Comparing the Canon 100-500 and the Sigma 150-600 on the Canon EOS R7. Which one should you chose?

[@adude394]

I had the 150-600 Contemporary, and then traded it in in favor of the Sport model. That lens gave really good account on both my 7D Mk II and 1DX Mk III. However, I decided to make the move to mirrorless, so other than an old 300D that's been in my bag for 21 years, I sold all my DSLRs and EF/EF-S lenses. I had waited and waited and waited for the 200-800 to become available, so I bought the 100-500 to tide me over. (And don't you know, literally less than one week after I got the 100-500, the 200-800 was in stock!) I'm only an avid hobbyist, nothing near a pro, but I find that I do like the 100-500 very much. It's unbelievably light (as is the 200-800), and I've gotten good results using the lens on my R5 and R6 Mk II.

[@JonnyPink65]

The 100-500 is an L lens and even if you put a 1.4 extender on there, I still think the photos are just a tickle shaper than the 200-800. The difference between F9 and F10 is negligible but you do lose the zoom. The other advantage tot he 100-500 is the super short MFD. Both are awesome lens and I often forget that I have a zoom and just shoot at the max focal length. LOL. The older DSLRs are amazing but the new tech we have at our fingertips allows us to get shots that were pure luck in the past. 🙏💖🤗

[@adude394]

@@JonnyPink65 Well put! Regarding your final sentence: Remember the old days of being limited by the amount of exposures on a roll of film? It's so great that now we can take hundreds (or more) of shots with no fear of running out of memory. I know it's kind of a "spray and pray" mentality, but still, the odds of a keeper are a lot higher than they used to be.

[@JonnyPink65]

@@adude394 New tech. I love what we have and the ability to share!!! Still, nothing beats experience. 💖🤗

[@adude394]

@@JonnyPink65 For sure!

[@basilbcf]

Duade Patton, on his YT channel, goes over some settings for the Sigma and r5 (and likely R7), which greatly reduces any pulsing. Since using his settings, I've not had any trouble with my Sigma on my R5 - it's been a fantastic combo. In addition to the Sigma having an extra 100mm reach, it is also 1/3 stop brighter at the long(er) end.

[@JonnyPink65]

That is awesome!! Yeah, I saw his fixes that were sent to him by one of his subscribers. I never did try those settings but I never really had trouble with mine - at least not enough to bother me. It is a fantastic lens but I do hope that Canon allows third party RF lenses at some point - that would be an awesome lens to compete with Sony's 200-600 and Nikon's 180-600! 🙏💖🤗

[@basilbcf]

@@JonnyPink65 It's not as compact and light as the RF100-500, but (the contemporary version) is easily hand holdable. And updated RF version of the Sigma would indeed be awesome. For times when I wand decent reach but don't want to carry around such a big lens (like long hikes) I've been looking at the RF100-400.

[@JonnyPink65]

@@basilbcf The RF 100-500 is really light, but the lighter and less expensive RF 100-400 is also pretty amazing! 🤗

[@adambadger]

I'm planning on getting a Sigma 150-600MM F5-6.3 DG OS HSM for the Canon EOS 60D after using a Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6L IS USM for years. I mainly use it for ground-to-air during air shows.

[@JonnyPink65]

It should be fantastic on the 60D!!! As a 3rd party, it does not play as nice with the mirrorless as native Canon lenses do but it does work. But on your 60D, it will work great!!! 🙏💖🤗

[@karthikr177]

The rf 100 to 500 is priced just ridiculously. For 1/4th of the price the rf 100 to 400 is an amazing lens. Focuses super fast and is super sharp. I would be happy to trade of the extra 100 mm and the slight advantage in sharpness of the L lens and even the one f stop advantage. To me the 100-500 is justifiable at 2200 at the max. I was heart broken when canon increased the price of ef 100 to 400 L lens. And then they did this. I wish Sigma and tamron soon come up with their own rf lens lineup.

[@JonnyPink65]

Hi Karthik R!!! I have had many suggest that lens so I am going to rent one of those to try. I agree on the price of the RF 100-500. I can get a close result with the adapted Sigma, but if I can get a better result with the RF 100-400 and with that price - I am all over it. Thank you Karthik R!!!💖🙏🤗

[@Chris_Wolfgram]

And now imagining being a working poor guy like me ! Yes, crazy expensive.

[@JonnyPink65]

@@Chris_Wolfgram Fish... I am a working poor guy too. I just live so far beyond my means. I live as hard as I can because I live by my manta - "live for today, live right now"! If I dont wake up tomorrow, at least i will have gone after most of what I wanted. I may not have gotten there but I did try. 💖🙏🤗

[@Chris_Wolfgram]

@@JonnyPink65 well it sounds like we are on the same page ! Follow your passions ! I know it's kind of a cliche, but life really is short !

