Canon RF200-800 Review - Ultimate Lens or Too Many Compromises?

[@williamvanbeek2749]

There is ABSOLUTELY nobody who does a better job in reviews than you. I discovered your channel recently and watched all your more recent work. Great thanks!

[@Duade]

Thanks William, you are too kind and I appreciate the kind words, Cheers, Duade

[@manabendragogoi]

I am not a flatterer by any means and I don’t have anything to gain from it. Honestly, even though I don’t have a Canon RF mount camera, I watched your whole review. All the questions that had popped up in my head after hearing about this lens have been wonderfully answered and some more. To top it all, your articulation is so calming and honest sounding, that I feel kinda blessed listening to you. Keep up the good work! God bless!

[@Duade]

Thank you so much for your comment, I really do appreciate the feedback and appreciate you taking the time to share your thoughts. Take care and happy birding. Cheers, Duade

[@mustachadon]

My biggest problem in life is that i have $15,000 tastes with a $100 budget lol

[@MartinFransson]

Couldn’t have said it better 😂

[@IntoTheMystery13]

Yep

[@KevinF235]

I thought I was only person like that. I am retired and I have a little money saved. But because I walk a lot, I might outlive my investment. However, I would rather enjoy a shorter life and go for the gusto than a really long drawn out misery of old age lying in a bed all day at 90. I don’t think this is a good expression for young as living conservatively is wise, but I at my age I like the young people’s term “YOLO” you only live once.

[@TheSheenMcClean]

I've had the lens for about a month, it is my first super telephoto. At 800mm f9 is not a problem, in fact with large birds like ducks and geese, if I get close part of the subject will fall out of focus. The lens is sharp and well made. I just wish it weighed less. It really is a borderline handhold lens. You can spend all day handholding it, and the weight will likely impact your enjoyment while shooting. Typically when I am out shooting I wish I had bought the 100-500mm instead, but as soon as I get home I can't argue with the results I am getting with the 200-800mm.

[@Duade]

Thanks for sharing your thoughts, yes, it does get heavy all day in the field and there is no denying the joy of the 100-500 in terms of weight etc. I guess its all a trade off isnt it. Glad you have both to play with, Cheers, Duade

[@courtney727ray]

A non-biased and factual review that is very thorough. Well done!

[@Duade]

Thank you, I appreciate it, Cheers, Duade

[@andrewborton9627]

This is the review I've been waiting for, brilliant, so comprehensive, youve covered everthing.Very well done, thanks a lot.

[@Duade]

Thanks Andrew, my pleasure, glad it was helpful, Cheers, Duade

[@subliminus]

First shots and thoughts with the RF 200-800mm f6.3-9 IS: While I cannot post images on here as an example, they are what I would call Sharp enough to get a passing grade by me, especially after running the RAWs through DXO denoise. Distant background looks good and blurry. Near background might prove problematic and may force me to shoot a subject differently based on what's behind it with this lens, but we'll see in time. Compared to just the EF 100-400mm f4-5.6 IS II and the RF 100-500mm f4.5-7.1 IS, those are both sharper, smaller overall, and lighter. They are also both packed with more features like a dedicated manual focus ring, selectable IS modes, and removable collar/foot. Both are more expensive brand new. Neither of them can reach beyond 500mm without a teleconverter, and those absolutely wreck IQ on non-primes and result in smaller apertures than the RF 200-800 at the same focal lengths when compared side by side. Compared to my much larger EF 600mm f4 IS II, with and without a teleconverter, the 600 f4 is still sharper by a long shot. Possibly faster to focus as well, I'll have to see in perfect lighting with the RF 200-800mm. Where the RF 200-800 trounces the 600 f4 is size and weight. I can actually travel with this setup in a bag and not look obvious to everyone around me that I have something large and expensive on my person. To that travel point, I own a Shimoda Action X 50L, and the RF200-800 fits, just barely, in a Large DSLR core. It hits the top and bottom and is thick enough to fill the depth of the core unit. Packing the RF 200-800 inside of the Action X 50L with the Large DSLR core will require me to leave a good portion of other gear behind if I want to bring the RF 200-800mm inside that bag. But again, not nearly as inconvenient as the EF 600 f4 v2 in any configuration. This lens was purchased with the sole intent of using it as a supplement to my EF 100-400mm v2 and EF 600mm v2 during travel where the 100-400 couldn't cut it, and the 600 is too big. I think with the results I'm getting, I am happy with the compromises this lens makes to exist at its price point. Its strengths far outshine the weaknesses. All shots were taken with Canon R5 at 800mm in varying lighting conditions. Lens was rested, hand held, and used on a gimbal for some of these shots. On that note, IS and IBIS seemed to work REALLY good for 800mm focal length. I am really impressed by that feature. On the downside, the AF seems to hunt worse than either my EF 100-400 v2 or my EF 600 f4 v2. I've had more issues keeping a moving target in focus, even when starting to pan while the subject is locked in, it will sometimes just begin to hunt to the background. It is possible at f9, I have the ISO too low to allow for better subject detection. Time will tell as I use it more, likely operator error. I think I would definitely recommend this lens to someone looking to give their Canon RF camera a serious boost in reach, for not a lot of money compared to other RF options at similar focal lengths and versatility. The RF 800 f11 is cheaper, but not versatile and fixed aperture. The RF 600 f4 is the cost of a car and nearly as large, need I say more? While I ordered this in January of 2024, I think the backlog is finally starting to thin out. If you're on the fence about buying one, just do it and give the lens a try. The worst that can happen is you return it and get a refund, but I think you'll like the results you get for the money you paid. Just don't expect 600 f4 prime clarity out of a $1900 lens and you'll be super happy. I am judging a lot of this opinion on the RF 200-800mm after using the following telephoto zooms and primes over my years: Sigma EF 60-600 4.5-6.3, Sigma EF 120-300 f2.8, Canon 100-400 f4-5.6 v2 L, Canon RF 100-500 f4.5-7.1 L, Canon 70-300 3.5-5.6 L, Canon EF 70-200 f2.8 v2 L, Canon EF 600 f4 v2 L, Canon 500 f4 v1 L, Canon 400 f4 DO II, and an old Sigma EF 800 f5.6 Sigmonster. The RF 200-800 is possibly the best compromise lens money can buy for the RF mount. The amount of reach it provides is fantastic. Learn its strengths and weaknesses, and it will reward you with great images.

[@HanFollo]

Really helpful. Thanks. Have you used the Canon EF 100-400 v2 on any RF camera with a 1.4 or 2.0 teleconverter? How is the AF speed and accuracy of that combination? I assume the IQ degradation wouldn't be too bad, right?

[@joaovinagre2977]

Thank you for this! I’m thinking of buying this lens or saving for the 600f4 Mkii, to complement my EF 100-400 Mkii! This was helpfull!

[@subliminus]

@@HanFollo hey man, sorry I didn't see this right away. I've used my 1.4x v3 and 2x v3 on the EF 100-400mm v2 a few times. I personally only did it for experiments sake, and the results were not up to the level of image quality that I'd consider for what passes for my "keepers". The EF 100-400mm v2 is so incredibly sharp to begin with, the teleconverters just kinda take away from that sharpness with no real benefit. It hurt the best qualities of that lens. So I would personally recommend not buying either of those teleconverters specifically for that lens. I don't think you'd be happy with the results.

