The BEST wildlife lenses! Canon 600 & 800mm f11 review with Canon R5!

[@joepiekl]

I would have liked to see them compared to a more realistic alternative. Let's be honest, nobody's deciding between a $900 lens and a $13000 one. But these lenses versus a 200-600 or 150-600 zoom might be a realistic choice for some people.

[@youknowwho9247]

It's a fun video to show the Canon lenses, not a high accuracy side by side test. I'm pretty sure they're aware that those two lenses aren't in direct competition. Since we are throwing different glass in the mix though: Nikon's 500mm pf is light and small enough to be hand-holdable all day, and it's two stops faster than the Canon options. Sure it's more expensive, but still affordable for a high quality telephoto. To me it's the current sweet spot - possibly until I see what an R5 with their new 100-500 can do.

[@michaeldande]

Save your money

[@youknowwho9247]

@@KungPowEnterFist Well, that Sigma super zoom is certainly very versatile in terms of focal length. However, it's not exactly known for being particularly sharp or reliable in terms of af. It's also significantly larger and heavier than those new Canon primes. I don't think it's quite as simple as you make this out to be. Both lenses have a reason to exist; seems to me they just have different pros and cons.

[@giac01]

YES I’d like to see a comparison across modern mirror less systems, Sony, Fuji, Olympus, etc. Best light (and not crazy expensive ) set up

[@youknowwho9247]

@@giac01 Including MFT in that wouldn't be particularly interesting. With Olympus out of the picture and Panasonic switching to full frame, MFT is pretty much dead for photography.

[@JENTHINKSO]

Instead of getting a whole new system that has it's own downsides (the Canon mirrorless + 600mm lens for it) for hikes and walks, just put a smaller, lighter lens on your Nikon. I often hike with my 70-200 plus a 1.4x or 2x extender. I still have max apertures of 4 or 5.6, respectively. I don't have the reach of a longer wildlife lens, but on the other hand, I can shoot handheld and there's no compromise on image quality other than a bit of focal length. I look for ways to get closer to my subject or compose different kinds of shots that might include more of the animal's surroundings. If I owned one, Id try a 300mm + extender.

[@eilazylak3786]

OMG I love you guys!!! Did not realize you were married until you mentioned in your video and now love you even more! Subscribed! Great review.

[@terryvitanza28]

Tony and Chelsea could you make the same comparison with and Olympus m1 mark 3 with 300 f4 and 100-400 lenses? It would be very interesting as well to make and educated choice between systems.

[@sailingsvsalacia8398]

Might be about time to re-play this using R10 or R7. With an APS-C sensor, you get almost 1000mm on the 600 in an even lighter package than before, and now with a DIGIC X processor. BOOM!!

[@mcunner]

Get a D780 with the pros from both DSLRs and mirrorless in one body or the 1D-X MK3 for Canon.

[@LSVBolsaChica]

Enjoyed your video very much. I'd like to suggest for your next video, a more detailed review of the RF 600/800's performance of Autofocus/tracking for birds in flight. I'd just bought the R6 + RF800 and I've found its performance in that area frustrating at times. I would appreciate your expert opinion.

[@trevorcarpenter6678]

the mimimum focus distances are a bit silly. I shoot birds that are too close for those two lenses.

[@robertmendes4181]

The sky is completely overexposed 😓 The Dynamique Range of the R6 is soooo Bad! Is the R5 better ?

[@RylansAmazingPhotography]

“Try to do that with yours 😂” “don’t 😒” had me dying 😂😂

[@Neopulse00]

Chances are because that's her personal kit 😏

[@cameralabs]

I really enjoyed that, well done! One question: do you remember your battery charge on the R5 when measuring its real-world fps? I've not tested it with the 600 and 800 yet, but in tests with other lenses, I've found having less than abut 3/4 charge on the battery will see the mechanical fps reduce. Canon says it's at 60% charge that the fps reduces, and it indicates it by switching the green H+ icon to white, and then white flashing if it gets lower still. So you only get the max fps when the H+ icon is green.

[@alopeztorres]

Does this happen with the R6 too?

