Canon RF 100-500mm f/4.5-7.1 'L' IS USM lens review with samples

[@getupandadam8932]

I’ve been lucky enough to have this lens for a few months now, having picked it over the 150-600 and 100-400 EF options. It really does everything so well, at such a reasonable size and weight, that I was able to justify the massive price tag. It’s one of the few pieces of equipment I haven’t felt any buyer’s remorse over, since I knew any other option would be compromising in details that make this such a fun lens to use. I think the most shocking comparison was how similar an EF 70-200 F4 IS + EF-RF adapter is in size and weight. This lens is almost identical once you remove the tripod collar! Canon has a real winner with this one.

[@ksyutang]

/

[@alansach8437]

What 150-600 option? The focus pulsing Sigma or Tamron EFs?

[@GinoFoto]

Unbelievably how fast modern focusing systems can be, especially on the high-end lenses, nearly knock to the theoretical speed limit.

[@detectivejonesw]

What is the theoretical speed limit? How close is the focusing of the human eye?

[@johnyyjoestaro]

@@detectivejonesw it's not that fast

[@GinoFoto]

@@detectivejonesw Not much faster than this actually, considering the whole task, moving weighty glass element on the rail for a few centimeters, while perceiving required reliability for no less than a couple hundred thousand activations.

[@jan.tichavsky]

It's hard to define theoretical limit. But consider the phase detect pixels have to sample the scene for couple moments to collect enough light for data processing, that takes some time too, only then the lens elements can start moving. There's finite acceleration and deceleration given the small batter power budget. At the end I think there is confirmation of focus or fine tuning the glass position to nail pixel sharp results in 100 MP image. Such quickly rrsponding real time system is quite the engineering feat.

[@billmartin1010]

This was the first lens (besides the kit lens) that I bought when I bought my Canon R6. It's an amazing lens. Extremely versatile and wonderful at all focal lengths. I have even used it to take outdoor portraits!

[@reallymentalpig1173]

This is my third one

[@reallymentalpig1173]

@@petitwhite6366 if your going to do stuff like weddings where you need a fast aperture with a good amount zoom you need the 70-200mm. However the 100-500 in decent light its very good I have it for sports and birds it works good.

[@brianhatcher2860]

Thanks Christopher, your review really helped my decision. I picked this lens (over the EF 100-400 f/4.5-5.6L is usm ii.) I've only had my copy of this lens for one outing in the field and - BY FAR - this is the sharpest, best-performing lens I've ever used. On my R7 it is brilliant for wildlife, especially song birds. Even pixel peeping at 300% or 400% the details are sharp and contrast is crisp. It's great for bird identification even if you can't get close enough for a great image. Comparing it to my 300mm f/4 L IS prime lens, it has vastly better sharpness and contrast. The IS is so quiet I thought that it wasn't turned on. Your review was dead on, "it comes highly recommended." Thanks!!

[@clartypaths840]

Dear Santa...

[@FunkyMunkey00_]

Haha

[@deanjelcic9299]

Dear credit card 😬

[@andrear9500]

The lens is great, please do not misunderstand my next words. Considered the purchase but decided to hold on as I regularly go to safaris and this lens could only become very interesting on a future R7 aps-c body. On full frame it’s too short unless you have plenty of pixels to crop. As you said, it’s pricey but it’s really good. The unforgivable flaw is the teleconverter from 300mm only, making you loose the great flexibility of a x5 zoom. When on safari you can’t always change lenses, sometimes dust is tremendous. Unbiased review as always. Thank you

[@jaypainespotter]

The lens review I've been waiting for from you! Thank you Christopher!

[@JoshBarea]

I had this lens pre-ordered but ended up cancelling. My EF100-400 II performs so flawlessly on the R6 that I decided to keep it and use the $1k difference that I would have spent to get the RF 800 f/11 instead. Now I maintain the versatility and build of the EF II plus have a super zoom that I've always wanted for smaller/skittish birds. I live in Florida so there are plenty of bright days for that fixed f/11 aperture. I'm happy with it the few days I've had it. But I'd definitely would recommend this new RF 100-500 to anyone who doesn't already own something like the Mark II or who can't get their hands on an RF adapter.

[@szinski]

One issue with using EF lenses with the adapter is that you lose IBIS. Yes, lens IS still works, but the EF lenses don't contain the necessary circuitry to work in unison with IBIS. The only way to use IBIS with EF lenses is to turn off lens IS or use an EF lens that has no stabilization.

