Canon RF 200-800 | Field Test and First Impressions

[@danielbrehmer4912]

I really like that you mentioned the effect of distance and what it does to sharpness in images. Something I think a lot of people oversee or don't really understand.

[@wildphil]

A fantastic review and even better to have the comparisons with the other lenses. Way better than any other review I've seen so far on announcement day. Great job and thank you, Janine 👍

[@pangolinphotohosts818]

Thank you so much Phil... I really appreciate it. It is only my first thoughts on the lens but I hope it helped 😊

[@brianchu8147]

This was an excellent breakdown of why all of these lenses are designed and priced as they are. It is our job as photographers to figure out the right balance of price and performance. Kudos to Janine for making it clear for photographers of all levels to understand!

[@PangolinWildlife]

Thank you very much indeed.

[@jasonjong4973]

Great summary of the strengths and tradeoffs of this lens! I think this one is a no-brainer for me, it's compact enough to fit in a camera bag, and it's inexpensive enough to risk taking it on my kayak without having a heart attack while still performing better than the 800/11.

[@PangolinWildlife]

Very good reasoning!

[@tintin69rr]

Yeah didn’t like the f11 got rid after couple a weeks lol 😂

[@DerPhiL]

Haven't seen a honest review like this for a while! Speaking of distance sharpness. Speaking of heat in the air etc.... great!!

[@janinekrayer2499]

Thank you so much 😊

[@rrrosecarbinela]

Thanks, Janine! I LOVE that white-headed kite at 17:31. All the photos are awesome, but that one is my favorite. Excellent review.

[@PangolinWildlife]

You are so welcome!

[@ghlocal1]

Wonderful images Janine! Just shows that it’s not just about the lens, but the person behind it

[@janinekrayer2499]

Thank you so so much !

[@mariaceciliarey72]

Wonderful review Janine!!! Thank you so much!!!

[@PangolinWildlife]

Our pleasure!

[@eikohariu8460]

Wow.. 200-800mm what a great option to have. Thank you for detailed info and update! Way to go Canon!!! 🥰

[@PangolinWildlife]

Thank you.

[@PaulGibbings01]

I love my 100-500, and used in conjunction with the 1.4 converter you can get 700mm F10, but then have the limitation of it becoming 420mm at the wide end. The thought of having 200mm all the way to 800mm without any of the fuss does seem rather welcome.

[@PangolinWildlife]

Indeed

[@armenhovhannisyan5505]

How do you get 420mm at the wide end?

[@PaulGibbings01]

@@armenhovhannisyan5505 The 1.4 extender protrudes into the lens meaning you cannot use the full range of the zoom with it attached. You can only use from 300-500, effectively turning it into a 420-700mm lens.

[@DonaldDolan-lh1vy]

Love your videos! Just got the R5 and am impressed with the quality in proper lighting. For low light I will still use my 90D.

[@Mark-te5uz]

I have had my R5 for about 2 years now. I started off with the 90D and now only use it for video recording. The R5 is a phenomenal piece of equipment.

[@Canon1DMkII]

I have found the RF 800mm at f/11 to be very manageable in low light situations. I suspect this lens will be a very versatile replacement for the 800mm, especially at $1899 US.

[@PangolinWildlife]

I think so.

[@NewsMoto]

wow this is a proper review! thanks for this! keep up the hard work on the comparison!

[@montanaylago]

This is one of the best lens comparisons I ever seen... Very objective and down to the earth/usability... Thank you so much... Love your High Key photos!!!

[@PangolinWildlife]

Wow, thank you!

[@PangolinWildlife]

Will you be considering this lens? Is the price point right for what you get? Let us know your thoughts!

[@arielarias4033]

Thank for the review I order mine in February and finally received last week . preorder price was 1900 usd

[@lovewyb85]

absolutely in love with your video. super clear super on the ground for beginners. Thank you!!!