[@cameralabs]

@@alopeztorres yes, both the R5 and R6 slow their mechanical burst speed as their battery power reduces.

[@gameshoes]

@@cameralabs That's kind of lame. Extending battery life is cool and all but, this over-proactiveness sounds more annoying than helpful.

[@milansajan1001]

@@cameralabs: 👍🏻

[@ToxicGopher]

Hey Gordon, I've been enjoying your reviews. Do you think you will be doing a final review of the M1 mk3? I'll shout you a coffee if you do :)

[@jasond1500]

How do they compare to the 600mm f6.3 zooms? Like Sonys 200-600 or sigma 150-600?

[@Abarataphoto]

Badly.

[@PPS-UK]

I could really feel the amount of fun you guys had doing this video together. It was lovely to see a couple enjoying there love for photography together 😊

[@peterebel7899]

... even being able to make money with the shared passion.

[@PPS-UK]

@@peterebel7899 Exactly Peter 😊

[@buckleybill141]

Some things not said during this video just would like clarification to ensure this was a fair comparison - dog picture looks like it was shot with an RP not an R5 but this was supposed to be a review of R5 combination (R5 is better in low light and should be better resolution) , Did not say what mode the view finder was in when tracking (smooth vs power saving), did not mention if a cfexpress and/or a UHS2 card was used in canon comparisons, does the NIKON support these faster cards? would they make a difference in frames rates and max number of frames? if shooting to both cards and a standard sd card in the sd slot would be slower correct? I assume animal eye tracking was turned on and used vs default portrait eye tracking on the canon. Did not metion that you still hve the option of a big lens for the EOS R5 with the adapter and no change in performance for those times when weight is not a factor.

[@Herkulez1981]

Those two lenses must be the most laughed at and misunderstood lenses (or camera relatera releases) in a llong time released by one of those more known camera manufacturers. Pretty genius move by Canon. They are putting everything they have in their new cameras and releases uniqe lenses like the rf 79-200 with its external zoom and the 28-70 f2. I really like this new Canon.

[@cooloox]

Lol@79-200 😜

[@Herkulez1981]

cooloox 70-200

[@realBatman]

I don't understand why people still think there is a possibility for a future canon DSLR (other than the 1D xIII). I have a feeling the "100D" will be mirrorless, and in a few years, the "T8" will also be mirrorless. Canon's biggest problem I see right now is its disjointed APS-C and FF mirrorless. If they could unite these two under the RF mount, it would suck a lot of sales away from Sony mirrorless. Once Canon figures that out, and produces cheap mirrorless kits for Christmas season, Sony will be in trouble.

[@peterebel7899]

The Canon approach is nothing but great. Unmatched USPs in size & weight: 800, 600, 35Macro, 2.8 70-200, 100-500 "Far beyond me to IQ" professional lineup: Holy trinity, 50, 85, 28-70 Every lens a reason for buying into the R-mount. More to come .... What's going on with Nikon? Prioritizing the Noct 58 nobody needs but not being ready with 2.8 70-200 workhorse, and which wedding photographer will prefer this lens to the Canon they carrying all day long? Some nice Z-mount lenses but nothing which changes the market.

[@90make]

For camera companies, the most important thing is that the lenses sell . I'm pretty sure these will sell well and Canon will laugh on its way to bank.

[@bonkmedia]

Tony filming Chelsea handheld with the R6 was amazing. Thought for sure it was on a gimbal. That IBIS is wild.

[@JoeMaranophotography]

Hi we are Panasonic shooters.... We been doing the same for years and years but nobody cared 😊

[@kyokuten]

@@JoeMaranophotography You were not doing in Full frame I believe, and there are far less options for what lenses and looks you can do that with

[@TimLucasdesign]

@Daniel Micele She used an RP and an R5.

[@RogerBenno]

Olympus IBIS for the past 3 years at least has been superior to this 'amazing' canon demo.

[@annajosek9282]

Which Olympus model has a full frame sensor?