[@kevindiaz3459]

Damn I want this lens. Other things are higher priority right now, but I'm dreaming of a pairing with the rumored R7 for wildlife in the hopefully not to distant future...

[@peteT269]

What's the R7 meant to be? A lower-mid range full framer?

[@kevindiaz3459]

@@peteT269 replacement for the 7D

[@RumourHasitYT]

@@peteT269 R7 will be a pro camera replacing the 7Dii and the R10 will replace the 90D I have a video about it on my channel

[@mikkelstormhansen9733]

@@RumourHasitYT Shut up

[@Visuallyben]

Rumour Has it actually the next EOS R is the R3 a mix between the R5 and the 1DX Miii

[@BrentODell]

I appreciate you pointing out that it's not actually a darker aperture except for a little bit at the long end. I haven't heard any other reviews point that out.

[@jukeboxjohnnie]

Hope you do this for years to come. Love it when you do high end lenses we dont all buy the budget end

[@DanielFazzari]

I waffled on on buying this lens for the longest time, but just picked it up from Canon direct refurbished for $2600 USD. Really a fantastic lens! It's everything Chris said it is!

[@WestVirginiaWildlife]

3:41 a lot of people say the lens does have focus breathing up close, which is made clear when comparing it against say a 500mm f4 lens like Duade Paton has done.

[@sergeidrovetski7414]

could you please test it with 1.4x and 2x extenders.

[@airb1976]

A review from a Professional Bird photographer: kzbin.info/www/bejne/e5TcmKqompeAeK8

[@snipexd4964]

I have the 2x converter and even though it's decent I wish I picked up the 1.4x instead. I find myself in a lot of low light conditions and it forces me to remove the convertor for better focusing.

[@mountainhobo]

Canon smirks and proves again why they are the king of lenses.

[@ricki-bobby]

I was impressed with the toneh on this lens. Great review!

[@cornishblue58]

Always enjoy your reviews Chris. I was fortunate to get hold of this lens shortly after it’s launch, and it’s hardly been off my camera since. It’s flexible, not overly heavy and well balanced on the R5 body. I did wonder about the price but have used it so much, I have to say it’s worth every penny.

[@yorkwilson4367]

Mr. Frost, thank you for all the fantastic reviews over the years. It has been great to watch your channel (and your family) grow. You do wonderful work and I wouldn't dream of buying a lens without seeing what you said about it first. Happy New Year!

[@Ghleis]

Great review as always. Waiting for your review of Sony 200-600mm to see which one is better.

[@smaakjeks]

Wow. Canon R5 + 24-70mm f2.8 and then this one? That would pretty much be my dream travel gear.

[@mariolombardi4766]

Thank you Christopher that was very informative, useful and helpful!

[@madtoffelpremium8324]

This lens looks real good and is amazingly sharp. I am seriously thinking about selling my monstrous Sigma 150-600mm Sport and switching to it, but I am still not completly sure if the better sharpness can compensate for the 100mm that I would loose at the long end. I would love to see a direct comparision!

[@alansach8437]

Lose 100mm PLUS pay 1,000.00 extra for the priviledge. But it is a much better lens.

[@CrisURace]

I just managed to get this lens. OMG what a life changer coming from Sigma 150 600 Sport!! The Sigma does the job, but man this one is way easier to use and it's very sharp.

[@arush2345]

Awesome lens, but the build of 100-400 ii is just another level.

[@WestVirginiaWildlife]

I look foward to your Canon RF 100-400mm f/5.6-8 IS USM review

[@cardiacade]

A stunning lens. My favourite for butterfly, dragonfly and larger wild flower photography.

[@kennethlui2268]

It is an outstanding lens. Period.

[@tkermi]

Blessed Christmas to you Christopher (and everyone else as well). During times like these it's comforting to know we have one we can trust to look after us. 🙏🏻😊

[@christopherfrost]

Amen!

[@sprout995]

Merry Christmas and happy new year. I do appreciate the insight into this lens.

[@RFGfotografie]

Whenever I get a R5/R6 I will change my 100-400 (best lens ever made) to this lens. Great video :)

[@jamieteestudio]

Best lens I have seen for this zoom range! Canon did it!