[@RayneClowd]

It is really important to note that the example at 12:42 is not an IQ issue of the 200-800. That image is back-focused on the grasses behind, likely a cause of atmospheric effects throwing off the focus. The most consistent tests are when the subject is close and there are less variables. In those tests you can see how similarly the lenses perform

[@janinekrayer2499]

Hi, it was consistently less sharp on long distances... so that was not simply back-focusing I fear. - cheers Janine

[@RayneClowd]

Interesting. To me it appears that example is a good example of back focusing, the grasses behind are sharper than the subject. The focus accuracy on the prime may be behaving more consistently in this scenario@@janinekrayer2499 I'm sure generally speaking the prime is sharper than the zoom at those distances! Just this specific example appears back-focused

[@Nicki-F]

Hi Janine - great review! Apart from the RF 200 -800 having the extra 300mm reach, how does it compare to the RF 100 - 500 mm with and without extenders? If you had the opportunity of one of the 2 which would you reach for first? I would love to see a comparison video 🙂

[@sagetheowlfatfeathery2083]

Going to be road-testing one of these vs my Sigma 150-600 that I’ve had for about 7 years now. Subject separation is not such an issue these days now that Adobe have incorporated “fake” lens blur tools into Lightroom and ACR. Coupled with their excellent noise reduction which means you can use very high ISO without issues, this could be a worthy replacement (although significantly more expensive than the Sigma here in the UK).

[@janinekrayer2499]

I would say it is definitely as good as the sigma from a quality perspective... especially if subject separation is not an issue for you

[@sagetheowlfatfeathery2083]

@@janinekrayer2499 “as good as” doesn’t really cut it at 2.5x the price though.

[@anonymouspdg6121]

£2299 In the UK. This sounds like a great lens but it's only great if you will use it for what it is. I had the 100-500 and loved it but could get just as good results from my RF 70-200 F2.8 so I sold it. I think lenses like these that try to be jack of all trades look attractive on 1st look, so attract a lot of buyers but eventually the novelty wears off. Good video Janine!

[@PangolinWildlife]

Thank you.

[@anonymouspdg6121]

Probably right for small birds. I would probably go for one of the fixed lenses, 400, 600 or 800 if I could stretch to the costs lol.

[@edwardcrawford4180]

An excellent review that points out the problems associated with long distance photography. I was in Manitoba, Canada in early March and it was bitterly cold and windy. A flock of Gray Partridges were sunning themselves in a brush pile, a potentially very nice shot as they were all facing the camera. All of the photos I took were extremely blurry because of heat haze and the distance was only about 100 meters. I was using a Canon 600mm f4 and R5. Thanks Janine.

[@Cirdon91]

I’m primarily a sports photographer who also dabbles in wildlife photography. I’ll never use this lens for the odd wedding or portrait work I occasionally do, but at $1899 for the sports and wildlife this is a no-brainer for me. Already pre-ordered. I see reports that this lens will start shipping mid-December, and I can’t wait!

[@PangolinWildlife]

Just in time for Christmas!!!

[@msmith2016]

Thanks Janine for your discussion of atmospheric limitations in high focal length lenses. I saw everyone's eyes glaze over when it became clear that this lens would work with the teleconverters. Immediately folks are calling for testing with a 2x TC on an R7! I can't imagine what a mess those images would be. I tell folks all the time - use these like a magnifying glass, not a telescope. This looks like a great lens but I don't think I'll trade it for my RF100-500/1.4x anytime soon. If this option had been available when I bought the 100-500, I probably would have went with it instead.

[@PangolinWildlife]

"Immediately folks are calling for testing with a 2x TC on an R7!" Nice idea!

[@jan.tichavsky]

I agree that with 2x TC it gets into heavy diffraction territory, not to mention the darkness and that 2x TC isn't that great compared to 1.4. This lens is great that you can use it without teleconverter or attach the 1.4 while zoom out and use the whole range. Main downside of the 100-500, which I have too, is the cumbersome use with TC, you can use only last third of the zoom range and it won't fit in my bag extended at those 300mm. So I will be getting this one, it's still cheaper than the 100-500 and I can always crop further on my R5.

[@SurreyAlan]

I shoot with a M50 on a swarovski digiscope, equivalent to about 2600mm and even on miserable UK days atmospherics usually get in the way, its also a lot of weight to lug and to get set up and focused takes an age and the bird has flown, forget about shots on the wing. My wife uses a cheap bridge camera with 1200mm equivalent onto a phone size sensor, good enough for identification but not good when they've been cropped. I'd love to see this on an R7 as that would be 1200 onto a much larger sensor though then the comparison might be with a 600mm bridge with a 1 inch sensor. I think it's white for marketing, if your lens isn't white and very long you can't possibly be a serious twitcher.