[@JonnyPink65]

@@Chris_Wolfgram Amen!!! It is a HUGE cliché but oh so true. Time is the master of change!!

[@larrycoonrod5563]

I have the 100-500 on my R6 MK 2 and a RF 1.4 tele. No complaints. One of the best lenses I have ever had. Pretty much leave my 70-200 F2.8 home 70 percent of the time

[@JonnyPink65]

Agreed 110% for sure. I use the extender almost always unless I put it on the R7. Best I have used as well. 🙏🤗💖

[@David_Quinn1995]

the pulsing is annoying sometimes but what I learned is if you use the back button autofocus it's a non-existent issue on my T7, it only pulsed when I was photographing a stationary subject.

[@JonnyPink65]

I have only used back button focus for such a long as I can remember. I did not have the issues that others had. 🙏💖🤗

[@wellingtoncrescent2480]

I have a neurologic disability, and I struggle to handle the Sigma 150-600C, which weighs 4.7lbs compared to 3.0lbs for the RF 100-500. But I still hesitated over the price difference, until a Canadian retailer offered 20% off Canon products in a national "pre-Black Friday" sale. While still more expensive than the Sigma, I don't worry about pulsing, the dual focus motors are more responsive, and the image quality is breathtaking. Having used both, the RF 100-500 is worth the difference if you can swing it.

[@JonnyPink65]

I completely agree. Of all the lenses I have used, on the R7, it was the most mind-blowingly sharp lens I have used - ever! The only reason I dont own one is I keep spending my money on other things right now. Other lenses that are light and are sharp are the EF 100-400 adapted to the that body. But over all if you have the cash, the 100-500 is the way to go Worth every bit of the struggle to afford it. There is a gentleman that James I see all the time that caries his gear in a wagon (he used to use an old stroller), then finds a place at the edge of the water, sits in a chair with his rig on a gimbal. As long as we all get out and have fun with it while we are here, that is all that matters. Congratulations on your lens and have more fun than you can stand with it!!! 🙏🤗💖

[@wellingtoncrescent2480]

@@JonnyPink65 I considered the RF 100-400, but since I decided to sell my Sigma 150-600, I preferred the longer reach of the RF 100-500. I'm curious, though: how would you compare the image quality between the two Canon lenses?

[@JonnyPink65]

@@wellingtoncrescent2480 The RF 100-500 is hands down, one of the sharpest lenses I have used. If you have the cash..... go with the 100-500! 🤗

[@dsmiljanic66]

Svaka čast majstore! Skroman, posvećen, jasan...

[@JonnyPink65]

Hvala!!! 🙏💖🤗

[@OldVideoPutz]

The RF 100-400 is a great lens for $600. It's a great match for the R7. It's very sharp, it's just not weather sealed.

[@JonnyPink65]

Thank you - yes, I am going to try that because you have suggested it. 🤗 I like that price. Weather sealing is not a consideration to me for the most part. With these hot days I have been going out into, I am starting to worry about sweat sealed. 😂 Thank you, thank you for letting me share. 🤗💖🙏

[@OldVideoPutz]

Another great thing about the RF 100-400 is the size and weight. My wife has a shoulder and back injury. The R7 and RF 100-400 is lightweight, compact and produces great result.

[@JonnyPink65]

@@OldVideoPutz I am excited to try it!!!! I will be renting it soon. 💖

[@JonnyPink65]

@@OldVideoPutz I am really excited to try it out!! 🤗💖🙏

[@marcogretsch7028]

Apart from eye tracking, would the R7 be an upgrade from the 80D with the sigma lens?

[@JonnyPink65]

Absolutely - 200%! If you have not used one, you will be impressed. I will be in Arizona to shoot hummingbirds again next week and I will be using the R7 as well as my R3 and R5 Mark II. One thing - the Sigma is a great lens but you will find that the new RF 100-400 is sharper and more consistent once you start using the R7 all the time. You will not have the additional reach but the photos will be a bit sharper. Until then, enjoy the paring!! 🙏🤗💖

[@marcogretsch7028]

Thank you for your detailed information! Will follow your channel! 👍🏻😃💯 Ps. Good music you make, birding and guitar goes together well! 💯😄🎸 @@JonnyPink65

[@JonnyPink65]

@@marcogretsch7028 Thank you, thank you, thank you!!! I love to share and feel fortunate to have this platform to do just that. I feel even more fortunate and appreciate you letting me share with you. If you have questions, please ask and I will help as I can. I do list my email in my description for just that reason. Happy to answer questions!! Again, thank you!! 🙏🤗💖