[@RumourHasitYT]

I just traded my 100-400ii and both extenders for this lens (had to add some cash) very happy with my decision. Although I had great results with my EF100-400 the RF100-500 is noticeably faster with a higher hit rate

[@RumourHasitYT]

Video on my channel now 👍

[@ministryoflies1344]

Awesome review as always!

[@vhc7764]

Plastic with a luxurious feel (smiles). Excellent review...many thanks for sharing Christopher! Seasons Greetings!

[@peterebel7899]

Short and clear message! Thank you!

[@lasselarsen2914]

Does anyone know if this lens will be just as sharp on the new canon eos r7 camera?

[@swistedfilms]

Yes, speaking from experience. That said, know this: first, at 500MM you're at the equivalent of 800MM f/11, so it won't be gathering a whole lot of light. Second, you will see a lot of atmospheric effects, i.e., humidity and heat distortion when zoomed in. But you can and will get incredibly sharp photos, even on the demanding R7.

[@christof4105]

​@@swistedfilmsThe aperture stays the same, F8 on FF is F8 on crop. If you were talking about depth of field equivalence, then you would be right. The exposure however is not affected by sensor size.

[@eliaspap8708]

Great review, looks promising 👍, I’m tossing up between this lens and the Fuji 150-600mm F5.6/F8. Would be great if you could do a review on the Fuji one day, for me the extra reach of the Fuji plus the fact it’s a crop sensor means I get around 900mm equivalent & with the Australian wild life it’s not easy to get up close your usually shooting at a distance.

[@rentoulzz]

I have this lens and agree with your findings. It is amazing. Thanks for the review It is great to see that What I experience is confirmed.

[@StaffordshireBirder]

Wonderful review thank you

[@networm64]

Wish we could see a comparison between this lens and EF version ii (100-400) also with Sony 100-400 GM and 200-600 G if they have any luck soon to be touched by your super talented hands, though you already have given back this lens so this might not gonna happen anytime soon unfortunately. Also wished we could see...the IQ results after using 1.4x and 2x teleconvertors in comparison with 600mm and 800mm f11. Great work as always👍

[@grhmbl]

What about it in comparison with the EF 100-400 L IS USM II?

[@christopherfrost]

If you own a Canon EOS R mirrorless camera just get this one

[@AugmentedGravity]

Was that IS clip shot with IBIS on as well? or just OIS?

[@twistedsting]

probably with ibis, since he has an r5.

[@AugmentedGravity]

@@twistedsting yeah i know that.. but the footage with IS off looked almost tol shaky, even if it was handheld at 500, for it to be with IBIS.

[@tezster0]

This is an important distinction - I would like to know myself - I expected the image to be close to perfectly still with IBIS + OIS, but it stabilization looked about the same as his review of the Tamron 150-600 G2.

[@tkermi]

This seems to be amazing lens 😃! Though slightly overpriced - at least here in Europe 😒. Still I would love Canon to make a big brother for it! By using the same design with 105mm filter size / ~4" glass they could make the following: 120-600mm f/4 - f/6,3 f/4 120 - 183mm f/4,5 184 - 309mm f/5 310 - 442mm f/5,6 443 - 575mm f/6,3 576 - 600mm This would weigh about 2100-2200g (+tripod collar) so still not overly heavy for being really close focusing and brightest in its class (almost f/5,6 at 600mm). For me all of those focal length / aperture combinations would be very usable (to get nice DoF for varying situations).

[@lukasvandewiel860]

Yes, it is a thousand euro more expensive in Europe than in Canada. A flight ticket to Toronto and back costs less that a thousand. ;-)

[@XHItube]

I would also be interested to see how it performs with TCs and how the AF works on the R, especially with the TCs and the darker apertures. Thank you!

[@GunnarsMassageoPizza]

Great work as always!! :) I'd love to see a behind the scenes episode!? ☺️

[@shankhanilsarkar2161]

Merry Christmas in advance. Thanks for the review...❤️ Please compare this lens with Sigma & tamron 150-600mm. That would be very very helpful for enthusiast wildlife photographers out there..

[@rjmediacanada]

Thx Chris, I bought one. I wish it was a little brighter

[@GiacomoZonco]

Incredible lens. Still debating whether this or the 70-200 f2.8 is the right choice for Travel & Landscape

[@alphaandomega2709]

Any updates?

[@GiacomoZonco]

@@alphaandomega2709 not really, I’m not at the point of buying either yet. The 70-200 f4 has also joined the list since its so compact

[@theplettz4569]

@1:09 that bird photo is great with prominent background separation. Nice shot!