[@mstrathmore]

Exactly my thinking. Jeepers when I read your comment I honestly thought I wrote it and had forgotten that I had already replied!

[@Glaucidius]

​@@SurreyAlanI have the same experience with a Svarowski telescope and a Sony APS-C: While the scope is really great for watching even over great distances, the photos coming out of the combo in most situations are good for determination and evidence, but not beautiful.

[@pawetura549]

Thank you very much! Great review. With an emphasis on not exaggerating the cost of equipment! Very sensible and comforting! Unfortunately, my "safari" will be limited to Poland. I need a lens like this!

[@janinekrayer2499]

Hi, Poland has some great birdlife too. And the 800mm will be fantastic for that....cheers Janine

[@afriquelesud]

I one day walked, by chance, into your office. All three of you were there, Sabine and Danielle, and you told me about your photo safaris and you girls were bemused by my ignorance. Now, some years later, I learnt to minimise my gurus to avoid confusion. Janine, you are right up there and my Darlingmost Wificle and I regard you as our Photographic Wizardezz of Oz. Thanks for the great quality edutainment, and encouraging us to go out there and shoot. I'd love this 800mm reach, as I give the Peaky Blinders lions a wide berth. Lions don't brush. 😊. Wishing you well from my perch in Kapstadt.

[@bengteriksen2586]

The best informative summary I have seen for the Canon rf 200-800mm so far.

[@PangolinWildlife]

Thanks

[@Unearthed80sVault]

Janine did you notice any fringing around some of the images? like purple? I thought I noticed it on the one image of the ostrich just in the video so i am not sure if its that or possibly KZbin

[@janinekrayer2499]

Not really yet... but it didn't put it through its proper paces... I felt like I saw vignetting!

[@Unearthed80sVault]

@@janinekrayer2499 vignetting is fixable if you go to 17:27 that image has some white fringing around the neck other then that everything looks good but the real issues wont be known till there are a lot of them in customers hands

[@MajorTendonitis]

Will be interesting to hear if there’s any problems with dust getting in internally with future owners

[@janinekrayer2499]

Yes, but it is the same as the current 100-500mm or the old 100-400mm .... it will happen but I don't think excessively - cheers Janine

[@michaellewis5921]

Really well done initial review - the real world comparisons to other lenses in the Canon lineup were especially informative. Best info I have seen on this lens and its pros and cons so far.

[@pangolinphotohosts818]

Thanks so much Michaelle

[@PangolinWildlife]

Much appreciated!

[@zhbc081]

Excellent review. Was first thinking of replacing my EF100-400mm USMII lens with the RF100-500. Will keep the EF lens and buy the RF200-800mm. With my EF500mm USMII should be covered for all my wildlife needs. Think this lens will work really well with the R1.

[@raz744u]

On the 100-500 I shoot F8 or F9 anyway to make sure the depth of field is deep enough, so the aperture is not too much of a big deal while the zoom range is really a great improvement from the 500. R6mII has great low light performance so that would be a perfect match. The only other alternative for the same range and price is OM-1 with the 100-400. Many Olympus photographers praise this setup. It gets the job done, but it takes more time in post. Canon is just a pleasure to shoot, the autofocus works way better than Olympus and the noise is much less at higher iso. I think the new 200-800 is a great addition to the RF lineup.

[@janinekrayer2499]

I am glad this lens fits your shooting style perfectly...!

[@biodan8577]

I shoot both Sony A1 (600/f4 and 200-600) and OM1 (150-400/F4.5) and have compared on DPReview. For hiking long distances or travel, the OM1 kit is my to-go system. I shot Canon for about 12 yrs, but DSLRs with 600/f4, 300/f2.8 and 100-400. The weight and bulk are vastly different with the OM1 kit. Sony big whites are the same size and wgt as Canon’s but the more compact A1 body is welcome.

[@biodan8577]

Forgot to add, AF on the OM1 is very comparable to the A1. But ProCapture is unique - so bird take-off shots are easy. Much more difficult with any other brand.