[@MatthewGorveatte]

This is my favourite video from you too so far I love the banter I love how each of you is upholding your positions of opinion and the fun back-and-forth banter is enjoyable to watch and Chelsey does have muscles

[@laserflyer]

I'd love to see an R5 with that 800mm f11 go up against the same R5 with a 100-400L IS II and a 2x teleconverter (EF>RF adapter). I think it would be really interesting to see that amazing lens with autofocus on a teleconverter!

[@ThreeCeeProductions]

I have both lenses and R5. You will spend more for the 100-400 than the 800 f11. After the teleconverter the quality and light falloff will be worse. The 800 is better quality with the large sensor and you don’t have to crop as much. The distance to the subject can be an issue but you can get more shots of a bird because you are further away and not as menacing to the bird.

[@jaimeduncan6167]

Just go to take photos with this think during the Dusk or the evening when wildlife is more active 🤣 I believe that ability to carry and the size is the same thing😂 I will say that an approach like the Nikon. 300PF or the. 500 f5.6. PF is a better compromise. Same for the 70-200 of the Canon R, I don't want to see a wedding photographer turning the zoom like in a cheap lens to move from. 70 to. 200mm. On the other hand, the 1.2 lenses from the R series are "bocatto di cardinale". Don't get me wrong, great idea by Canon, they are going to sell like hotcakes there is nothing like them.

[@thomasscott8148]

I thought the 800mm was going to be comically awful, but it's actually surprisingly good!

[@cks993]

It's because you never try wildlife photography with m43 system, this is the same thing.

[@GalacticoUC]

Ck S can you please elaborate?

[@JjackVideo]

@@GalacticoUC Us m43-losers have been shooting with Tony 8 and Tony 11 equivalent lenses for years and years. It's fine for us amateurs

[@uhu4677]

@@GalacticoUC In MFT world you have a ~1kg zoom lens with an equivalent of 200-800mm f8-f11. You also have a ridiculously sharp equiv. 400mm f5.6 prime (which can be used together with a 1.4x or 2x Teleconverter). There's also equiv. 600m f8 and equiv. 100-400mm f5.6-f8. It's just perfect, if you don't want to carry absurdly large and expensive glass with you.

[@KiinaSu]

That's because tony has been misleading you for years. Instead of focusing on the fact that you can get a rather small and sharp 600mm equivalent lens on MFT he choose to focus on the fact that 300mm f4 on mft is not the same as 600mm f4 on Nikon FF. Yeah no shit. But now that Canon Builds something that we had in the MFT had for years he realized that maybe there is a market for a lens that isn't the price and weight of my car. Stuff like a 600mm f4 is a fringe market. Sure it's a great lens but not even an option for 99% of the viewers.

[@The.Urban.Birder]

How about the Panasonic Lumix G9 and the Pana-Leica 100-400mm? This setup can be purchased for 2000-2500USD and is as compact as this. It can zoom, covering both 600mm and 800mm eq. focal lengths. It also has a close enough MFD to attain a full-frame equivalent magnification of 0.5x. It is slightly slower than this setup at 800mm (f11 vs f12.6 FFeq.). Also, the Panasonic setup is weather-sealed and should focus faster than the STM in the Canon lenses.

[@CrazyAboutFlyFishing]

I have the 100-400mm lens with the GH5 and it works great. Can imagine it would be even better for photography with the G9. It's fantastic for video with the GH5.

[@forbesjeff]

It'll lose out a bit on detail versus the R5 due to megapixels, and the autofocus isn't as good, but micro 4/3 makes for a great casual wildlife setup for daylight stuff. The zoom would probably make it preferable in many cases in the real world. If you're looking to do some backyard birding or bringing a lightweight camera around when you're walking, it'd be a great choice.

[@shang-hsienyang1284]

I'd like to see a comparison video between these combinations. On paper, I would definitely prefer the 100-400 combo.

[@rockatanescu]

@@forbesjeff I think Mohammed was comparing the Canon EOS RP + Canon 600mm f/11 setup with the Panasonic Lumix G9 + Panasonic Leica 100-400mm f/4-6.3 as they are in a similar price range. However, if you're using the EOS R5, the body alone is more expensive than the G9 + Olympus 300mm f/4. I think the Canon setup would still be slightly due to better low-light performance and the number of megapixels, but I think the differences would be minimal for anyone that's not doing this professionally which is basically the target audience for this Canon lens.