[@shankhanilsarkar2161]

Sir please compare this RF 100-500mm lens with Sigma 150-600mm & Sony 200-600mm G lens.. 🙏🏻🙏🏻

[@vladimirlenin4080]

That's an extremely sharp lens

[@Direkin]

It would be nicer if the tripod mount had an integral Arca compatible dove tail. Oh yes, and detents on the collar ring.

[@DigitalSamTV]

this is an extensive and great lens test

[@turke765]

1:44 ff7 remake looking good

[@peterkrstic498]

This lens is superb

[@JB_Hobbies]

Seems a bit of a stretch to say its price is justified. The Sony 200-600 seems to perform just as well and has some design advantages. Either way, it's a whole $1,000 cheaper and is arguably a better lens. Not saying that the Canon is a bad lens at all--it's comparable to the Sony, which is definitely a good thing. Just saying that Canon is out of control with these prices. People need to call them out on it. And, I thought that Sony was getting crazy with some of its prices, but Canon is really going the extra mile here. No one is saying they can't make money, but with their market share, they can probably make it up in volume. More people would adopt their mirrorless system if everything wasn't so freaking expensive. Yes, they have that crazy cheap RP body, but you're gonna need some lenses to use it.

[@julius4858]

It's almost a kilo lighter my dude.

[@reallymentalpig1173]

@@julius4858 lol 😂

[@ArteUltra1195]

What are you comparing here? Lump both lenses around with you for a day and you will understand the point

[@ronrotunno2901]

Had the 200-600 but the back pain it generated moved me to Canon. The 100-500 Carries (and travels) so we’ll. No comparison.

[@HaakonDueland]

Great review! Been following you ever since I started photography three years ago. Almost every purchase is run through your channel for quality control before I swipe my card. BUT! I would REALLY like to see a zoom comparison when doing reviews on zoom lenses. Yes, you zoom from 100-500 early in the video. But for reference, I’d very much like to see a 24mm or 35mm comparison just to have a reference to see how much zoom you’re Actually getting. Pretty please, and keep up the good work!

[@danielson_9211]

500mm on R5 800 crop mode 17.5mp almost as much as my old 7dMII, and no the tamron or sigma don't even come close, had the G2 brother had the sigma and both are not as sharp and miss the af more often, think Jan Wagener did a video on this. Yes its expensive, but so was the 100-400, 500 bucks more for 100mm and faster focus, might be lighter hahah. Oh it's F/6.3 up to 470mm only the last 30mm is 7.1

[@maxshean2607]

This will be my first lens when I buy the R5 one day. And hopefully together with the rumoured 14-35 f4... who knows

[@ksprvnksprvn4258]

Hi, any comments on the AF performance of this lens with the eos r ? All reviews seem to base this on an r5 or r6. I have an r and i'm interested. Regards.

[@yukonchris]

That's $3,700.00 in Canada--Wow! I'd love a lens with the sort of versatility, quality, and reach that this one has, but I really don't think I could ever justify that price. I'm pinning my hopes on Sigma, and others, eventually releasing comparable RF mount lenses for more affordable prices. If this goes on, I may just exchange photography for painting.

[@alansach8437]

Canon has patented a 200-800! Will probably cost ten grand, though, if they ever make it!

[@Tainted-Soul]

once again another great review , thank you for an open review. I'll look forward to getting this lens once saved up as a hobbies but without load of money but want the best so it will last for many years so I class it as an investment

[@camerapunk4109]

Yes 🙌 it finally happened ! 🎉

[@mike.k]

Chris, would You be able to test this lens on Canon R7? In my opinion overall optical resolution/quality is worse on Canon R7 (with any full frame lens)! I think there should be lenses specifically designed for apsc sensors!

[@ronrotunno2901]

This lens performs beautifully on an R7.

[@Tzadeck]

Wow that's a damn good lens.

[@aviation_jelle]

is it good for the EOS R7 and Planespotting?

[@swistedfilms]

It's incredibly sharp on the R7.

[@aviation_jelle]

@@swistedfilms what settings are good for the R7?