[@raz744u]

@@biodan8577 Thank you for your reply. The weight of the OM1 system is definitely a big improvement. My concern is the picture quality. I tried everything, 2 different bodies, 4 different lenses, went through all the settings. The only way to get something decent was shoot raw and then spend time in Topaz or LR to make adjustments. It's like details are not there, at least not what I expect. I'm talking about wildlife. I don't have any problem with the Canon. The eye autofocus works very well on the Canon, unlike the OM1. I'm really puzzled. One thing I love about the OM1 is the computational modes. Those are amazing, but everything else is a hit and miss...

[@biodan8577]

@@raz744u I shoot a lot of wildlife too. I don't have problems with eye focus on the OM1. I have always shot RAW, from my Canon days and now with all my systems: Sony A1, OM1, and Fuji GFX100. I'm surprised that you mention shooting raw is considered an unusual effort. Until the newly announced A9 iii, Olympus/OMDS was the only manufacturer that enabled ProCapture. I could rarely get shots of humming birds taking off from branches when i shot Canon. Its now trivial on the OM1 and likely the A9 iii.

[@michaelvankempen4505]

Hi Janine, I like the review, good points for people to consider re atmosphere wise and the price point is very reasonable. I do have a question, at 14:40 your #2 point about a low light sensor, the R5 is not in the graphic only the 26 meg sensors, is there a problem with the R5 45 meg sensor and low light with this lense? Cheers.

[@janinekrayer2499]

Hi Michael, for such a high mega-pixel camera the R5 performance astoundingly amazing. However, I would not shoot it higher than ISO 10000 at a maximum. So it is much better than the R7 but not on par with the R6ii and AR3

[@jaylamar81]

Hi Janine, great video. Was the available af area limited with this lens, like it is with the 800 f11?

[@janinekrayer2499]

Hi, that's a great question and there isn't.... Isn't that fantastic. - cheers Janine

[@mukeshsharma-iq8dp]

Thank you Janine, i am definitely going to buy it🙏

[@janinekrayer2499]

Have fun with it 😊

[@terryloewenberg2764]

Your reviews, like this one, are always honest and informative. Well done!

[@kennethlui2268]

The actual retail price is $1899 USD. Many people already threw their negative opinions without having tried it yet in the field. I am preordering it to test it for myself and compare to my RF 100-500 mm. If it turns out no good, I can sell it. $1899 is not a big deal. With current advance noise reduction software like DXO and Topaz, and now Lightroom, noise is not a huge concern as before. This is mainly for amateurs and enthusiasts. Great price point.

[@PangolinWildlife]

Yes it is!

[@Panda-ik4uk]

Whoa! Awesome video! Thank you so much. I found this helpful, especially the point near the very end about using a full frame high performing sensor. That makes sense. Happy shooting!

[@PangolinWildlife]

Glad you enjoyed it.

[@mattmackowsky2682]

Thanks for this amazing review. Judging by sample photos presented in this video, in my opinion, the 200-800 looks bit wider @800mm than 800/11 and 800/5.6. Did You have the same impression? Does it suffer a lot of focus breathing like Sony 200-600?

[@janinekrayer2499]

It's definitely wider than the 800 f/11 ... I didn't get the impression from thr 800 f/5.6 so much

[@CHASZYTV]

Having nosebleed listening for the whole video!!! Ur the best!!! ❤❤❤❤ from Philippines!!!

[@andyallard5990]

All the latest editing equipment we have a new D noise in light than the new blue background. I don’t think Lens choice is a problem. If the Lens doesn’t does it the software will. Thanks for sharing Janine, always a pleasure.❤

[@PangolinWildlife]

Totally agree

[@thegoldenhours]

Looking good Janine! I think this is the first review of this lens on KZbin 👏

[@PangolinWildlife]

Certainly one of the first!

[@sailendrayalamanchili]

Dust, smog and heat haze are absent after rain and the light under overcast conditions is perfect for long range shooting of stills and videos. These lenses will produce stunning imagery under these favourable conditions at long range. An excellent and comprehensive review of lenses from a wide price range.

[@rinku533]

Nice review..But why the 200-800 mm images are looking smaller in 800 mm focal length (Time 10.39 &12.03)as compared to 800 mm f5.6 and 800 mm f11 ? So is it true 800 mm lens or canon is just claiming it ?

[@janinekrayer2499]

It's definitely smaller than on the 800mm f/11 ... the same issue is on the 70-200 EF vs. RF... don't know though if one falls short or one adds on

[@rinku533]

Thanks for the reply 👍

[@nerrelloader4226]

Excellent review of this new RF 200-800mm lens and comparing it to the other two 800 primes. Thank you. A very good point you made at the end, exactly what are we doing with the images and does it necessitate the expenditure. Photography is a great hobby.