[@JoeMaranophotography]

The G9 also blows away most of Canons cameras for features like video.

[@TerenceKearns]

I have G9 with Leica 100-400. Autofocus is not good but IS is incredible. Also 30fps open gate 10bit HEVC recording at 18MP per frame. It’s a fun lens. Real wildlife enthusiasts seem to do very well with this combo. Not my speciality.

[@uhu4677]

You should try Micro Four Thirds. We had such lenses for years now. 😉 (Actually even better and with zoom. But still small and light.)

[@youknowwho9247]

How many 45 mpix MFT bodies are there to put them on? What MFT camera has animal eye af that works on flying birds? Which 400mm f/5.6 lens costs less than a grand new, at release?

[@faunagraphy]

@@youknowwho9247 A full frame f11 lens is like an f5.6 m43 lens in terms of depth of field only. Obviously you've never shot m43 (or a half-decent m43 setup) or you'd never be saying this. And to equal a 20MP m43 sensor, a full frame would need to be around 80MP. A 45MP full frame sensor captures the detail that a 12MP m43 sensor would (roughly). Those were used in early m43 bodies. The Olympus 300mm f4 has the resolving power equivalent to a 600mm f4 on an 80MP full frame sensor. Yesterday I used it with a 2x teleconverter (1200mm f8 equivalent ) after sunset and took a handheld 1/10s shot of a deer which showed every eyelash, even the reflection of the surroundings in the eyeball.

[@PaulRentz]

@@faunagraphy Post a like to that, would like to see it.

[@johnherzel718]

I completely understand the 800mm f11, I wonder what the compromise would be to get the 600mm at f8.0 and how much better that would make image quality and reduce noise. But I agree with Tony - I want one of these. Interesting times, interesting (mind blown) lens ideas!

[@sctm81]

1 stop of extra light is huge in wildlife. Often the difference between a usuable shot that can be fixed in post and a documenting shot.

[@mshelhart]

I bought the 600mm for my EOS R. It’s been amazing. Also currently waiting for my R5

[@scorpionx211]

What are you talking about?? The Canon was much sharper then the Nikon!!!

[@toejamr1]

What were you looking at? 😂

[@maxsr3236]

Hmmm, so you are saying they are workable with the R5 attached and 'meh' with the RP/R. Fixed aperture, not weathersealed at all, 6 m minimum focusing distance and only acceptably good attached to a $4000 camera. So essentially an A6400 with the Sigma 100-400 or maybe the 200-600mm (or a D500+200-500mm) will be cheaper and eat them for breakfast in almost all other aspects. Maybe good for an experienced photographer, who needs the 800mm and knows how to work around the limitations, but I would never recommend these to a beginner wildlife photographer. 👎 for the lenses.

[@uhu4677]

Yes, or think about Lumix G9 + Pana-Leica 100-400mm. Or EM1 III + 300mm f4 ... or any other of the great telephoto lenses, we have for Micro Four Thirds. It's nice that full frame finally starts to offer some lighter glass at the long end. But the whole design of those lenses (with the extension and without weather sealing) does seem rather cheap.

[@TonyAndChelsea]

Nah they're awesome. We've tested everything and they're the best choice for beginners. Yeah, it's better with the R5, but the RP still produced great results.

[@youknowwho9247]

@@TonyAndChelsea Beats me how they would perform better than the 200-500 on a D500. With the DSLR one gets 10 fps reliably, great af, zero lag and 750mm f/8 equivalent reach. In what way do the R/RP with one of these new lenses improve on that?

[@ZeLoShady]

@@TonyAndChelsea How did you acquire these lenses and camera bodies? Did you buy them yourselves or were they provided by Canon? Tony said at the end that he "Wants one of those" in reference to the 800mm so that leads me to believe that these were provided by Canon.

[@matthewbell1968]

@@youknowwho9247 good point. I've got the same combo and in terms of bang for the buck it's unbeatable.

[@robbie154]

F11 is too high imo. I wish they made these in f8. Think that would've been a better sweet spot.