[@joshuakersman637]

personally. im looking into the rf because i have the 150-600 sport from sigma on my r5. it just cant get sharp. calibrated the focus, new firmware updates. it jist isnt sharp where i need it to be. i do motorsports photography. so also panning with a over 6 pounds lens is just exhuasting. ill pick the RF100-500 any day for what i need it for even with the price. however i agree with you. the pulsing on the sigma, if you arent shooting professionally and arent worriwd about missing one or two oppurtunities it isnt a big deal. youll find plenty more. it can get a tad annoying as ive owned the 100 to 400 and it could never find focus. i missed a few eagle shots from the lens acting up with its pulsing. especially against empty sky. it really comes down to what you need it for. professional work, the rf all the way. not to say the sigma cant be used by a professional shooter making some money. it just has a few too many drawbacks when you talk about using it for a 12 hour racing event.

[@JonnyPink65]

Perfectly said. My favorite set up, at leas one of my favorite set ups, is the 100-500 with a 1.4 extender - I still think it is better than the 200-800. The EF Sigmas just dont do as well on the the RF bodies unlike the native EF Canon lenses do. 🙏🤗💖

[@CrisURace]

Having a hard time to find a video that reviews adapted the Sports version of the Sigma. I own it but the R7 is not coming any time soon it seems, i guess Romania is last on list...

[@JonnyPink65]

Hi CrisURace! There are many places that are having problems getting it. This is where I got mine and it shows they have it in stock - www.e-infin.com/ww/item/10895/canon_eos_r7_mirrorless_digital_camera_(body_only) Not an affiliate link, just sending the information. If - when you do adapt the Sports lens, I would be curious about that. The reason I went with the Contemporary over the sports lens was the price .... and the weight. I wanted the 60-600 but not at that price. Would love to see what you get. Hope this helps. 🤗🙏💖 Wanted to jump back in here after going through comments. I have one from a shooter who DOES use the Sports lens and says it works better than the Contemporary one. 🤗

[@blutey]

Hi John. Am enjoying looking through your informative videos on wildlife photography. Can I ask, how does the Canon RF100-500's autofocus in video mode compare to stills mode in your experience on the R7 for birding and insects in flight etc? I was considering getting this combination and like to shoot video quite a lot so would be interested to know.

[@JonnyPink65]

Funny you should ask I FINALLY just bought this lens after renting it countless times. It works well - better in fact I think that the Sigma, but nothing is perfect. I do use all my lenses for video and of all the systems I have used, Canon seems to be the best with Sony being right there as well. Canon also has amazing stabilization. I will never say that any system is perfect or is the best - it works extremely well. LOL 🙏💖🤗

[@blutey]

Thanks. As a rule of thumb I think video AF for a camera tends to be not a s good as stills performance and I like the results I've seen from that camera-lens combo but it's a little pricey!@@JonnyPink65

[@JonnyPink65]

@@blutey Price wise, Sigma and you can get some amazing images with the Sigma - video too. But the Native Canon I think - any maker really (that might be the old school in me), native is the way to go. However, I do hope that both Sigma and Tamron are given the green light to make RF AF lenses - I will get one when it comes out. I have rented the RF 100-500 so many time and held on buying it until recently because of the price so I understand. 🙏🤗💖

[@Eli4Bill]

Great comparison of the two lenses John. While the Canon lens is $2,000 more it’s also 1 lb. lighter. That would be a consideration for me also. I think I would do like you and rent at least the 100-500 before making a final decision. Great video!

[@JonnyPink65]

Bill, I have never been a big fan of renting.... until now. I am glad I did and..... I did almost buy it LOL. I rented the RF 100mm for the next week. It is amazing for sure but I like some of the things the Sigma does better as well. Each has strengths and weaknesses. I guess....... I will have to get both. LOL Live for today, live right now. Tomorrow may not be here. 🙏💖🤗

[@Eli4Bill]

@@JonnyPink65 👍👍

[@bennettfrfr]

Hello! this video is very helpful would you say that the sigma is better for airplanes at airshows? I am also considering the 100-400 because i am just a beginner photographer upgrading from a canon rebel t5 and a 75-300.

[@JonnyPink65]

Well, if I am given a choice, I will take the 100-500. As a native Canon lens and as their top of the line pro level L lens, it is simply stunning. Just my opinion, but it is one of my favorites. It is expensive though but worth it. The RF 100-400 is a fantastic and super sharp lens as well, but the 400mm is sometimes a little limiting 🙏💖🤗

[@bennettfrfr]

Awesome thank you would you say that the sigma 150-600 is better or the 100-400pn the r7 for air shows?