[@swistedfilms]

@@aviation_jelle Every situation is different of course but here's a good starting point: put the camera in Aperture Priority (AP), Auto ISO, and choose single point AF and choose Spot Metering. That should take care of most situations. Take a photo and look at it. If it looks like what you're looking for then you can manually dial in the settings that the camera chose (the ISO and shutter speed) on Manual setting and leave it there. The aperture will change on its own. If it's too dark or the shutter speed is too slow then you can adjust the settings to better match your needs. But AP with Auto ISO along with the AF that suits your subject is usually just fine. You might have to raise shadows in post like you do for wildlife but that's usually unavoidable.

[@prokremelskidezolati1426]

@@swistedfilms planes and AP (aperture)? lol

[@stephenbarlow2493]

Thank you, great review of a lens I've wanted to see a review on. If I win the lottery and replace my Canon reflex system with an R system, I'll replace my 100-400mm mkII with this lens.

[@zvxcvxcz]

I'm still partial to my 400 f/2.8 (old model, first version with IS I think, bought used), but this seems a lot lighter for travel :P

[@be_bigger_today]

You Rock 💪 Christopher 💪💪

[@michaelq16000]

Is it possible for you to upload some raw files from your reviews for us? It would be so great to have a look at these by myself

[@philfyphil]

Hi Chris, is there any chance you can test this with the R7? I’m thinking of buying that combo for my wildlife photography.

[@afsoto]

Please compare with Sony a7R4 and their 100 to 400mm G Master.

[@nguquyen]

This is the lens I am waiting from Canon!

[@themarksmanABP]

I wonder how this lens compares with my sony 200-600mm which im a serious fan of

[@afsoto]

Mark Smith answered me that he geels they are optically about the same. Main difference is the short internal zoom of the Sony. Chrck out his channel.

[@frederickletterblair]

Love the factory shots, is it Clairton?

[@christopherfrost]

Steelworks at Port Talbot

[@AmericanMoviePodcast]

Any news on when these will be back available?

[@deanjelcic9299]

Just bought it, cant wait for to test it first thing in the morning. Tonight no sleeping 😮‍💨😂

[@goldenstasgs]

Cristopher why you mentioned that Canon made from plastic? It’s magnesium alloy but not plastic. Maybe you have to explore deeper Cabon technology. I faced with same mistake with headphones review of Meze Lyric. It also made from magnesium alloy, but very often it was confused with plastic.

[@stevekzian5955]

I like this review. annoying is only that you have to get very close to your object / target for good results

[@RC534]

This lens is definitely on top of my wish list... and just as with Gordon's review this only reinforces that thought. But it'll be a while before I can justify the expense as other non-photo related things sadly have higher priority for now ;-)

[@rws531]

I’ll never afford this lens, but I’m definitely curious how sharp it would be with the 2xteleconverter on the R5

[@smaakjeks]

It'll be affordable on the second hand market in about 10 years' time XD

[@letsfindout6587]

I am offering 2200 right now for a used one hopefully they take my offer

[@candyandy9377]

Nice review (again) of an impressive lens. Since I‘am still looking for a telephoto „extension“ of the 10-18/18-135 STM (kit) lenses of my Canon 70D (the latter being the „always on“ lens) is there anything comparable to this one for my 70D (yet)?

[@JimBailey]

Thank you so much Mr Frost. :)

[@mdturnerinoz]

Nice review BUT I will be staying with my 100-400 EF lens for my R5/R6. It works just fine and with the 1.4x extender, I can get more than 500! (Quite zippy with very little focus breathing!)

[@dimitristsagdis7340]

I have the 100-400 and 1.4x and I’m thinking of buying the R5 so how is AF with that combo cause it is f/8. Do you have the photos taken with that combo somewhere to share. Tnx in advance.

[@mdturnerinoz]

@@dimitristsagdis7340 Today or tomorrow I will post shots of some Chinese Trumpet flowers in my garden (summer here in OZ) at my Instagram mdturnerinoz. Look here for examples.

[@maxsr3236]

Does anyone know why Canon puts markings for vertical and horizontal alignment on the tripod collars, but none on the lens barrel itself to align them with?

[@eliaspap8708]

I guess your meant to remember what part of the lens barrel your aligning against.

[@lukasvandewiel860]

2.700 US dollars?! Bwahaha. Good old times. Now it is 3.349 euro, or about 3.750 US dollar equivalent. It reminds me of the Bigma, the 50-500 Sigma lens that gave me tons of fun photos I would otherwise never have been able to take, even though optically not all that magnificent. Would consider this lens if the price takes a steep drop to 2.700 US$ ;-)

[@gkcima007]

So, how do you get this 100-500 lens????? No one, including Canon, seems to have any idea when it may be available again.