[@HanFollo]

@@subliminus Great. Thanks for the reply.

[@subliminus]

@@joaovinagre2977 anytime! I love both of those lenses. My 600mm f4 v2 is probably my favorite thing that I own. It's so sharp, and so clean. It images are just insane. But it is huge. Unpackable and impossible to hide when trying to be discrete. The RF 200-800mm is amazing in terms of its versatility. Larger than the 100-400mm, and smaller than the 600mm, it fits in the top of a Shimoda action X, or internally if you empty everything else. Haha. Its ability to zoom allows it to double as a long range landscape lens. Especially now in autumn, you can snag photos of leaves or animals/birds higher up. It's a staple in my travel bag where ever I go now. It's been to California with me, shenandoah mountains, outer banks, and all over the VA, DC, MD area. If it were my money, for the versatility alone, I'd get the 200-800mm first, and keep saving for the 600mm V2 or V3 for later. You'll use the 200-800mm in far more scenarios. 😁

[@Joya5545]

Hey Duade, great and thorough review. I’ve had the lens since December and we were in the depth of a dark and gloomy British Columbia winter,so I didn’t expect too much from the lens…boy was I wrong. This lens gave me some of my best birds in flight shots (thanks for the bufflehead image you used Duade) and overall it was a revelation. Light, great autofocus,amazing reach, I am so pleased with this purchase. I know that some don’t like the non removable foot, but having nearly destroyed my 100-500mm when the lens foot detached from the lens, I know that I don’t need to worry about that with the 200-800mm and it does make a comfortable carry handle when on the move. The other negative others mention is the long throw on the zoom. Not much of an issue for me, as I rarely will zoom from 200 to 800 or back in one shot and the lens is normally at 800mm for small birds most of the time. The biggest Con I see is that I will not be using my 100-500mm as much or the 800mm F11! Thanks again Duade for all the great content you provide.

[@jeffolson4731]

You situation sounds just like mine. I live in the Puget Sound area of Washington state and have had my lens since December 14th. I need to sell my RF800 f11, if there is any market for it. I think by starting out with this lens in the winter we have taken the biggest "limitation" most people think the lens has and dispelled that.

[@Joya5545]

@@jeffolson4731 Absolutely, the F9 is not really an issue, especially coming from the F11 of the 800mm. I do still love my 100-500, as Duade suggests there are occasions when that is a better choice, but for the most part I think the 200-800mm will be my preferred lens.

[@Stran8n]

Canon finally has this back in stock in the USA (12/2024) after being back ordered or just "out of stock" for nearly a year. I ordered mine today and should have it by tomorrow. Thanks for all the great videos! No nonsense, no click bait and always straight forward - I've been here for years now.

[@ForrestWest]

When you add in all of the negatives it makes me very happy that I'm using the RF800mm f11. It's super lightweight and enjoyable to carry, has great image quality and in any decent light the f11 is no issue. It also has excellent stabilization. I'm also always wanting that full 800mm and I have other zooms if I want to shoot at a shorter aperture. Thanks for the review and another great video as always! Best of luck to you!

[@windycross]

and being so light it makes it much easier to throw around to track BsIF.

[@hstein27]

My experience over the past two months is that the R5 with this lens is more reliable for in-focus shots than the R7 and 100-500. The only annoying thing is what Jan also had, which was jittery IS in video mode sometimes. It seems to happen at the beginning of videos, especially when my pulse is racing and that ever so slightly moves the camera back and forth against my face. Thanks for including my dovekie picture. That was such a great surprise. The surrounding area had been flooded by rains, worse than local residents had seen in decades. Multiple small flocks of dovekies found themselves somewhat inland in the local harbor. This little guy and his buddies kept swimming towards me and stayed for at least five minutes. I even got flight shots! The 200-800 really came through for me that day. With the 100-500 on the R5, I wouldn't have had as much reach, and with the R7 on the 200-800 I probably would have had more out-of-focus shots. They are so small, maybe the size of a soda can. Because of that, the 800mm gave me shots that needed little cropping to get the bird so large in the frame.

[@Duade]

Thanks for sharing your thoughts and experiences with the lens so far, and yes I loved that shot, such a cool looking bird. Cheers, Duade

[@eltonbartlett2913]

So, I am assuming you have a R5 and R5, with the 100-500 and 200-800. I have the same. On paper, the R7 with the 200-800 gives you the ultimate reach and the R5 with the 100-500 gives you the macro and close-up quality shots. What lens+body combo have you settled on/ recommend?

[@hstein27]

@eltonbartlett2913 I've been using r5 and 200-800 since late December as my main rig. Hopefully it will work for some macro when the butterflies and dragonflies arrive. I have not used the R7 or 100-500 at all since. For lower light situations I have an EF 600 F4 MK ii.

[@Duade]

@@eltonbartlett2913 G'day, I currently use the R5 for the majority of shooting and I just change lenses when I need to. I will likely get the R5II so will have two cameras to use then. Cheers, Duade

[@kernzilla]

good recap here, very insightful thanks! between the 100-500 vs 200-800 on R5, which would you say performs better on smaller subjects with a busy background? my prev 100-400 II struggled with this, my 300 2.8 does a very decent job, RF800 pretty horrible at this lol, but curious if you see a clear winner in this specific situ? guessing the 100-500 might have better recovery time/lock speed due to the dual nano motors, just curious if you see one or the other get it right on the first try more consistently in this situ? appreciate it!

[@robertbrown6060]

I know Duade was specific in his lens comparisons and referred to specific RF lenses. But I think the EF 100 - 400 should not be forgotten. It is an exceptional lens, works great with an adapter and can be used well with a 1.4 TC. It’s an option plus with an R7 gives significant reach and even more with a 1.4 TC. Where budget is an issue these lenses are good value used.

[@HanFollo]

Great option!

[@cloudpandarism2627]

there is NO way you just uploaded this. because of your channel i got a new R7 some days ago and paired it with the RF50 1.8 and Rf 100-400 to see where this will get me. after shooting almost nonstop even in cloudy rainy weather i am hooked and want the 200-800 so bad because i cant reach any wildlife here. as soon as i sneak up they shut up and run. cheers from china again mate! panda gonna watch now! 🤗🙌🙏

[@cloudpandarism2627]

done watching. this review is far better than ANY advertisement canon could ever make! i am sold and get this asap! fun fact: i dont know why people are annoyed about the non removable tripod mount. it will not bother me and i get the long dual screw mount with a new tripod. also coming from nikon P950 with insane noise even at ISO 800 plus very high F stops and now owning the Rf100-400 where i am stuck at f9.0 also this will not bother me as well. i learn to shoot only in good light and dont get all the action. if people want a wide open lens with insane quality just spend 1000$ more to get a L shell! canon needs to safe money somewhere and i will appreciate this lens very much for what it is! thanks duade

[@davepastern]

@@cloudpandarism2627 it comes in handy if you can remove the foot and replace it with a 3rd party foot that is better designed...that's why people are annoyed.

[@RedmilesShark]

You can get close to birds if you watch their behaviour, not look at them directly and try and get close by zigzagging slowly. Waiting for them to come to you if see them following a path is also possible.