[@JonnyPink65]

@@bennettfrfr Well, I would take the 100-400 over the Sigma because it is a native lens. I think the hit rate is better even with the shorter reach. But keep in mind, we all shoot differently and look for something different in a set up. If you can swing it, the 100-500 is a better choice. The older EF native Canon glass adapts perfectly to the new RF bodies and although the results are good using the Sigma, it is just not quite there. Hopefully, Sigma will be allowed to release long RF glass in the future. Again, this is just my opinion based on how I like to shoot. 🤗💖

[@bennettfrfr]

Thanks for the information😀

[@JonnyPink65]

@@bennettfrfr Thank YOU for asking!! 🤗💖

[@petercarpowitz7007]

Amazing macro shots...

[@JonnyPink65]

Thank you, thank you!!! 🙏🤗💖

[@carloslandscapeinc.4230]

Hi John I have a question I have a Canon eos R do you think that will work good with the Sigma 150-600 as your R7 please let me know Thank you.

[@JonnyPink65]

The Sigma 150-600 will adapt just fine to your EOS R for sure and you will get some great photos. However, the R7 has a vastly superior eye autofocus system and the photos will be better out of the R7. The autofocus in the R was good but not great. The R7 focus is on a whole other level. The other advantage to the R7 is that it is a crop sensor and so the perceived reach of the focal length will to from 600 to 960. If you are shooting wildlife, reach is what you want in my opinion. 🙏🤗💖

[@AKSKMY]

Still torn if I should get the Sigma 100-600mm C. Especially how it is EF mount and I most likely have to change all my lens to RF one day. Also I hear you mention that it is not as sharp and does have occasional breathing issue which makes me reconsider. Sellers here in my area are putting it at about 1K for used. Should I wait for the RF100-500 to drop in price? Not in a rush anyways

[@JonnyPink65]

On the R7, if you want something right now that will not break the bank, the new RF 100-400 is a fantastic option - I would take that over the Sigma. The Sigma has the reach, but it is not a sharp and consistent as the new RF lens. If you have the cash, the EF 100-44 II lens is amazing and the RF 100-500 is at the top of the list. The other lens that has really impressed me, at least on my R5, is the RF 800 F11. I was reluctant to try it but I rented it and fell in love with it. If you work around its limitaions, it can be impressive and so much more consistent and sharper than the Sigma!!! 🙏💖🤗

[@AKSKMY]

@@JonnyPink65 I went ahead and got the Sigma for $980 with warranty of 3 months. I think it was worth for the reach. Agree on the consistency hence my next change slowly is to upgrade all my EF to RF sooner or later.

[@JonnyPink65]

@@AKSKMY Enjoy it - go out and have fun with it. I keep thinking about upgrading my EF lenses but I really like them - they adapt just fine to the new bodies!! 🤗

[@ludowild]

Hello Johnny Pink, thank you for your various tests! we have 3 passions in common: cycling, music and photography! speaking of music in France we had a great rock star Johnny Halliday -) Small question I am equipped with a Canon EOS 90D that you know well and a Sigma 150-600 that you know just as much! I really have trouble filming with the Sigma because the autofocus is so noisy... I'm thinking of investing in the R7 with later the RF100-500 which according to Christopher Frost's test is amazing as it borders on perfection but here it is a question I ask myself is it ultra quiet especially in video? All the best from France, thank you, Ludo

[@JonnyPink65]

Ludo Wild, the new lenses have silent focus motors and that does make a difference. You can go the less expensive route of moving and external mic away from the camera itself. I use my 90D for my music videos, and all my outdoor talking head stuff because it is light and the video quality is simply amazing - yes it is better on the R7 but I keep forgetting to swap in my camera bag LOL. I also use an external wireless with the receiver on the camera and a lav on me - that makes a difference but you can hear me grunting and groaning when I hold it for too long. But moving and external mount away from the lens will take most of that away. 🤗🙏💖 PS I rented the RF 100-500 and it is an AMAZING lens!!! Hands down.

[@ludowild]

@@JonnyPink65 Thank you very much, I will use my 90D to film myself during my outings while I shoot with another camera (maybe the R7 or the X-H2S ...) which lens do you use with the 90D to do your vlogs with good sharpness?

[@JonnyPink65]

@@ludowild I use an old EF L 17-40 F4. I have used it on my R5 and on my R7 and it is the sharpest on the R7!!! I have ordered a 24mm EF F2.8 lens for a deeper boca, but it is not here yet. I love the autofocus on all of them. I have even had the 90D fall over and it still works perfectly. I do use a variable ND filter, I keep my ISO at 400 most of the time, 1/40 shutter, at F4 with the white balance at 5500K It works for me,!! 🤗💖

[@ludowild]

@@JonnyPink65 Thank you so much for your response and sharing! All the best from France

[@JonnyPink65]

@@ludowild I thank YOU!!! I try to respond to everyone unless I just miss it. You have no idea how much it means to me to be able to share and have you watch my stuff. I can not thank you enough!! 🙏😊💖