[@forbesjeff]

I think they should have done the 600mm in f/8. An 800/8 would be pretty chonky still!

[@russellbaston974]

But f8’s would have probably doubled the weight and bulk and increased the price considerably.

[@RichFreeman]

@@russellbaston974 if sigma can do an f/6.3 zoom for $1200 there is no reason that Canon couldn't do a reasonable fixed aperture prime at f/8. It would be cheaper to design and build of virtually every respect. Maybe Sigma will see how popular this ends up being and sell the f/8 equivalent for $500. :)

[@russellbaston974]

Rich Freeman The Sigma has a 95mm filtersize and weighs near 2kg. Roughly extrapolating an f8 fixed 600 might come out at 82mm filter and 1.2kg? Canon have chosen certain design parameters- including the ‘compromises’ inherent in any design. Just like the best tripod is the one you’re prepared to carry, likewise the best/better lens is the one you’re likely to want to/ be able to carry around, and still be optically excellent.

[@RichFreeman]

@@drmgillan yup. I lug the 150-600 around everywhere I go. That's why I'm interested in a comparison.

[@daycreek]

No love for the Sony A9? Seems to me a better mirrorless solution would be the A9 + 200-600+1.4x TC for birds/wildlife. Your investment dollar-wise (with current street prices on the 1st gen A9) would probably be close to the R5 + 800mm. This would give you a hand-holdable, 280-840mm setup with zero EVF lag, no black-out in electronic shutter mode, better in low-light, excellent IS, excellent tracking autofocus, the ability to shoot over 1/8000 sec without distortion in electronic shutter mode. The zoom capability of that lens also gives you the ability to frame larger animals without having to switch lenses. I much prefer that compared to being stuck at 800mm with both options you presented. IMO, the best wildlife combo out there.

[@TonyAndChelsea]

24 MP, heavy AA, still EVF lag.

[@bashmahs]

Nikkor 200-500mm all day and its f5.6! Case closed.

[@auliaalam4860]

At what price and weigh :(?

[@eamartinez88]

Agreed, I really enjoy mine on a D780. The Nikon pf lenses still interest me however since they are lighter.

[@youknowwho9247]

@@auliaalam4860 Well, it's twice as fast. Of course it's going to be larger, heavier and more expensive.

[@christopheespic]

@@auliaalam4860 The 200-500 is 4 times faster, for only about 20% higher price. But yes, it's heavier (about 80% more). But you gain the possibilities to zoom out and modify the aperture.

[@auliaalam4860]

@@christopheespic i see , looks nice, but since i own already own rp it will cost more for me 😅 Any news about f mount to rf mount adapter? If possible i want to pair this 200 500 with this 800 to boost my reach further, if not i will look for second hand 100 400 instead, doesn't look lime heavy combo to me I wonder, if i attach rf 2x converter, attach ef rf adapter, and attach another 2x converter to another super zoom, will it work? It's sounds silly, but I'm wondering if it's possible

[@getmarked]

U tested Canon RP or R5???? I am confused...U earned points only when comparing against RP tho........

[@jameskurzynski2386]

I would love to see how these lenses perform on the R6!

[@jrdtruckee]

Thank you for the review. I think it’s great info for someone like me, a hobbyist on a budget. I have a question: Which would be better paired with the R6, my Canon EF L series 100-400mm with a 2X teleconverter and an adapter or. this new 800mm f11 lens. Which do you think would give better image quality? Thanks!

[@NathanPrintz]

Price difference that big is worth 10 points. 1 point for each time the RP setup goes into $16,000.

[@Bayonet1809]

The price means different things for different people; for some it makes the 600 f/4 unobtainable, for others it could irrelevant.

[@TheMarcfont]

3:31 that feels sluggish.... omg

[@JamesMilliganJr]

Tony, maybe you can get your dog to carry that thing around!!!

[@ME2K23]

🤓 I would really like to see the dog carrying that big Nikon DSLR + 600mm f/4 lens... and a sturdy tripod with extended flash bracket, the speedlight with betterbeamer along with extra batteries... water bottles etc... just pray it wont see a cat on the way 😉

[@lcador9]

I am sure the dog would love to carry the 600mm combo but try to get him to carry the Canon combo and I am sure he would take a crap and head the other way.