[@173jaSon371]

@@RedmilesShark All great tips and I would add getting low to ground or trying to appear small is helpful. Or hiding in a blind, a car, or just some natural brush

[@excalibro8365]

@@RedmilesSharkI would add crouching and keeping your body as low as possible. I've taken some nice pictures of small birds at an open field with a 300m ff equivalent m43 lens

[@PillsGrabber]

I’m head over heels in love with my 200-800! The first warm day of winter was just yesterday in my part of the world and so far I was only able to capture swans and waterfowls. Can’t wait to see some action this spring

[@Duade]

Great to hear, have fun out there, Cheers, Duade

[@ww3688]

Another masterpiece and very thorough coverage Duade! Thanks for all your hard work on this! I have both 200-800 and 100-500+1.4x combinations but the minimum focal length of 420mm on the 100-500+1.4x has trapped me many times. Like you said, you have to have both lenses! My biggest cons - unremoveable foot, no fluorine coating.

[@Duade]

Thanks mate, totally agree, nice to have both options, Cheers, Duade

[@msyuan1124]

Another great review, Duade. I appreciate the more balanced review. The inclusion of your members’ photos makes this review stand out. Thank you for this thorough review.

[@Duade]

My pleasure mate, Cheers, Duade

[@LindaHarrison-f2c]

Just watched your video and you have convinced me I want this lens!!!! I currently use the Sigma 150-600mm. Thank you!!

[@garyknight3019]

I love the 200-800. Was using the Sigma 150-600 sport and found the upgrade worth every cent. One surprising thing that I found was that the Sigma lens was draining the camera battery while the camera was turned off, whereas the Canon lens doesn’t do that. I had mistakenly thought that it was normal for the R5 to have the battery drain while being turned off.

[@jaykrishnan8716]

If lens is draining the battery while your camera is off , it may be due to the IS motor got damaged , plz check with an expert. I had similar issue.

[@David_Quinn1995]

Amazing review, let's hope Canon takes these reviews and does better with a v2 if they continue to improve on this glass.

[@Duade]

Thanks, yes, I would love it if the sent me a preproduction lens so I could give my honest feedback during the design phase. But overall a great addition to the RF lineup. Cheers, Duade

[@bryanwilliams36]

Absolutely the most comprehensive and thorough review I've seen on this lens. Great job and thank you!!

[@Duade]

Glad it was helpful!

[@RVNmedic]

I can't wait to send you an image. However I've been on backorder for this lens for 2 1/2 months. Come on Canon!

[@Kryxtal]

I've been waiting on backorder for 5 months, it could be a while yet

[@Duade]

Sorry to hear that, I believe it is sold out everywhere in the world, I have asked Canon Australia for an update on availability and I am waiting a response. Cheers, Duade

[@ShotInTheDark]

@@Kryxtal looks like canada was sent the worlds supply! lol

[@srtwrc5]

Awesome video ​@@Duade, very much appreciated. I also have one on backorder in Western Australia with no real idea of when I may see it. If you do get a response from Canon I would love to hear it if you don't mind. Thanks again mate and keep up the great work.

[@VABrowneMDPhD]

Despite the f/9 aperture, the images you and other members shared are fantastic! The focal length range is exceptional for wildlife photography!

[@donnancb]

I only just started back into photography recently and have been catching up on your videos. All the praise is well deserved. And for the first time, I became a member of a KZbin channel. Truly worthwhile. You really have a knack.

[@Duade]

Thank you so much for the support and becoming a member, I really appreciate it, good luck with your photography, we are so lucky to have this amazing hobby. Cheers, Duade

[@Mikedegot]

I want one. Saw someone out in the wild with one, it's recognizable. My primary need is something with more reach than the 100-400 that doesn't require a loan to purchase. I think the 600 and 800 f11 primes are tempting but too restrictive. The 70-200 f4 + 200-800 seems like a logical pair for the great outdoors.

[@MrBman2109]

I own the 70-200 f4 currently as well, and it serves me very well. I have recently made a good personal investment and with my profits I was thinking/looking at this exact combination. The 200-800 will cover everything in between with that extra reach for a great price. I have had a Canon 70D for a long time and am looking to get the R5 with this lens too. This review and others' responses were very informative.

[@hanmikkers8340]

Hi Duade, what a WONDERFUL review you just posted! I own the R7 and the 100-500. Now that there is a 200-800 I like to switch back to FF. I am waiting for the R5 MkII but perhaps the R5 Mk I will be sufficient and much cheaper. Nevertheless, 200-800 paired with the R7 would be great too. Thank you for the lovely pictures again!

[@naizajn]

We have been waiting for this from our fav guy! Thank you!

[@danylohawks2302]

Great video as always Duade! You hit the nail square on the head with your review. Spot on and thorough points on the pros and cons; noting some of the obscure "features" like the control ring and lens foot limitations, not to mention some great info on the comparisons with other lenses. I've owned the lens now since the beginning of the year and while the number of sessions with it were limited so far, I've come out of them with some great images. It's absolutely a blast to use and the reach and flexibility has opened up the opportunity for many different styles of shots. Having the ability to change composition to fit the subject is unparalleled, 200mm to 800mm is truly remarkable in one lens. My main takeaways are to be aware of the limitations and to work with them. The max aperture of f/9 in terms of DOF and blurred backgrounds is usable, and the mirrorless bodies and de-noise programs these days can keep up with the ISO needed in low light situations. The lens is exactly what you would want and expect from something in its price range! Thanks for including my image in the review, certainly made my day! Cheers!

[@Duade]

Thanks for your great comment and sharing your image and thoughts, very helpful to others. Great to hear you have got lots of nice shots and I am sure you will get plenty more in 2024. Cheers, Duade

[@blisteringbooks2428]

Incidentally I have avoided the R7 because of various problems, small buffer, slow readout speed. I will be quite interested in what they do if they release the R7ii later this year. Also, if the autofocus will be better on the R5ii. I imagine you will review them the moment you can lay your hands on them.

[@windycross]

Another great review, thanks! The point you pop in at the end about how this gives the added reach you need for wildlife with the FF cameras is something that perhaps needs more emphasis, but not just because of the extra reach, but also because with their large pixels they work better at f/9-f/11 than the very high resolution cameras like the R7. Those big pixels give much better noise performance at the high ISO values needed in poor light & with high shutter speeds for BsIF. Conversely. we find that the larger aperture of the 100-500 better feeds the tiny pixels of the R7, boosting its performance in low light and at high shutter speeds, and avoids most diffraction, which together with its added fundamental sharpness allows its images to be cropped to their full expected extent, giving even more effective reach. The result is that those two combos produce very comparable results, and the R7+100-500 even holds its own well when compared to the 6ii+RF800/11+1.4, when the images are cropped to give the same subject size. The R5 of course works well with anything, but that's another story. IMHO it would just be useful for you to make a little more of this "optimum mix & match" approach when reviewing or comparing very different types of lens.

[@Toamserippa]

43:41 I think you made a small error in your crediting viewer photos. While it is my Name and possibly my settings at the photo of the Kohlmeise, it is not actually my image.

[@jirinovotny5580]

A very useful comparison 👍

[@Duade]

Thanks for the support, I really appreciate it, Cheers, Duade

[@davemigliore]

Thank you, Sir...! I've ordered my 200-800 lens FIVE MONTHS AGO and I am still waiting. (fuggin' Canon) I got to the point where I was on the fence as to keep the order or not. I already own the 100-500 and recently purchased an R7 - which makes my 500mm an 800mm. After watching this video I have decided to stick it out and keep the order.