[@EuropaChronicles]

Thanks for the comparison! If I could offer a slight comment/critique, since I listen to KZbin videos while doing other things, it was difficult to follow your points because you would routinely refer to each lens and say “this one.” I know it may seem overly repetitive to continuously use their names, but I think it would help out viewers like me immensely. Otherwise, really good info and GREAT shots. I’m motivated to try shooting more small subjects with my RF 100-500 since it’s not something I had really considered and your work looks phenomenal. Subbed. 👍

[@JonnyPink65]

Europa Chronicles!!!!! That is an excellent suggestion and thank you for that. I will make it a conscious effort as I have two comparisons I want to do soon. That will make it more clear as well. As far as shooting a pho-cro as I call it, I LOVE doing that. I discovered shooting bees that way years ago and have done it since then long ago. The sharpest shots I have had shooting dragonflies is with the Canon 100-500. The 70-200 with the 1.4 tele on the lens is almost the same. Thank you, thank you for that tip - I will do it. 😁🙏💖

[@HeadlessChickenTO]

Focus pulsing...I find I have that on almost anything that zooms anyways. My Sigma 18-300mm did it a number of times when I suddenly see something and I pull all the way to 300 without focusing first, and it can't find it up close. But if I focus on the subject then zoom in, no issues. Or if I focus on something next to my subject by pulling out by a few mm, it finds my subject as I recompose. A bit of a pain, but I took it as a challenge. I am definitely going to try and save up for that Sigma 150-600mm Contemporary. I am almost wanting to get the Canon RF 100-400 F5-6.8 to fill in the shoes of my Sigma 18-300, just so I can have something to fit natively onto my R7. I'm rethinking my kit for my new camera, and work it around urban wildlife photography. I know I have a red tail hawk that likes the area around my house, still haven't been able to snap a picture of it yet.

[@JonnyPink65]

I am glad I rented to try it. I have never been a fan of renting.... until now. I am going to get the 100-400 and try it - I would like a native RF lens myself. The native Canon did that for me as well and I only pulled about 50 shots of the thousands I shot...... and narrowed those down as well. i think some get carried away with expectations. I happy with one or two shots I can share. Thank you, thank you!! 🤗💖🙏

[@Chris_Wolfgram]

But I think your describing something different than the "focus pulsing" that is often described. People are 'not' talking about it being able to find focus in the first place. Yes, that can be a problem with mirrorless cameras too, but that's a whole different issue. The focus pulsing that people are talking about is, Say its already found focus, its making the small box right on the eye, and its sticking there. One would assume every shot from there forward would be tack sharp (given the right camera settings for the conditions) but instead, you get sharp, sharp, soft, sharp, soft, soft, soft, sharp, etc...... This is what happens on my R5 - Sigma 150-600c combo. Sure, I almost always end up getting a nice, razor sharp shot, of any creature that gives me a chance for a burst of 8 or 10 shots, but if its a split second where I only get one shot.... or only one "at that perfect angle", good luck. I'm thinking about the Canon 100-500 for exactly this reason. Definitely going to rent it first.

[@JonnyPink65]

@@Chris_Wolfgram Fish Chris - I got the same thing with the 100-500. I am glad I rented it and I DO want to buy it but it is not as high on my priority list as it was. Even with the focus point showing the entire time, I would get in a burst MOST that were sharp. Sony has the same issues as well. There are so many that will not use a third party lens but have never used one. I was SUPER impressed with the sharpness of the 100-500 for sure, but it does miss focus. So for ME, right now, the Sigma does for ME what I want it to.. Rent one and enjoy it - if you do find it superior buy it. I am having fun renting lenses for a change. 💖🤗🙏

[@Chris_Wolfgram]

@@JonnyPink65 TY. I wouldn’t expect 100% perfect focus with every shot, with any lens, just because they are several other factors that can effect the sharpness of a shot. But in the test Duade Paton had done, he was getting 15% from the Sigma 150-600, and 80% from the Canon 100-500…. This, plus the fact that apparently the 100-500 plays well with TC’s where the Sigma absolutely did not, is another big deal. Guess I’ll find out in a week when my rentals come in 👍

[@Chris_Wolfgram]

@@JonnyPink65 hmmm. Duade Paton said in his comparison tests that he had only a 15% hit rate with the Sigma 150-600, but an 80% hit rate with the RF 100-500. And of course another thing to consider is “our own hit rate” as a photographer 🙂 I’m sure at least some % of my soft shots are totally my own fault, be it my technique or my settings.

