair points. The one you undersold was the weight of the RF100-400. It deserved a section too. I went for the 100-400 II L as the mounting options were great with extenders and mounts not to mention the deals one gets on the used market. £800 for a mint if you are patient otherwise it’s £1k.