[@PangolinWildlife]

Thanks for watching!

[@JoesWildlifeAdventures]

Great review Janine! I’ve been shooting the RF 100-500 on my R5 and just love it…..but now I have something to think about.

[@janinekrayer2499]

Hi Joe, definitely... however, I find the 100-500mm still has the better quality...! However not the extra reach... it is a trade off... cheers Janine

[@StephenKennedy]

Great review! This is one of the best lens reviews I have ever seen, especially covering the atmospheric conditions!! Thanks for this! I think for my air show stuff I'll stick with my RF 100-500 for now. But it does look intriguing!

[@PangolinWildlife]

Good to hear. Thanks.

[@alechunter3913]

Great video as usual. Many thanks Janine

[@PangolinWildlife]

Glad you enjoyed it!

[@williamcollins4373]

Great review . Will the lens allow you to manually focus to infinity and have the lens stay at infinity? This could be a great lens for the Total Solar Eclipse in April 2024 Bill

[@janinekrayer2499]

Yes, on Manual focus you can do that with no trouble! Being such a long focal range it likes to get hooked on infinity in moments you don't want it even...

[@Jone500s]

Please test the sharpness of bird photos between the 100-500 lens and + TC1.4x adapter and 200-800 at a distance of approximately 20 meters to see how much or little the difference is. Thank you.

[@janinekrayer2499]

That is a good point that we should really look into more... I will wait for the Canon festival and give it a try!

[@leviyaakubov1875]

Thank you very much. You are just amazing. Most of the time you were in the field and not on warming up a chair. Your technical specification was rich with essential information. I have a question please. But in your opinion, the focus speed in the 800mm mode with the 800-200 lens versus the black 800mm lens. Who is faster in most situations

[@Collins.J.Kaboggoza]

Otherwise, I love the work you are doing. Thank you. I'm am Collins Joshua Kaboggoza from Uganda 🇺🇬 . I love Mother Nature😊

[@hunktubes]

Wow, Janine is such a great presenter! Well done!

[@PangolinWildlife]

Thank you.

[@adude394]

Great and helpful stuff here, and superb images. Thanks for posting! After 2 decades of being a happy DSLR user, I finally decided to add a mirrorless to my kit (R6 Mk II). I bought the 800mm f/11 along with it, because I figured that it was a fairly inexpensive way to get that extra reach. I've had it for a couple of weeks and it has returned good results, including with the recent full moon. However, I've decided that the 200-800 is going to be a bit more versatile, so I'll be trading the 800mm in and picking the 200-800 in the near future. Looking forward to it already.

[@erwinkruger-haye2698]

I think that this should be the gold standard of lens reviews.. You 100 % nailed it, discussing what the purpose of image is and sensor size and heat haze as well as shooting at extreme distance! also cost vs usage case...Brilliant. All important points covered. I see so many people getting excited about reach on a Crop sensor. on comments sections. The new lens blur function on LR and PS can make any lens aF2.8 😂😂 these days anyway ... for 99% of users and usage cases

[@samuelmoolman1674]

I love this lens, though I currently have a 150-600 Sigma Sport, so I would be interested what would the quality be of the Canon vs the Sigma with a 1.4x teleconverter. Or using the Sigma lens with the R7 or the Canon R6 mkii.

[@PangolinWildlife]

Good video ideas!

[@MB_MN_19]

If you shoot a lot from a vehicle or blind, this looks like a great setup. But if you do a lot of hiking, I like the micro four thirds options. The Panasonic Leica 100-400mm f4-6.3 weighs only 1kg. Same effective zoom, faster lens, in a package that weighs less than half as this Canon. It’s really nice.

[@janinekrayer2499]

Yes, I wouldn't consider it the perfect hiking set up even though it is fairly light for what it has to offer.... cheers Janine

[@CarlosHernandez-kg8py]

For hiking the RF 100-400mm is perfect. And if you own the R6 Mark II, just dial the built-in digital t c 2X, in case you need more reach. Advantage of using the built in 2 x: you don't lose any stops. The 4X is too much

[@orloaguilar]

This is a more than fantastic answer to the Sony 200-600 and Nikkor 180-600 I was sold on buying the RF 100-500 but really considering this one instead

[@PangolinWildlife]

Its a tough choice now!