[@Zwiesel66]

I like your idea, but I think he needs new dog for this task - maybe a newfoundland dog, it can even swim with that load, that's pretty handy if you want shoot birds near the water 😁

[@sfink16]

I'm considering the R5 and 800mm lens combo. I'm considering selling my Canon 300mm f2.8 lens and my Canon 5D MKIV to help pay for the "upgrade?". That would leave me with one DSLR in my Canon 7D MKII and my Tamron 150-600mm lens, should I want to go the DSLR route. Does this make sense to anyone?

[@camspotr9012]

It's not really possible to answer without knowing what subjects your're shooting and under what conditions.

[@triethylborane49]

0:00 "Shameless plug" XD

[@iyot1020]

nothings free

[@Andres-ow2sn]

Lol 😂 it’s funny how KZbin keeps the name of the scenes of the video,... shameless plug section lmao 😂🤣🤣 Time to create new video templates,.

[@saynomore192]

Shameless indeed.

[@merdanserin3017]

Many thanks for the video! I really enjoyed it. What do you think on the comparison between canon 800 f11 vs canon 400 5.6? Which one would you prefer?

[@aerofart]

Number of pro wildlife photographers who trade in their fast primes for one of these new Canon f11 lenses: ZERO

[@auliaalam4860]

Of course, this lens is for hobbyist who want reach and don't have that much money I genuinely think canon may sell this lenses like hot cake Especially when paired with dirt cheap RP

[@DreamReleases]

Number of Non pro wildlife photographers that would love to shoot more without the heavy rigs.

[@derekv6479]

Number who add it, though.... Plenty!!!

[@auliaalam4860]

@@FEED_MY_EYES_63 number of love for amateur, hobbyists and on budget wildlife shooter other manufacturers give, ZERO, NADA, big 0

[@edwardoliver971]

Not relevant

[@ram9midde]

If you look on the sony side....Getting an a6400 with a sony 200-600 will give an effective focal length of 960mm, may be at an effective aperture if f/8. Is it not a better option than canon.....Plz comment tony.

[@terryvitanza28]

900 mm not 960 I think.

[@auliaalam4860]

But at how much more cost ?:( I wish sony make one of this

[@terryvitanza28]

@@auliaalam4860 I think the Sony combo is actually less expensive!

[@auliaalam4860]

@@terryvitanza28 uuh, i checked the 200 600 lens alone cost more than double of this 800mm, 2000 bucks a piece A6400 cost same price as RP at 999 So sony offer cost 3000 Canon with eos rp cost 1800, almost half of that, and if we compare RP being fullframe gain 1 stop advantage over a6400 A6400 is smaller but i think this lens is smaller than 200 600

[@maskinmoller]

Interesting comparrrison! Wonder how a m4/3 camera with the Olympus 300 mm f4 will compare?

[@HappyHubris]

Tony tested the new m43 300mm and it was noticably less sharp than 500mm and 600mm FF lenses.

[@forbesjeff]

It'd probably be alright. The 300/4 is like a "600/8" in terms of full frame, but if you're comparing this to an R5, you're comparing a 20MP camera to a 45MP camera too. You'd need the 1.4x teleconverter to make it about equal to the R5 + 600/11 in full resolving power. I'd be willing to bet that that would be a pretty close comparison as you'd have about the same amount of pixels on target, and the resolution of the lens is basically slightly diffraction limited.

[@youknowwho9247]

@@forbesjeff Teleconverters will reduce sharpness quite dramatically, especially in conjunction with sensors that already have a high pixel density. They're certainly no substitute for long glass or a high res body. They've tested the Olympus against the 200-500 super zoom and the Nikon was substantially sharper. Then there's the fact that the 300 f/4 is much, much more expensive than even buying both those new Canon lenses. To me that's a comparison which does not shine a very flattering light on MFT, to put it mildly.

[@lorenzofortunati]

@Tony&Chelsea: Canon 400 5.6 + TC (f8, no IS) or Rf 600 (f11, IS)? Which lenses is this going to kill?