[@Duade]

G'day Dave, sorry to hear about the delay, that is very frustrating indeed, we are sold out down here also. Canon must not have anticipated the demand for the lens which is poor from them. Cheers, Duade

[@DirkDien]

Jep, this lens will be a buy at some point for my R6! Thanks a lot for the review Duade!

[@Rickyp0123]

Love the shot at 22:25 ! Especially because it looks like he's dreaming about doing what the adult is doing in the previous pic.

[@TerryTube]

Hey Duade, Phil Thach doesn't recommend the 200-800 RF for the R7 due to the high pixel density of the 33MP sensor. He says it suits a lower mega pixel camera such as the R6, R3, R8 etc. I was hoping to use it on my R7, but I'm not sure now. Your thoughts would really help.

[@curtislewis3555]

I live in the US. Ordered the lens on December 26th and received it July 5th, 2024. Great review.

[@andreas_rr]

28:53 not sure if that has exactly something to do with the T-stops, but definitely with the aperture itself. The 200-800 is, according to it's patent, a F/6-8.5 lens, which gets rounded down to F/6.3-9, giving us basically a 1/6th of a stop of advantage over what it tells us. The 100-500 however is much closer to (and even a bit slower than) it's true F-stops (F/4.6-7.2 in the patent), and that's why it might have less blown out highlights at the same settings. Fun fact, the Tamron 150-600 and many Sigma lenses (i havent found the 150-600 sadly) are very generous (in a bad way) with the apertures. the 150-600 goes to F/6.45 according to the patent, which is actually corresponding to F/8.6 if calculated up to 800mm, and thus a little worse than the 200-800 (at F/8.5). I can only say, in photography, many details get "lost in translation" from the real physics to the "art" of photography, especially through rounding up/down, so any numbers should be taken with a grain of salt. Similar to how if a lens "jumps" from F/8 to F/9 at 636mm, that doesnt make 635mm be any brighter than 636mm. it's just how 1.49 is mathematically rounded to 1 and 1.5 is rounded to 2, that doesnt make 1.5 twice as big as 1.49. here's the patent to the 200-800 and 100-500, but since youtube doesnt want me to put links, you'd have to look for it on your own. it's on the site "canonwatch" and called "canon-patent-application-for-rf-200-800mm-f-6-8-5-lens"

[@ludowild]

To complete what you say at the same setting with my R7 at 600mm with the Sigma 150-600 at F8 and the RF200-800 at 600mm F8 I find that the RF200-800 takes a lot more light and I admit that I don't know how explain it...

[@simonthibodeau7082]

Great explanation! Thank you. I suspect the fact that this lens tends to overblown highlight is probably caused by a combination of that "hidden" 1/6th extra stop, and the fact that it probably does have a bit less contrast natively. I think both are probably true. Needs to be added as well that people hung up on numbers and splitting hairs will argue, a Nikon or Sony 600mm f6.3 zoom, paired with a 1.4x TC, technically goes to 840mm f9. And argue 600mm f6.3 zooms are superior for that reason for "that extra 40mm". Not only are we reaaaally splitting hairs at that point, it's not exactly true anyway. This lens is, for all intents and purposes, truly like a 600mm f6.3 zoom, plus 1.4x TC worth of added reach. While you do lose between a third stop or two in the 300-600mm range, at 800mm, it'll be insanely similar to a 200-600 f6.3, precisely due to the explanation you have given here. In reality, it's like an 800 f8.5, rounded up to 9. Had they pushed this 200-800 to "200-840mm", then it would be a true f9, like the other 600mm+1.4x combos. At 800mm, it's still not pushing the aperture all the way up to 9. In short, they all have the same entry pupil diameter, and their overall "total" light gathering ability is exactly the same. Not like any of this actually matters in the grand scheme of things lol. Between the Sony 200-600 and 200-800, the differences are mostly internal vs external zoom, and getting the TC range "for free" on the 200-800. That's what people should actually focus on.

[@ludowild]

Well explain ! I come to the same conclusion as you !@@simonthibodeau7082

[@andreas_rr]

@@simonthibodeau7082 yea. I really hate it when people say "oh but you can put a 1.4x on the XXX-600". Well guess what you can put a 1.4x or 2x on the 200-800 too. And good luck getting to 1600mm on any of the XXX-600mm's.

[@fylphotography9269]

No, the f8.5 is a very early design patent from 2020 probably doesn't hold true for the final interation of the lens. In September 2023 closer to the release of this lens there was also another 200-800mm patent but with a different more compact optical layout and f5.8-f9.2 aperture. Patents of the final design indicate the lens is 203-776mm f6.4-9.18. They also patented other designs such as 200-700mm f5.6-7.1 and 200-1000mm f6.3-f9. I'd like to see some more testing regarding this "blown highlights" phenomenon - I notice it intermittently and using highlight tone priority mode does seem to help a bit but images sometimes seem more washed out and I can't shoot below ISO 200. I still suspect it has more to do with coatings (Super Spectra Coating not Fluorine like on L lenses) rather than the lens overexposing. It could also be that the coating doesn't handle

[@brucemichelotti4887]

Great and accurate review Duade. I have been shooting with this lens for about a month and love it more and more everyday. I have it on my R5 and it is super sharp. The weight is a bit of a problem for long stays in the field, but i use it with a Black Rapid strap for birds in flight and a monopod for other times. The issues you mention about the zoom throw are quite accurate, but you get used to it. and really who goes from 200 to 800 all the time. Mostly it is adjusting the focal length from 500-800 or the like so the issue becomes less of a problem. I was using my EF 100-400 with a 1.4x converter and wondered if this would just be more stuff and similar to what I have. Not even close. Great lens and you can get great photos.

[@sandersassen]

I just put the first few hundred images through this lens using the R7 and I can only say it has been night and day when compared to the Sigma 150-600mm I previously used. The amount of keepers has risen by at least three- to fourfold. The lens is tack sharp, throughout the entire focal range. Couldn't be happier really, as I really was frustrated with the Sigma, when it worked it was superb, but it has been a real struggle sometimes. Thanks for a great review and sharing your experience Duade, it is what convinced me to pick up this lens.

[@oojiflip]

Awesome to hear! The sigma has really been letting me down on the R7 so I can't wait to get this lens! (currently on pre-order in the UK for £2,300 or around $2,900 so I'll be looking to get one second hand eventually)

[@rfh1234]

Thanks for a wide range of lenses covered in your review. I have the 200-600, and the Canon 100-500 and a 1.4 for both. I love the 1.4 on the 200-600, but thinking of how nice to have that sort of reach on my R5II. A lot of my critters are quite far away, so you answered all of my questions about this lens, it’s quality, and many other factors.

[@RandyRobbinsPhotography]

On the subject of the tightness of the zoom... I've had the 100-400 L for several years and the adjustment ring is always on "tight". I really don't want it to creep when I'm carrying it around, and I like the tight feel. So this 200-800 feels just about right to me. It feels like an easy transition to me. Mine will live on "tight." I don't hold it the way you do though, with the foot in the palm of my hand, zooming with the thumb and finger. My tripod foot is rotated up to the top, and I grip the zoom ring with my whole hand. It lets me go "lock-to-lock" with the zoom in one fluid motion, and I don't see getting the sore thumb thing you describe. Just a different technique/preference... so if you "cave man" grip the zoom ring like I do as your go-to technique, I don't think you'll find it clunky or stiff. For me, "loose" is too loose, even on this 200-800.