[@kernzilla]

all reviews should be this thorough! the side-by-sides and 100/200% zooms are wildly helpful when lens shopping. appreciate you guys doing reviews correctly for today's photographers, thanks so much!

[@dougsmit1]

Images marked copyright 2022 posted in November 2023? When was this lens being sent to reviewers?

[@janinekrayer2499]

It's my old copyright... it was tested on the day it came out

[@anthonyhershko]

Great video!! I got the R5 and I wonder, do you recommend using Electronic shutter 20 or so? I'm an aviation and Navy photorapher. Thanks!

[@intellegence63smart]

Probably one of the most well-spoken human beings to ever exist. Very clear review.

[@PangolinWildlife]

Thanks

[@333Rick66]

If I'm not mistaken, at 12:53 the problem is not with the lens sharpness of the 200-800, it's that the lens focused sharply on the grass several inches beyond the bird, and not the bird itself. Check it versus the 800 prime picture, and you'll see what I mean.

[@arianta72]

Always love your review and presentation. A lot of sharing. Thanks.

[@PangolinWildlife]

Thanks for watching!

[@pawelmod3292]

Why black hood on the white lens? Is there any design idea behind it or it is just what it is?

[@breathLP]

Yeah, it is weird. That is how they did it in the past but some of the last EF lenses and all of the white RF lenses had white hoods so far.. Maybe to differentiate it further from L-series lenses.

[@nordic5490]

It makes no difference once you have slipped a protective camo cover over it.

[@janinekrayer2499]

I guess to show it's not an L-series lens... the body was kept white to try and keep so much glass cool and to avoid too much variation with temperature changes

[@AC-xh9wr]

Excellent review! Janine you have such a lovely, natural way about you. You put things across very clearly covering all aspects and considerations. I’m just an amateur who does photography for a hobby as I totally love it but I can understand much of this due to the wonderful way you explain it all. Wish you were here in England as I’d learn so much from a wildlife photo shoot with you. Amanda

[@rmm9747]

Hello! Will you do an in-depth review of this lens, comparing it to the RF 100 400 or the 100 500 to the R7?

[@baramirm1509]

Thank you Janine for this great review.

[@PangolinWildlife]

You are so welcome!

[@josephnash3015]

Great honest review and comparison Janine. Appreciate you showing and explaining the differences in the lenses while photographing the same subject.

[@PangolinWildlife]

Glad it was helpful!

[@sjsjelsa]

Thanks of the review. I guess you would need a new body as this RF lens will not fit the EOS 7D Mark II body right? Also no adapter?

[@JamesWinecki]

Wonderful review! With an R5 and given vs the 100-500mm with or without the 1.4 TC quality over reach, how much of those quality differences are "pixel peeping?"

[@palaneproductions7357]

RRP is U$D 1899, I dont know where you got the 2600?

[@PangolinWildlife]

That the price we got from Canon SA....The US is low balling a bit!

[@jigjitsu5599]

The best wildlife reviewer for sure 💯

[@PangolinWildlife]

Wow, thanks!

[@gerraldgoselink]

What a wonderful review! Thank you so much. I can see how it performs on a R3, do wonder how it will go on my R7. Will find out hopefully soon as I preordered it. "Buttery"? Loved it! :)) My question to you Janine would be: will you take this combo with you in the field or would you opt for the 400 F2.8 with a 1.4 extender instead? (I love that 400/2.8 btw....!)

[@janinekrayer2499]

I would always go for the RF400 f/2.8 .... if the money is there, it is a no brainer! However, it is a huge price difference! It will perform great on the R7 I think but the R7 itself has limitations with higher ISOs.... so in that sense it might give you trouble! -cheers Janine

[@isotechimages.9130]

Good work as always Janine.

[@PangolinWildlife]

Thank you! Cheers!

[@kalyanchappidi2447]

Much needed review for me to decide … have been seeing may reviews but this pointed the right things …. Thanks for making this

[@harrytan9035]

Hi, if you had to choose between RF200-800mm on a R6 or FE200-600mm on A7R3 for Safari at Chobe, which would you choose?