[@MrTmiket0007]

Thanks for sharing another wonderful video and the information, hopefully soon I will be able to get the Canon 100 to 500 👍🤗

[@JonnyPink65]

Miguel, Thank YOU!!! I rented that and renting is allowing me to try many different lenses. If you have the cash, it is an awesome lens for sure. AMAZINGLY sharp. 💖🙏🤗

[@forced_perspective]

Thats awesome. That eye af is amazing. Scared to try out all this new technology because I won't be able to go back to my ancient tech 🙃

[@JonnyPink65]

James - fear is the biggest thief of dreams. Use anything I have for as long as you like, sell what you have and lets go out shooting. It used to be invest in glass, but I am starting to think that the tech also matters if you know how to control the light - and YOU do. You have a natural eye. The new tech is simply amazing in what it can do. Lets go macroing this weekend - you take what ever camera and lens you want. 🤗💖🙏

[@forced_perspective]

@@JonnyPink65 i will take you up on it for a weekend!! Thats for sure 👍 💯

[@JonnyPink65]

@@forced_perspective PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE do!!!

[@NecatPace]

Great!!! i have a sigma 150-600 but someday a canon 100-500! or 200-600? in canon rf? someday?

[@JonnyPink65]

Thank you! The Sigma is a great lens and has the added reach advantage. The 100-500 is incredibly sharp. I want that lens at some point but I do hope the come out with a 200-600 RF lens at some point as well. The RF 100-500 is amazing! I do however prefer the EF 100-400 over the RF 100-400. 🙏🤗❤

[@MrEcliptor]

@@JonnyPink65I have the RF 100-400 and it’s such a slow aperture lens that I’m limited to bright daytime shooting, or shutter speed under 640”. I feel the same way about the 800 F11 but what’s really odd to me is that the 800 F11 seemed brighter than the 100-400 @ 400mm F8. Call me crazy. I figured it worked like this… a 400mm F8 doubled is 800mm F16… which would be dimmer than an 800mm F11.

[@JonnyPink65]

@@MrEcliptor Yeah - those are not lenses for me for those reasons. I also found the older EF 100-400 sharper. Nikon figures their light loss differently as well which is a confusion. Right now, I have a Canon Ef 800 F5.6 as a rental for a couple of days that I am going to use on my R5 and the R7, with and without the 1.4 tele. Heavy with all that glass but that is where the quality of the photo comes from. And if I like it...... I will find a way to finance it. Way more worth it to me for what I want than the newer 800mm F11 - just too slow. 🙏🤗❤

[@laszlohudak5778]

Maybe coming 200-800 and 200-1000 but only RF Lens...and No L..so maybe 200-800 will BE 2000€ or less.

[@Intothewildwithpraveen]

Amazing video☺️!!! I am planning to by R7. I already have sigma 150-600 MM lens..can you please suggest which adpotor i should buy to mount them🙏

[@JonnyPink65]

Thank you, thank you!!! you know, I have two adapters - the expensive Canon EF to RF adapter, and an unknown brand that I got on Amazon when I was going on a trip and wanted a second one. I have not noticed a difference between the two so I rarely pay attention to which one I am using even if it is with 600mm F4. 🙏💖🤗

[@harrison00xXx]

I can really recommend the Meike 3rd party filter adapter. I paid about 190€ for the filter adapter including the clear and V-ND insert plus the C-PL filter

[@Intothewildwithpraveen]

@@JonnyPink65 Thank you so much🙂..I brought a canon EF to Rf adaptor. Works Fine 🙏

[@JonnyPink65]

@@Intothewildwithpraveen It works perfectly - was using it today and I do use it all the time. 🙏🤗💖

[@ricknicholson5894]

I should really just do a copy and paste of my rant. When vloggers talk about the Sigma 150 - 600 they should identify which one it is right of the bat - contemporary or sport. As soon as you mentioned the price of the Sigma lens I knew it was the Contemporary, but playing detective every time is getting old.

[@JonnyPink65]

Well you are correct, I should have but I bought the one most will buy due to the cost. When Sigma announces and comes out with RF glass, I will buy some of those and I will keep that in mind - to talk about the specific one. Good call!! 🙏🤗💖

[@jeffolson4731]

Great video. For now I will keep my Sigma 150-600 C, but later, who knows. I may just rent the Canon and give it a try but I am kind of afraid to 😀.

[@JonnyPink65]

Jeff, I am keeping my Sigma as well. I am glad I rented and will buy..... eventually. Thank you Jeff!!! 🙏🤗💖

[@Chris_Wolfgram]

Ha :) lol Me too !

[@adrianalfordphotography]

Top comparison video John and some magic images as examples. Great work as always my friend. I see there is a comment from a guy on this video who left nothing short of a disgusting comment on one of my videos. The one with the big tough jet as a profile pic. Gotta love those cowards who hide behind a keyboard!