[@fylphotography9269]

I find loose setting too flimsy and when I take it out of my backpack I often end up pulling the zoom. Around 700-800 it wobbles on the loose setting when I am holding it. On the other hand tight feels a bit awkward sometimes because it doesn't turn as fast as I would like although the throw itself is not bad as I have big hands.

[@Gaztography]

Fantastic in-depth review Duade. Well worth the watch. Time to start saving…

[@Duade]

Thanks mate, yes, a nice lens to add to the collection, Cheers, Duade

[@johnclark9499]

Hi Duade. Absolutely brilliant review, thank you. I think you've covered pretty well everything anyone could need to know about this lens. Yes some limitations but so many fantastic images from you and many of your subscribers. Still don't know if I'll get one as I'm lucky enough to have the RF100 - 500 and the 1.4 extender already. Also a part of me thinking about the R52 which won't be too far away now - can't afford/justify both any time soon. Sorry for being slow to comment - we've been away for a few days and only just had a chance to sit down and watch. Thanks again. John

[@Duade]

Thanks John, I think the R52 will be a great update and with the rumoured stacked sensor and AF upgrades I think that and your current kit will work very well. Cheers, Duade

[@FrankSD76]

Thanks! Once again, and very thorough, informative and useful review. With some really inspiring shots, too!

[@Duade]

Thanks for the support, I really apprecaite it, Cheers, Duade

[@utubify100]

Nicely done, Duade! Thanks again for another very informative & comprehensive review :) Really do appreciate all the time & effort you put into these. I believe that those looking at these items find your insights invaluable when trying to decide what to spend their money on. I often especially like all the image comparisons you take the time to take & share - tells a great deal of the story. Glad that lens works well for you so far & hope it will be a valued piece of kit for yrs to come. I am still waiting on mine from Canon (after 4 months), with no indication of when they might send one my way. Canon's customer service is quite poor in my experience, here in the US. They share virtually no information about most all things when trying to deal with them - from direct sales to service. Do hope my copy is a good one, if I ever do receive one. The flexibility & extended reach, with solid IQ, are things I am hoping it can achieve. May you enjoy your coming sessions @ the end of summer there & thanks again for all the valuable information regarding the 200-800mm lens. Best regards ~ Chris

[@Duade]

Thanks Chris, sorry to hear about the delay, that is unfortunate and poor from Canon re letting your know what is going on, hopefully not too much longer. Cheers, Duade

[@jessiecampbell4971]

Awesome review, I’ve been looking forwards to seeing this video! I have a canon EF 100-400 LII and a new R5 - i tried it with a 2x extender and it surprisingly is not terrible but I think this lens will be my next upgrade. I shoot lots of things but the little songbirds are closest to my heart. One day i’ll swap out my EF100-400 with the newer Rf100-500, but I think this lens makes more sense for me right now, especially since my older 100-400 still takes lovely shots with the Ef-Rf converter. Thanks for your insights Duade! You do such an excellent job with your videos! Cheers! Jessie - Alberta Canada

[@Duade]

Thanks Jessie, yes, I think the EF100-400 is a great lens and works very well on the R5 so you have that focal range covered. The 200-800 will be a nice addition to that lens for sure. Have fun, Cheers, DUade

[@tycho_escher]

Great review, level of detail is amazing. Love the channel, really helped me as someone new to bird photography.

[@fy7589]

I think in order to calculate the t stop of a lens, all you need is an led light and stop down the lens to likes of f/22 at the same zoom range. If one appears brighter, then the t stop of that lens is faster. For example this lens has a 95mm entrance pupil and divide 800mm with 95, you get around 8.42. Not 9. However sigma 150-600 also has an entrance pupil of 95mm and that equates to around 6.31. So this lens is probably T/8.42 and thats why its blowing some whites. However with the lack of coating and cheaper glass materials, it's probably therefore called and F/9 cause it'll underexpose the darker areas while overexposing the brighter areas, if it was software wise an f/8 lens or something similar, it'd not perform as good. Stopping it down to f/10 will likely give better exposure. I'll probably own the both tomorrow and stop both down to f/22 and shoot the same subject. I suspect the rf lens will be brighter but it may be slightly softer due to diffraction.

[@fylphotography9269]

There are some Canon patents suggesting they considered making this lens f8.5 early on, but the later patents indicate the f-stop is actually f9.18 and the real focal length is 776mm. It's also interesting to see the other considerations like a 200-700mm f5.6-7.1 and 200-1000mm f6.3-9.

[@tanocaperna1205]

Hi duade ! Very nice video, however i'm curious about a point. When comparing the 200-800 to the 800f11, you say the af might be faster on the prime which surprised me. I own that 800f11, and personnally find the af very slow, when compared for example to the 100-400f8, which uses usm motors, like the 200-800. I'm considering upgrading for the 200-800, but if the af isnt better i might reconsider it !

[@christianwetzel1862]

A late thanks for your review! This was very helpful so eventually I bought the lens. One vacation and some thousand wildlife photos later I have to say I'm very happy I did. Just two additions from my side: 1) I am used to hold a lens with my left hand directly under the barrel anyway, never under the lens foot. By turning the foot out of the way up to the right upper side I never had much difficulty to reach the control ring for manual focus, neither to turn the zoom in basically one throw from 200 to 800. 2) The maximum magnification of the lens is actually at 200 mm, where the minimum focus distance is at a very short 80 cm rather than the 3.3 meters at 800mm. This has turned out to be perfect also for "near macro" stuff like butterflies, so the lens now has effectively also replaced my trusty EF L 100-400. And while I was very happy with the 800mm F11 for the last two years with its low weight, it is absolutely no match in all other categories like image quality, AF speed, minimum focus distance and overall versatility.

[@gary_michael_flanagan_wildlife]

Thanks for the video. I can’t wait to get this lens. I use the 600mm f4 II and it’s fantastic. But sometimes I just want to get to the action faster or take a walk without people approaching me like I’m a celebrity. There are some downsides and especially if you are used to the big primes. But it looks like an excellent compromise

[@kennethlui2268]

You are right. People always walk up to me asking what pictures I am taking, the price of the big prime, and how close I can get to an object.

[@gary_michael_flanagan_wildlife]

@@kennethlui2268 ha same!! Sometimes it makes for a good conversation and I have gotten work from it too. It just looks more professional too. But when you just want to to do your thing for enjoyment it can be annoying. “Sorry sir can we talk another time? I’ve only got about another half hour until the light is terrible and I’m going to blow all my highlights”. Lol

[@Harry-bh5dg]

Hi Duade, absolutely superb review, certainly the best I have seen about the lens, I know from when we met you thought it was winner and obviously the review backs that up. Some of the photos on the review are stunning from you and members. Out of interest will you be doing a review of the new Sirui monopod and head I liked the look of that especially if I do go for the R5 ii this lens, and it can take the weight.

[@Duade]

Thanks Mate, yes, it performs well for its price, the f9 is a bit of a weakness but the range is great. Yes, I will try and use the monopod in a future video. Cheers, Duade

[@chemhornet430]

Thanks!