[@orbitalgolem91]

Janine - any thoughts using this lens on an EOS 7D Mark II with APS-C sensor? Or should one only consider this lens for full-frame? With the crop factor of 1.6x, the 1280 zoom would be something else, lol.

[@MichaelThornton-hx6wt]

Hi there @orbitalgolem91, this lens is an RF mount, made for Canon's mirrorless R series cameras. Sadly, it won't work on DSLRs like the 7D Mark II. (It will work on both full-frame and crop sensor models, as long as they're in Canon's R series.) Woulda been a killer combo though, eh?

[@GeneLeeRollins]

This is an RF lens. The 7D MkII needs an EF lens.... there is no adapter to use an RF lens on an EF body. This lens WILL work with an EOS R7 body... or any of the R bodies. I hope this helps.

[@russellmm]

What a great review. So complete and geared towards Safari shooter, I love it! My wife and I just came back a few weeks ago from Kruger and Sab where I was using my R5 with my trusty EF 100-400 II.

[@PangolinWildlife]

Maybe we will see you n The Chobe next time?

[@russellmm]

@@PangolinWildlife it's on the list

[@stubones]

This lens leaves me conflicted with its slow f/9 at 800mm, but I think if I shot wildlife primarily, it might be an option to pair with my R6 ii. The weight and relatively low cost are a big plus. Great initial review Janine.

[@PangolinWildlife]

Thank you. Valid points...well made.

[@TheMrNeffels]

It's faster than the 800 f11 or the 100-500 with a TC It's also as fast as the Sony 200-600 or Nikon 180-600 with TC to get to 800mm Obviously a 800 5.6 would be ideal but that's $20k and not as versatile

[@stubones]

@@TheMrNeffels Agreed on all points.

[@jeffbronson3696]

@@TheMrNeffels The issue to me is that everything from 200-600 in the Canon is slower than the Nikon and Sony lenses (eg, 600mm is f8 on this lens). So the only real reason to get the lens is for the extra reach of 800mm. So this really only works in bright conditions when you want that extra reach. Not so great for Golden Hour where lots of animals are active (yes DXO and Topaz is great but it's not a silver bullet). Also, the lack of internal zoom makes it worse at being weather-sealed (external barrel) and much slower to get to 800mm from 200mm (Gordon Liang had to turn the zoom ring 4 times) compared to getting to 600mm in the Sony and Nikokn which only requires a few flicks of your fingers to achieve 600mm. Lastly, because it's external zoom, the lens doesn't balance as well, which makes it troublesome for those birders who use gimbal-tripods.

[@mike_s_media]

@@jeffbronson3696 As a Sony shooter myself you hit the very points I was looking at being that you're already at f8 for 600mm opposed to f/6.3 with my 200-600 and shooting on the Alpha 1 I can easily crop my shot to the desired focal length/framing without losing sharpness or low light performance. But, Canon have the lens priced at $1899 on their site and if you really think about it they are just giving you 200mm more focal length in exchange for some of the aperture. Guess it comes down to your preferences/needs whether you need more aperture or range! Canon can do things like have a 100-500 f4.5-7.1 and then this 200-800 f6.3-9 because there's no third party options on the platform so there's no competition to make the lower aperture lenses in the same focal lengths like Sony and Nikon with companies like Sigma. I also couldn't imagine using a lens with that much throw on a gimbal while trying to shoot eagles or owls... that would be a nightmare to keep balanced!

[@bensaunders616]

I pre-ordered this lens for $1800 US, significantly cheaper than the price stated in the video. As you state, it is not a competitor for a $17K big white 800. Would also like to see a comparison with an RF100-500 with a 1.4x TC shooting 700mm at f/10. Many people, myself included, have this set and are wondering if this lens, even at the low price, is worth getting.

[@PangolinWildlife]

Nice idea for a video. Thanks.

[@FrankSD76]

Excellent, very comprehensive review and I really appreciate the way you cover the practical aspects of the lens in use versus pixel-peeping in studio conditions. Two weeks after you posted this the price is down to $1900 US from Canon USA with a delivery date in mid-December (three weeks hence). Thanks for helping me make the decision!