[@TechWithSean]

TFW you publish before waiting for the HD version to process

[@gnexus01]

It's light, but man.. F11 ? I wouldn't even bother. It requires very bright conditions, and if it's not. Then the subject needs to be still. The shutter speed would have to be low, and wouldn't be able to properly capture a moving bird, if for example it's cloudy out, or not the middle of the day. I would like to see the same 13k lenses go head to head with the Sigma 150-600mm F5-6.3 DG OS HSM. Another good comparison would be the Sigma 500 F4.

[@DrummingTmate]

If I can't shoot at 100 ISO I can't crop deep and thus I can't get a good close shot of a bird up in a tree. F5.6 is the F-stop limit.

[@michael_swardh]

Let's hope Canon will release a RF 600 L IS 4.0

[@TechnoBabble]

They're probably already working on one that they're gonna announce/release when they make a 1D replacement mirrorless camera.

[@youknowwho9247]

I'd wager they'll make a 400 2.8 first

[@peterebel7899]

It will be f..g close to the EF 600LIII which is already# - the best option on the market - great to be used with the R bodies Sorry, this is no real priority on Canon's to do list!

[@grahamfloyd3451]

These lenses really should be reviewed with just the Canon RP; this practicality is what makes you guys just the best reviewers out there! Also Chelsea, choosing shutter speed based on subject movement makes you one of the the world's best wildlife photographers, and I'm not being hyperbolic. When this virus ends it would be great to see you guys go on an African Safari applying your skillz. A fairer comparison would be vs the D850 + 500 f5.6 imo.

[@drewholmes9946]

I like how they are basically auto focusing spyglasses!!! Very clever. I wonder if we'll see other manufactures come out with lens like this?

[@przybylskipawel]

OK... Assuming that someone would never ever buy $13k 600mm FF prime lens and thus doesn't have a need for buying into R5 body, what are advantages of this 600mm f11 lens over Olympus 300mm f8 FF equiv. or even Sony RX10 IV (600mm f11 FF equiv.)? Are these lenses designed solely to lure into R5 those people that don't need such a camera? Those who would spend their last money on a new body and end up with no money for lenses? To convince that everyone should buy R5 and as for the lenes... we'll figure something out?

[@przybylskipawel]

OK. Now I see the problem. It a price. This Oly 300mm is INSANELY expensive! But still I would prefer Sony RX10 IV than canon 600mm lens for wildlife.

[@melgross]

What Canon did was brilliant. By it just being f11, they were able to optimize image quality for just that one f stop. That’s why it’s so sharp, which others have noted as well.

[@RichFreeman]

True, but they could have made it a bit bigger and done the same thing for a faster aperture without going all the way to f/4. That would have made it better.

[@auliaalam4860]

@@RichFreeman but the cost will double for bigger opening and making it sharp at wider aperture For hobbyist this is perfect, i want to dive to wildlife shooting because of this lens alone

[@cks993]

I'm confused because why I pay the double of a m43 body and then get a f/11, a f/5.6 equivalent m43 lens? while I have much more options of similar telephoto lenses in m43 world.

[@auliaalam4860]

@@cks993 well, you don't have to pay for another camera if you already have an R system to reach this setup

[@RichFreeman]

​@@auliaalam4860 The cost wouldn't double just to go to f/8. That would require the cost of every single component and the manufacturing to double due to this change. 80% of the parts probably would be the same. The manufacturing process would be the same. And other companies make f/6.3 zooms with way more glass in them for far less than double the cost of these primes. There is no reason that a faster prime would be less sharp than a slower one either, or harder to make sharp, especially when it is fixed-aperture. In any case, the lens is what it is. I'd really love to see a review comparing it to the Sigma/Tamron zooms. If I switch I'd lose some light, maybe gain some sharpness, ditch a whole lot of weight, and pocket a bit of cash (though not too much after selling it used).

[@alvinblackwell268]

Ok T your wife 🏆 this on $600 - $1000 > $10k. Makes this a no brainer. Add on usability and the fact that you would have enough 💰 left to buy 2 R5s and a RF 2.8 24-70mm L lens. When I upgrade to the R5, I will get one of these lenses too. Great review 👏 BTW

[@ShinilPayamal]

In terms of sheer practicality and value for money, the Canon combo is surely way ahead.🍹👍

[@R3tr0v1ru5]

No, get the Sony 200-600 or Sigma 150-600mm sport.