[@Duade]

Thanks for the support, I really do appreciate it, Cheers, Duade

[@robertbrown6060]

I’ve had this lens for a couple of weeks in UK. The light is not great this time of year plus it’s been awful dark and dismal weather. But images in trying light conditions have been much better than I expected on my R6. I’ve not tried it on my R7 yet. The greatest pro for me is that it transforms the reach of the full frame R6. It’s a bit of a game changer for the camera. Hitherto I was using it with EF 100 - 400 plus 1.4 TC. Very good but the 200 - 800 is better plus no adapter and TC. I can deal with the long zoom throw and get used to it I’m sure. The biggest con for me is the weight. Despite using an appropriate black rapid strap I did end up with neck ache after a days use. Why,I’m not entirely sure. Hopefully that was a one off. I would recommend this lens for birders based on my , as yet, rather limited experience. In terms of reach, it’s a game changer for those of us who own full frame cameras and can’t get on with the RF 800 F11 or can’t afford th expensive primes.

[@LyddieGilbert]

I have just across your channel while researching for new camera equipment, and I love how in-depth and informative you talk about the products! It has really helped with my decision making and considering the pros and cons that not many other reviews would mention. Thank you for sharing!

[@adrian_div_photography]

Duade, I need to commend you on your reviews. I have watched literally every youtube review on this lens to date, and no one comes close to doing this justice (with exception of Jan - he is also excellent). You cover all the burning questions with real life trialling and testing, and provide a conclusive (and non-bias) opinion on all of them. I am picking mine up next week so will be interesting to see my experience vs my 100-500! thanks for the video! great stuff.

[@andrewkeir2282]

The Birdlife Conference has been really great Duade. Half way through and I have been really enjoying it. David Stowe was particularly good.

[@Duade]

Great to hear mate, yes Dave is a legend, sorry I couldnt make it, I am at home suffering through Covid at the moment. Cheers, Duade

[@andrewkeir2282]

Oh No..... I hope it's a mild dose... We managed the conference in good health. Get well soon.

[@stefancremers7409]

As i am able to get Sharp shots with the r6ii and 200-800 my older 100-400 l ef series ii produces sharper images. I was at the beach in denmark last week en had a lot of soft focus shots unfortunatly Its a bit hit or miss for me with the 200-800 …

[@manmohangour368]

Hey daude , can you do a comparison video of rf800 f11 and 200-800 please 🙏😊

[@rossk7927]

I don't have the 200-800, but I've never really been happy with the 800/F11. On high contrast subjects it blows out the highlights terribly and really requires a lot of light in general. Nothing is better than getting closer to your subject and with the 800/F11 more often than I expected its reach is too much. With that reach it can be really challenging to locate a subject in frame and keep it there. This last issue is made worse by the small AF box - it's a totally useless lens for birds in flight IMO. All that said, it is a light and an easy to walk around with lens and has its uses. I have taken some great photos with it, but I've missed a lot more than I've gotten.

[@manmohangour368]

@@rossk7927 okay, let me tell you my Point of view, I'm a bird photographer I have an r7 and I'm going to buy the Rf 100-500mm. I know this is a great combo but sometimes we need a little bit more reach so I was thinking of buying the Rf 800 f11, mostly for video purposes, the rf800 f11 is so compact and lightweight, i know this lens has it's limitations but still I think it will be fun using this lens for videos in great sunlight 😄 I know the rf200-800mm is better than the rf800f11 but that lens is big and heavy and I am already buying the rf100-500 so it makes no sense for me to buy this lens, i would like the rf800f11 What do you think??? 🤔

[@rossk7927]

@@manmohangour368 while the 800/F11 does collapse down and is a lot smaller and lighter than the 200-800, it's still a huge lens even when it's as small as possible. There are only 2 ways I bring this lens with me, either it's the only one I bring on a walk, or it's in my car. Otherwise it takes half my pack space and rarely gets put on the body because it's just so non versatile. Usually it's faster and better to use the 100-500 and get closer. 800mm really is a little crazy in most situations, and on an APSC at 1280mm and F17+ it's even moreso. If you're after video and your subjects are smaller birds like wrens or chickadees and are mostly stationary (nesting maybe) and close enough for AF to actually work - it might be a good lens for you. I say mostly stationary because once it escapes your viewfinder it can be quite a challenge to reacquire it, especially if it's a fair distance off and you have trouble spotting it with your own two eyes. The thing I've realized is that the reach of 800 is awesome, but most of the time the conditions for getting usable images with that reach just don't happen often enough for me to justify carrying that prime with me. Like Duade points out - avoiding heat haze is a real struggle and taking home nothing but soft shots can be a real disappointment. That said, this lens really shines at getting bird portraits when they are just beyond the minimum focus distance. It's amazing to have that tiny head fill the frame.

[@manmohangour368]

@@rossk7927 thanks for your opinion 😊

[@bruceholmes4006]

Duade, Another great review. I really appreciate these thorough reviews. This lens is one I am extremely interested in. Mostly for the reach but I was wondering how the focus was which you indicate is good. I have a Sigma 150-600 for many years using with my Canon R5 and at times the auto-focus comes out of focus, so I recently bought the Canon RF 100-400mm f/5.6-8 and added the Canon’s Extender RF1.4x as my new walk around lens. I really like the combo as it is very light in weight, and for the lens price it takes great photos. But adding a longer lens with the Canon RF200-800 might be ideal for when a longer reach is needed. I really like how you talk about the pros and cons on this Canon RF200-800. Will see if I get it but your great review goes a long way to deciding. Well Done!

[@Duade]

G'day Bruce, AF is very similar to the RF100-400 and you should see the same performance. You just get that extra 560-800mm range over the 100-400. I think the two lenses are perfect for wildlife photography. The weight is the biggest consideration as it does get very heavy quickly if handholding for long periods. Cheers, Duade

[@billpeters9266]

Another great review! Thanks so much for the comparison with the RF 100-500 w 1.4 ex, and the RF 800 f11, my kit is the R6 mkII and RF 100-500 + 1.4 extender. I like the convenience and ease of carrying the 1.4 ex with the 100-500. Noticing how the 800 f11 lenses are starting to show up used now I’ll probably pop for one and experiment with the 1.4ex on bright days. Sounds like the new 200-400 is super, but not worth replacing my 100-500 w option of 1.4. Thanks again for the wonderful review!

[@Duade]

Thanks Bill, the 100-500 is a beautiful lens that is a joy to use, the 800 f11 does work well on the R6II, just be aware of that 6m MFD which can cause issues if the subject comes close. Have fun, Cheers, Duade

[@TheodoreSchnell]

First, this is an outstanding review, which is what I've come to expect from you. I pre-ordered the RF 200-800 lens on March 2, based on the overwhelmingly positive reviews the lens has been receiving. I already owned the R7 and the RF 100 macro lens. I purchased the R5 within a few months in anticipation of the arrival of the 200-800. Unfortunately, the parts shortage that has been affecting Nikon and Sony also has hit Canon. I've been waiting five months, and I understand there are others who have been waiting eight months for their lenses to arrive. I was patient through May but am beginning to feel pretty exasperated by now. August is late summer in the Chicago area where I live, and the annual bird migration is coming up. By late fall, I'll have lost a lot of potential bird photos waiting on this lens which I already have paid for but have yet to use. I get it. Canon does not have total control of the parts market. But you would think that when they introduce a new product that is going to be so warmly welcomed, they'd make sure they would have enough lenses on hand to meet the initial demand. This lens was released in November 2023 and I understand some of those first buyers are still waiting for product delivery. Regardless, I will wait. But had I known it would take this long, I might have considered the more expensive RF 100-500, which I initially rejected because of the loss of he lens's flexibility when used with a teleconverted. So if you order the 200-800, check on the availability. You may be waiting a long, long time.