[@ChannleDDD]

You should get a FD adapter for the M6 and test some Canon FD vintage lenses

[@j.kimmer1509]

Thank you for the delicious review. I went out and bought one that was still in stock at my local shop. .... and the RF2x

[@JimBailey]

Thank you Mr Frost

[@afsoto]

How does Image Q and focusing aquisition speed compare with Sony 100 to 400mm G Master?

[@blaizze]

I love the small form factor. I wonder how it stacks up against Sony 200-600 in terms of image quality? Are you planning to test the Sony FE 200-600mm in the near future?

[@Vantrakter]

Yes, that would be an interesting comparison. Besides being significantly cheaper it makes different tradeoffs in terms of how it handles. I like the short turn to zoom, instead of turn-turn-turn but it is also heavier to carry around.

[@Andy_Thomas]

Now that the "big whites" are no longer made of metal, thermal expansion is no longer such an issue, so they no longer really need to be white. I wonder if Canon will consider making black ones.

[@nordic5490]

Why black ? Why not just make them with a camo print so can be used for wildlife ?

[@LeoNatan]

Hi Chris 👋 Will you be testing the Tamron 150-500mm f/5-6.7 for E mount? Thanks!

[@christopherfrost]

Eventually, yes

[@LeoNatan]

@@christopherfrost Thank you for your reply!

[@sanu4frndzs]

pleas do fujifilm xf 70-300mm lens review

[@steveparent8788]

Hi Christopher, I really enjoy your hard work ! I have a question for you. If money was no issue which lens would you pick : the Canon RF 100-500 or the Sony 200-600 ? These are 2 exciting lenses but which one would be number 1 for you ? I tried the RF 100-500 and was really impressed. Please let me know.

[@KentSpain85]

The Canon is lighter. Maybe money is of no concern, but weight and size always is for me. That's why the 100-500 is the choice for me.

[@steveparent8788]

@@KentSpain85 Thanks !

[@vaibhavpisal]

I find the price to be a major issue. One can get a d850 + 500mm 5.6 pf over r5 + 100-500 and still save $1000. A casual glance at Flickr group of the two lenses prove 100-500 to be more of a camper van than a Ferrari. It's a good choice if you absolutely must have an all in one to do landscape, wildlife, macro. Unfortunately canon added price of good 200-500mm, 70-200mmf4 and a 105mm macro and thought its a good idea to charge the same for all in one. In reality it's not as good as dedicated solution. I have seen tests where Nikon 200-500mm reaches same center sharpness when stopped down to f7.1 at 500mm. Again all this would be fine if it were priced according to its capabilities instead of hiking price of an already overpriced 100-400mm

[@jan.tichavsky]

Your 200-500 combo will be cheaper but it weghts twice as much and you're stuck with mirrorfull body. The 500 is lighter but much more limiting in single focal length. It also costs more. It the end it's all about the system. Canon shooters will likely go to RF mount, use this and other gems like RF 28-70mm f/2 or the compact RF 70-200mm f/2.8. Nikon shooters can stay with Nikon, same for Sony and their 200-600mm.

[@vaibhavpisal]

@@jan.tichavsky Are you ok with the price? I commented cause Christopher compared it with performance cars to justify price. It has good consistent performance. Similar to z50 kit lenses. Interesting you are downplaying telephoto prime lens that too on 45mpix body which can take even more out of lens performance. And 500pf will be cheaper than this prosumer zoom. Also look at weight including tripod coller. It's not as light as you think.

[@digitalclips]

How does it stack up against the Sony 200-600mm G other than the obvious? I had the Canon 100-400mm L with my Canon bodies but I have moved totally to Sony now.

[@xplanepro]

Hi. Would this be a good lens to shoot plane spotting with R5C or would the cheaper RF800mm F11 IS STM suffice? Thanks

[@swistedfilms]

I've seen footage of this lens with the R5C and it looks incredible! Even at 8K! I have no doubt that the 800MM f/11 is sharp; Chelsea Northrup uses it all the time, even on her R7, which is just insane! But of course this lens is faster and more flexible. So, y'know, tradeoffs and all that.

[@AJHux-10]

I am currently using a Canon 400mm f5.6l ef lens on an R7. Would the 100-500 be as pin sharp as the 400mm?

[@swistedfilms]

Yes. I've used that combination myself.