[@JonnyPink65]

Thank you Adrian my friend. I am so looking forward to your video with this camera. There are so many people on the internet that speak badly about product with out ever having tired it, of have an opinion based on someone elses opinion..... files are too big, "you think that bike is HEAVY?", you are a moron, you are clueless....... I just let it go. I am so happy I get to share, and get to share your experience - I LOVE it. The beauty of sharing here on KZbin is that it is creative artwork and we each have a different vision that we want to present - no right, no wrong and there is something beautiful in all of it. OK, enough tree hugging LOL. In the old days, it was buy glass, and that is still true...... but the camera body tech also makes a huge difference I am starting to think. The AF on this is .... WOW. The one thing I forgot to mention is the focus peaking... I wish it were brighter like the M50 or R5 - I find that a little weak even set at max. I have had so many say that the Sigma would not work on the R7 or leave negative comments, the eye AF does not work..... I want to show that it does work...... if you know how to control your camera!! Again, thank you Adrian. Have a FANTASTIC week!!! 💖🤗🙏

[@HeMweb01]

Thanks for the objective review. Love the hat btw. Where can I buy it? 😉 Grx Henk

[@JonnyPink65]

Thank you, thank you!!! I think I bought this one at the local gas station down the street. LOL. My favorite one was in my car when it was stolen - it was gone so this was my replacement. 🙏🤗💖

[@harrison00xXx]

I had the chance to try the 150-600 on R5 Probably a bad example or monday product, but it was extremely unsharp and only "ok"-ish in the center of the image. It got a lot better stopped down to F8 and slower, especially the corners, but in overall definately NOT the lens i would wish on any EOS R camera, especially not high MP APS-C like R7. I dont know how you managed THAT SHARP images... sure postprocessing, but the Sigma i had in my hands.... like day and night to yours! I was totally not impressed with the sharpness, and the RF 100-500L (with and without 2x TC) i had the chance to test at the seller of an RF 800 F11 really impressed me, nearly had the feeling that i should wait a while and buy a 100-500L if i can afford. But instead i went for the 2nd hand RF 800 F11 as planned, and WOW! 800mm with THAT sharpness, on the RP its a even lighter combo and with the R7 its a reach monster for wildlife with 1280mm (and "compact") Yeah, a universal zoom with the range of 500mm (or 800mm on APS-C) is nice - its even usable at open aperture which is really awesome, but open aperture is also only F7.1 at 500mm which is with the high price and the fact its an AIR/DUST PUMP a "nogo". So as much i wanted a (super)telezoom like the Sigma 150-600 or the Canon 100-500... the RF 800 F11 seemed like the right decision: Sigmas optical performance is questionable and its heavy, but its affordable at least. The AF breathing is one of its least problems! The RF 100-500L is definately better, especially on APS-C probably one of the best lenses you can get for wildlife on R7, but the price is too ridicilous! So old "garbage" tele/superteles with at best very poor AF (more like manual focus) or just going for a modern, entry level RF 800 F11 with good AF, very good stab and still affordable. The RF 800s biggest strenght is its compactness and lightweight, the only lens with much reach i really enjoyed yet at hiking. RP and/or R7, RF 50 1.8 and RF 800 are a very awesome travel/hiking combo. I would still wish a better/more usable telezoom lens, the EF 70-200 2.8L is too heavy and bulky to take with me in most cases additionally to the RF 800 and is reserved for real photographic travels or things mostly. All i can really hope - That Canon will release some day a affordable, lightweight and compact RF-S telezoom or big aperture prime with 400 or 500mm and short MFD.

[@JonnyPink65]

GOAT OF DUTY!!! You know, I really, really enjoyed the 100-500 without a tele on the R7 - I was impressed!!! I am sorry it was not a lens you enjoyed. One of the amazing things about photography is that everyone will have a different experience with gear - what works for you may not work for me, may not work for the next person - I LOVE it. Cycling and music are like that as well. If you enjoy the 800. shoot it as much as you can and simply enjoy it. I did not try the 100-500 on my R5, but I do LOVE my old EF 500 F4 with a 1.4 tele - it is AMAZING on the R5. For the R7, I also really enjoyed the RF 100-400 (I would not put a tele on there) and it was light. I also have an version one EF 100-400 that I think works better than the RF version, is faster and is super light. Just my $0.02, but I have just been having as much fun as I can with this camera body. Today while I was out, I pulled out the R5 AND.... the 90D. As soon as I pulled it up to my eye, and started clicking, I got that same giddy kid feeling all over again. Even if all the pictures are crap, I had fun. I think I had to at least have taken one good photo with it!! LOL. Thank you, thank you for the input and for watching. 🤗🙏💖

[@harrison00xXx]