[@matthewbrookes8561]

Great review I have on on order in the UK, cannot wait for it to arrive

[@tonyblake8841]

Hi Duade, at approximately 12:40 you mentioned the magpies were a long way off, maybe 30-40m. Apart from heat haze I would have thought many wildlife photographers would be shooting at 30-40m. Maybe that is where I’m going wrong. Maybe I need a rangefinder as I have problems with judging distance. Would be nice to see a comparison between the OM-1 with the 300 f4 pro with 1.4 x tc and this canon camera and lens at maximum reach. Or maybe the OM 100-400.

[@Duade]

Thanks Tony, to be honest it is hard to judge distance so perhaps they were further away. But I will try to be within 20m most of the time I would say, but again hard to know exactly. I guess you can tell by how much you crop in post. Yes, I should have done an OM-1 comparison also. Cheers, Duade

[@tonyblake8841]

@@DuadeI can’t believe the size of that lens. OM-1 with 300 f4 and 1.4x tc is f5.6. Even allowing for MFTs you must be looking good at around 2kg.

[@Duade]

G'day Tony, yes, the OM System combo is great for weight and size that is for sure. Cheers, Duade@@tonyblake8841

[@Wildridefilms]

Great review Duade! I would love to see a quick rundown of why you take the editing decision that you do and the overall thought process behind editing. Especially ones like @18:53, where I would have included the other gull on the right as I think it complements and balances the overall composition.

[@johnscott9869]

Hi Duade, Ive been waiting for someone to compare this lens to it's rivals and especially the RF800 F11. I'm mainly shooting small birds and I think the F11 used is fantastic value. Even at low light and crazy iso it's fine given the noise reduction software out there. Also in Europe the 200-800 is mostly out of stock. At this price point €2600 it's between the cost of an EF600mm F4 L USM & the IS version, so I got the ancient F4 instead. Sharpness is not an issue with any of these again because of the software out there. Maybe I'll get the 200-800 when it's a mark 2 or affordable second hand. Thanks for this and all your reviews.

[@stuartcarlton7939]

I have been lucky enough to have this lens for a couple of months and am super happy with it. I don’t use manual focus a lot but yes position of focus ring is a little awkward. One other thing I find is that the zoom throw requires a long twist on the ring which can be a bit tricky in some circumstances. To my eye images are sharp and af is fast (I am using an R5) Where else will you get this degree of flexibility and quality images at this price?

[@alzippideedodah326]

Thanks

[@Duade]

My pleasure, thanks for the support, Cheers, Duade

[@jTreaks5198]

Ordered back in November and still no delivery date in sight for the 200-800. Purchased a used in like new condition 100-500 with 1.4x extender and could not be happier. Miles ahead of the Sigma 150-600 C that I let go. Very versatile, portable wild life lens that is razor sharp. Canceled my order for the 200-800 for the time being. More than likely will buy it at a later date used when prices come down. Great review Duade.

[@jhenry248]

I have noticed the whites being blown out at f/9 also. I've since have been stopping down to f/13 for my shoots in bright daylight that seems to work out for me.

[@simonthibodeau7082]

Turning down exposure compensation a third stop or two would do it nicely as well.

[@canadakaren1131]

Fantastic and comprehensive review. Great to see the comparison shots between different lenses. Clear concise and interesting video as always. Thanks Duade

[@Duade]

Glad you enjoyed it!

[@keithhumphrey7529]

Brilliant review. Very helpful. I own the R5 with 100-500 with 1.4x. I also have 500 f4. Very tempted to add this lens to my arsenal. Thanks again for being so thorough.

[@Duade]

Glad it was helpful!

[@andrewphillips2520]

beautiful images and a thorough comparison, thank you Duade!!

[@ludowild]

Thank you Duade for this sharing and this ultra complete video on the RF200-800 thank you also for sharing my photo of the European Greenfinch -) For my use of the R7 and the RF200-800 I think that I am more limited by the R7 than by the RF200-800 which is a little frustrating I am impatiently waiting for the R5 mark II because sometimes in backlight for example the autofocus is a little capricious! Note that compared to my Sigma 150-600 the photo quality is a little better but it is especially in video that the gap widens; the RF200-800 "crosses the air" much better than the Sigma in a way for slightly distant subjects there is a big gap in quality! the total silence of the RF200-800 is also a big change from the Sigma! The additional 200mm is very appreciable!

[@GerryL116]

Sure wish this lens really was available. We're now in July, with this lens having been "released" last fall, and none of the regular outlets in the US have it in stock. The few smaller places that do, have $400 and $600 up charges. Its odd (to me) how all the reviewers regard this lens as if it is widely available. I've bought a number of other RF lens within a few months of release. None have been this elusive.

[@PhotoGearFun]

Thanks for another great review. I may be the only one that shoots with the ring set to tight. I use a cotton carrier and I keep the ring set to tight and then usually just don't move it when I shot. I do agree that a switch would have been better to lock it. I'm also not a fan of the placement of the control ring it seems they could have switched the two. Other than those two issues I can't find too many faults with this great lens. I will say though my shooting experience with the Sony 200-600 is far more pleasant overall.

[@Duade]

Thanks for your comment and I agree with what you have said, interesting to hear your use for the tight settings, if you are not changing focal lengths it would be handy. I agree the Sony is a lovely lens to shoot with. Cheers, Duade

[@michaelpoole8410]

An excellent review as usual Duade. I had a look at the 200-800 at the Photography Show (UK). They had it linked to an R7 on their viewing platform and only two at the show, which I found a bit surprising. The twist zoom did not seem too tight, so I wonder if Canon have made a slight change. The Canon rep said he had not heard about the problem...

[@Duade]

Thanks Michael, great to hear you had a play with one, good to hear the zoom ring was not too tight, it is possible Jan and I got the first batch and they have improved it. It is mainly an issue when resting the lens on your palm and you use two fingers to turn it whilst looking through the EVF. Cheers, Duade

[@michaelpoole8410]

@@Duade Ah! I need to try one in the field.

[@bensaunders616]

Terrific review. One thing to mention is availability. I've had one on order in the U.S. for 3 months and no sign of it coming. I was hoping to use it in Alaska in July, but I fear it will not arrive in time.

[@stuartriley]

It’s a big lens, but so are the competitors lenses. I have not gone over to the RF Design because I have plenty of EF lenses. I know that I can adapt them but I am not sure the best way to get them to work is via an external adapter. Overall, it looks like a good lens. Is the price worth the value to have some loss of performance rated lenses? I dunno. 😮

[@Duade]

G'day Stuart, it is always hard to know for sure, for me this lens works well on RF bodies and performs well for the price. Cheers, Duade

[@ShotInTheDark]

Excellent review, and I cant add anything else than what you've already said, Jan and yourself have summed this up perfectly, I got my 200-800 last week in Alberta, where the weather has been challenging for any photography, but I went out regardless and shot bald eagles out of the window of the car, heat haze central when its -20 outside and +20 inside! That being said, I was very impressed with the results in terrible overcast snow storm weather at extreme distance with the R5. I cant wait for spring and put this through its paces.