[@CidomarMoraes-z3r]

Masterpiece Janine! I would love to see you testing this equipment in a different environment,in natural habitat! Amazonas-Brazil,if you have any plan to go there,let me know I'm native and I know the places!!🙌🏻🙌🏻🙌🏻

[@janinekrayer2499]

Thanks so much... we will definitely get there at some point... cheers Janine

[@jeffolson4731]

Very good review. The US price turned out to be $1899 so I preordered one. Where I live I can get away with longer distances on most days since we don’t let a lot of heat shimmer. But, not everyone lives in the Pacific Northwest. However, I like a long lens to make a small subject big in the frame so I rarely shoot at a distance anyway. I am really looking forward to getting my copy.

[@PangolinWildlife]

Hope it arrives soon.

[@MagnitudeReviews]

How does this compare to the Tamron 150-600mm f4-6.3 g2 lens?

[@PangolinWildlife]

That would be a great comparison.

[@janinekrayer2499]

Quality wise very similar except that you get far more reach

[@tomlillandt1344]

Thanks Janine for a great video! Even as Sony shooter I think the new 200-800 Canon lens is great. However, I took your advice from Maasai Mara. 😊 Do you remember? I asked you, weather to buy a 400 mm F2.8 or a 600 mm F4? I managed to find a secondhand Sony GM 400mm F2.8. 😊 and I have the 1.4x and 2.0x teleconverters from before. Thanks and have a good one!

[@janinekrayer2499]

that is so exciting.... you must enjoy it!!!! - cheers Janine

[@graymarks3143]

Hi do you use UV or Skylight filters on your lens

[@janinekrayer2499]

I don't use either one

[@kbkesq]

Wondering about the 100-500mm RF L series with a 1.4x multiplier?

[@dcmsends]

Excellent review, as always. Would you consider pairing this 200-800 with the R6 Mark II advantageous?

[@PangolinWildlife]

Yes, absolutely

[@iainf1]

I am coming on the Canon Festival and looking forward to pairing this lens up with my R6 and R6 MarkII during the event.

[@PangolinWildlife]

See you there!

[@rmm9747]

I use Canon R7. Which is your opinion about R7+ 200-800 lense? Thank you

[@PangolinWildlife]

We will be trying that out soon!

[@rmm9747]

@@PangolinWildlife❤

[@jackburgermeister4636]

Great review, Janine! How heavy is the lens for handheld photography? Do you need to seriously work out to be able to hold it and focus when fully extended? I don't lift, so I'm curious.

[@prashantabhattacharjee4890]

Madam, may I know which body are you using? Is it a eos r system or dslr? What do you think about the combination of this lense with canon eos r6. Please come with your opinion. Thank you.

[@PangolinWildlife]

Janien was using an R3. its an RF lens so can only be used with mirrorless. Would work very well with an R6.

[@highanddryful]

mmmh , this lens or should I opt for the Canon RF100-500 for birds and wildlife? Thank you for your informative review.

[@rommellim2368]

As always! you've done it again Janine! Well done Ms Beautiful of Africa!

[@PangolinWildlife]

Thank you.

[@bryanswisshelm941]

Not using Canon equipment, but always look forward to your videos as I always learn something new. Hope to get back to Southern Africa soon to sign up for a Pangolin trip. Great review (as usual)!

[@PangolinWildlife]

We look forward to having you visit.

[@CarlosHernandez-kg8py]

I wonder how the RF 200-800 will perform with the built in Digital Tele Converter 2X-4X of the R6 Mark II found on Menu Red Camera, tab 1?

[@NoahStephens]

Thank you for sharing your expertise - especially concerning atmospheric distortion. Great review.

[@dirkwerdermann8870]

A very precise analysis and review in a charming way. Thank so much for it.

[@PangolinWildlife]

Its a pleasure.

[@djzone81]

I’m a wildlife photographer currently with the R5 and a sigma 150-600C. I’m looking to upgrade and I’m looking at this lens and the rf 100-500 +/- the 1.4x TC. At the end of your video you recommended a camera body with suitable low light sensor and the R5 just doesn’t hold up as well as an R6 in low light. So my question for you is- which lens (100-500 or the 200-800) would you recommend for a wildlife photographer (birds and big game) with the R5? Thanks!

[@davetv13]

Great review but I have one question. I thought Canon just released the lens and when looking at your review the images were copyrighted in 2022. Has the lens been secertly in testing and in your hands for that long? Also how much hevier than the canon 100-500mm is the lens?