​@@JonnyPink65 You misunderstood something. The 100-500L was impressive, at least what i experienced within the few minutes of testing it (on RP and R6) Just the performance on 2x TC didnt impressed me at all (the RF 800 was sharper at 800mm than 1000mm of 100-500+ 2x TC) The RF 100-400 looked interesting, but even less reach so a nogo on full frame. As i got my first lens for wildlife, i though i can get away with using my EOS RP full frame camera. It worked out also well. RP isnt as good for AF and so, but i managed to get a few shots and i liked the combo. But i guess you know... the more you get into wildlife, the more you get interested into video because lets be honest: Wildlife photos are nice, wildlife video in decent quality and fps can be AMAZING! On the RP i was happy with 1080p video (and a hassle of rode video mic+ preamp/mixer!), but i would have wished at absolute least 120fps in 1080p and "proper" 4K 30. Well then i got the R7, much better for wildlife, and i realize more and more how bad the RF 800 is for APS-C when you dont want just reach. I will try to find in the future a fair priced 2nd hand RF 100-400 (here in austria i find something like 3 people selling 2nd hand for the price as new^^) Otherwise i will go for the EF 100-400L pull zoom (there goes a lot for 550-700€ in my country!), its a great lens what i have seen, also on the R7.

[@harrison00xXx]

@@JonnyPink65 Hehe, i had this feeling too recently. I pulled out my good old 28-135mm (probably 25 years old, full of dust, a "i dont care" lens) for a trip, just light and universal, if it breaks due the rain this day, no problem. Used the RP for it, didnt wanted to harm the R7 or any (weather sealed, LOL) lens with the weather but it feels with its "old" and crippled software and small body also very similar to the 550D i was used to for a long time. But yeah, the lens sucked, you couldnt do video with AF, you needed to focus manually for a nice video (AF motors wobbled the image heavily), the AF perfromance of camera and lens felt at all "classic" and bad especially after R6 and R7 experience... good old photography gear is always interesting for more basic/regular stuff. In fact i even prefer "trashy" lenses for this type of stuff. At a hike i once broke an EF 50mm 1.4, the camera luckily survived. Imagine that happening with any super expensive lens. Just for wildlife (and i talk about wildlife, not setups, feeding or luring), gear really matters when it comes to AF performance, lenses. The R7 is just SO MUCH MORE enjoying than the RP in wildlife, its day and night literally.

[@JonnyPink65]

@@harrison00xXx The R7 is an amazing body and works perfectly with the old lenses!!! 💖

[@JonnyPink65]

@@harrison00xXx I did misunderstand!! I would not use that lens with an extender. All by itself on the R7, it is simply.... amazing!! 💖

[@manmohangour368]

Great video, make more videos with the r7 and 100-500🥰

[@JonnyPink65]

Thank you, thank you - I WILL once we start heading into spring here. I will be using for dragonflies and butterflies. If it gets sunny here again, I will go out for some hummingbirds too! 💖🤗🙏

[@peterviragphoto]

Great comparison mate and some stunning shots, love it!😍😍 also the footage of the dragonflies , butterflies and the in flight capture of the hummingbird is superb John! Thoroughly enjoyed😀🤗🤗👍👍

[@JonnyPink65]

Peter, thank you. This set up and new tech is making this so much easier. It lets me get video like you do. Each has strengths and weaknesses and it awesome in its own way. The Canon is sharper though overall. Thank you, thank you Peter!!! 🙏💖🤗

[@mredben]

Nice video with smart guy. The Canon looks quite sharper. You said the Sigma is better for you?

[@JonnyPink65]

Thank you MrEdBen!! The Canon is way sharper and if price were no object, I would go with that. For most, price is an issue and since I too look at price, and I already own the Sigma, I am going to use that. It also has that extra 100mm of reach and that is huge. Even the Sony long lens goes to 600! I know many have talked negatively about the Sigma, but I have been happy with it. I will take super sharp shots and I like the price!! Thank you MrEdBen!! 🤗💖🙏

[@jamiebarrera6153]

Great stuff 🙂🖖

[@JonnyPink65]

Thank you Jamie!!! 🤗💖🙏

[@grahamfloyd3451]

Canon 100-400 > Sigma if you can't afford the 100-500. Stay away from teleconverters.

[@JonnyPink65]

HI Graham! Well, I will tell you after using all of them, and including Sigma Sport and my original EF 100-400 (yes original version one). I would take my original EF 100-400 over the RF version. The RF 100-400 - and this is my opinion based on my use and what I want to shoot, my least favorite was the RF 100-400. It is a great lens, but the extra reach is huge...... and this is just my playing with these lenses on the R7. The BEST of all of them is the Canon 100-500, next is the Sigma. Thank you Graham Floyd 🙏🤗💖