[@JonathanMikulich]

Thank you very much for this fantastic and comprehensive video. You have certainly helped me in my decision making process.

[@lewcehjitl3282]

Very soft and slow lens, it’s even more soft on the Canon R7 due to high mp crop sensor.

[@paulfarrell4039]

Thank you. What a great review. I am coming from 7DII 100-400mII. I am a birder 100% so younhave convinced me to buy the 200-800mm plus R5.

[@craigwebb2066]

Great review! You have been my mentor since I started birding around two years ago. At the time I could only afford the R6 and the RF 100-400, but have gotten some amazing shots following your advice. I've been thinking of upgrading to this lens but have been waiting for a good, full review. Given that my R6 has fewer pixels than other cameras and I can't crop as much without losing detail, I think the reach of this would better serve me than saving for the RF 100-500.

[@ladyethyme]

Rewatching b/c I just find your reviews super relaxing!!! Cheerful, informative content!❤❤

[@Duade]

That is nice to hear, glad you are enjoying the review, Cheers, Duade

[@dalelautenschleger8763]

wonderful once again, I simply enjoy listening to your thorough detailed analysis during my nature walks as I just did today. I currently only 100 to 500 and a 600 mm prime, but seriously considering getting this one to add to my tool bag to go along with my R5 and R6 .

[@IntothewestOkotoks]

Fantastic review. So glad you like it because I bought one, and haven’t had a chance yet to get out and try it! Hopefully this weekend. I think for the money, and reach, Canon is offering something no one else is. I’m looking forward to trying it…as well, thank you for sharing all the photos throughout and at the end of this video - some great shots by all the photographers!

[@trevor9934]

Very comprehensive review and aligns pretty well with my experience. I shoot with the R5, and both R6 versions. Instead of getting the R7 (which I think has a poor bus and focus design), so on occasions when I would want that capacity, I use the 1.6x crop mode in the R5 to be able to see a smaller FoV when shooting - the reduction in MP capacity from 45 to 17-ish is fine for my purposes. The focus in that mode is great, as always. I shoot almost exclusively hand-held, and do weights to be able to handle this and similar configurations - at 71, it's a good thing to do anyway, this just gives me a good incentive to do it! Like you, I am frustrated by the fixed tripod mount, it would save me a bit of bulk and weight and make hand-holding the lens a lot more comfortable. If the collar had the clicks at 90deg that would be good, as would having a Swiss Arca plate built-in. No issues with focus (compared to my RF 100-500 and Sigma 60-600 lenses). I don't use teleconverters, so no opinion there. So far, I have had great images with the lens and certainly the focal range is awesome, especially in crop mode. Glad they included the lens hood. I got a high quality protect filter for the lens - not cheap but I prefer protection from both the hood and a filter for my expensive front elements. Why, oh WHY in NZ, do they want $229NZ for the soft lens case??? That's ridiculous... I use the inner cardboard box the lens came in with the plastic bag for storage.

[@mickemmett6828]

I appreciate this is an older review and you may not be monitoring replies any more but here goes, the mirror less Canon cameras are pretty new to me after holding out for a while with my 5DSr, which I love. I bought a new R5 mkI (the mkII was a bit pricey for my first dive into mirrorless) with the kit 24-105mm and I'm still finding my way around that setup, while doing do I ordered a 200-800 which arrived a couple of days ago and I haven't really had chance yet to get out with it. I have noticed while having a play around with it that the IS starts up as soon as I turn the camera on, the AF is turned off in the body and lens but even if I turn the IS off on the lens I can still hear the IS whirring away inside, surely this can't be correct, you'd end up with flat batteries in no time. Surely it should perform in a similar way to the previous DSLR's and only start up IS when the shutter button is half pressed and stop shortly after the button is released? Am I missing a setting somewhere? There doesn't seem to be much about this on the internet or the manual? Love the vids, keep 'em coming.

[@markdavidson8625]

Thanks for this in depth review Duade. It proved invaluable in allowing me to determine that it ain't the lens for me, due to the stiff zoom ring and poor manual focus engagement. With the R5 & 100-500 I've set up so that manual focus works in all of my Custom settings just by turning the manual focus ring. Eyeing off the RF600 f/4 having borrowed a friend's EF600.

[@Duade]

Thanks Mark, yes, the 600 is a beautiful lens, a bit big and expensive but the IQ is the best you can get. I do wonder if Canon are close to releasing the 500 f4 replacement in RF. Cheers, Duade

[@deepgreenphotography]

A very well planned and well executed review for bird photography. Thanks!

[@aridfoo]

Fantastic review Duade, really detailed and a good balance of the pros and cons of this lens. I ordered mine at end of February to go with my R5 and been advised by the retailer of stock likely coming end of March or early April at this stage. Seems like massive stock shortages of this lens everywhere at the moment. Can’t wait for it to arrive as your images look fantastic.

[@daviesmia]

I am a complete Novice, so stationary birds are what I'm able to get clearly, so far. Rebel T7 with a 55-250. It is Spring now, got a fledgling Redtail Hawk in its nest...baby steps I reckon

[@henrikw377]

Super review. What a bittersweet package - 200-800 is a fantastic range and f/9 is OK, but the zoom throw and stiffness and the lack of a manual focusing ring just makes it so much harder to use. As a Sony user I won't be getting this lens regardless, but I really feel for the Canon users who have something that is frustratingly close to "budget perfection".

[@Duade]

Thanks for the comment, yes, if they had made a few more improvements it really would have been a winner, I am still happy with it but there is room for improvement. Cheers, Duade

[@r.lee1989]

just found my new favorite photo channel!

[@hawkforce3109]

Awesome review, I agree with all the points you make about the lens. I love my 200-800 paired with my R3. One interesting thing I noticed when I zoom in to 800mm I can dial the aperture wider than f9. My R3 display shows the aperture as follows= F8.0 4/8 Not sure what it means but I wonder if anyone else has seen this.

[@mdoing]

Great review! In my opinion you really need/want /crave 800mm for birding. My version of that is the 100-500 on the R7. Love the combo compared to my R6 with 1.4X, not needing the extender and not losing the zoom range is great. The 200-800 would definitely be the go-to for full frame, I agree with you that the 500 on full frame is not enough. Can we wish for an R7-II with improved autofocus and less rolling shutter, please Canon?

[@CJC051]

another great review....I wish they came up with that lens 5-6 years ago when i could afford it..

[@pierrebeaupre8249]

We can always count on you Duade but how did you and some of your members manage to get your hands on the lens lol I purchased mine back in December and I'm still waiting for it!

[@Duade]

Thanks Pierre, yes, the short supply is a real bummer and I believe many are still waiting. I think I got lucky with the limited number released in Australia. I hope you don't have to wait too much longer. Cheers, Duade

[@kennethlui2268]

Excellent review. Thanks for posting my image. Obviously we can't compare it with the big prime that costs 10 times more. The big prime like RF 600 f4 is sharper, has better bokeh and contrast. But at $1899 USD, this lens is a no brainer. I will carry it for walkaround, hiking, and places where big prime is not convenient. As you mentioned, my R7 takes quite a bit of soft or blurry images due to, I think, slow sensor with slow read out speed. I use the R5 95% of the time with the RF 200-800.