[@henry2742]

comparing bananas wirh apples, very dumb and unprofessional

[@dimitristsagdis7340]

The R5 is way overpriced for a stills camera. And it's like: if you pay through the nose for it we throw in some cheap super-tele glass - f/11 is unusable for any subject that is moving and is shot at any other time than full blast sunshine which is the worst for wildlife photography.

[@softrockification]

Mirrorless have better low light autofocus compared to a DSLR. Autofocus is fine.

[@Icayn]

Not sure why people keep saying that. The 1Ds are $6000 stills cameras. The r5 does much of what they do for less money. And what other stills camera does what the R5 can do for less??? Keep in mind it’s full frame. And it shoots 8k video as a bonus. The D850 is old and it STILL sets you back 3 grand. How is 3500 too much for a camera with some of the best AF and IBIS in the world???

[@dimitristsagdis7340]

Icayn the Sony a7riv has significantly more MPs almost as good AF, DM, fps... and is cheaper.

[@JohnPaul-ts8dq]

What about the Nikon 200-500 mm f/5.6? 😎📷

[@jackpast]

That f11 scares me. Wouldn’t turn it down if it was gift though.

[@nuclear64_]

LOL, this is the best comment. As a free gift its perfect! You just kindly killed Canon LOL.

[@stevepseudonym445]

Not that the sunny f/16 rule translates to all digital cameras, but a subject that's well lit by the sun would be properly exposed at f/16 and 1/800th of a second with an ISO of 800, so in theory you can get a well exposed shot at 1/1600th and f/11 at ISO 800. At 600 or 800mm you may want an even faster shutter speed depending on how fast your subject is moving, but at ISO 1600 you can jump all the way up to 1/3200th of a second. Sure, a lower ISO will give you a better image (assuming comparable exposure), but these lenses offer a chance to get images at long focal lengths without spending a ton of cash. And, as in the video, you can shoot slow moving wildlife at lower shutter speeds with a lower ISO. Ironically, I think the small f-stop means that these inexpensive lenses really need to be used on expensive cameras that produce good images at low light levels. And in the real world I think the most likely choice people will make after buying the R5 or R6 will be if they want to make the trade off for a light and inexpensive 600 or 800 mm f/11 lens or get something like the 100-400 mk II and have the option of using a 1.4 teleconverter and still having an f/8 option.

[@pierrevilley6675]

@@stevepseudonym445 yeah, but sun isn't always available... Especially in wildlife, were the max activity is in the evening or in the morning, where you have to shoot in the woods, with a lot of shadows. These are what i would call "summer lenses", good for people who wants a big focal length to enjoy their summer hollidays without having to ruin themselves or carry a massive piece of glass. Hobby-ists will take a 600 6.3 zoom, or for nikonists a 200-500 5.6, with 1.4 teleconverter if they need greater range. And pros will get the finest lenses.

[@amirmeshel7539]

Thanks Tony and Chelsea, I just uploaded R5 with 2x and RF 800 photo of a Sydney surfer and the eyes were sharp at 1km away. WOW

[@paulgill3785]

Amir Meshel I shoot surfing with a 600L F4 on dslrs. Does the 800 F11 get good consistent results?

[@amirmeshel7539]

@@paulgill3785 yes it does. The 2x makes it less consistent at 1600 but I use the 400Lf2.8 and the 800f11 to very consistent results. The waves breaking at an angle that allows sunlit photos and great compisition (I'm on the East Coast of Australia) means that I move the tripod often. 800f11 is so much more flexible and I can sometimes leave the $15,000 400Lf2.8 at home :)

[@thedondeluxe6941]

Would be interesting if you compared the Canon to a micro four thirds camera/lens combo. A 600mm equivalent on a weather sealed Panasonic or Olympus would hold up well, I think. They're also very light weight and easy to bring on hikes.

[@CrazyAboutFlyFishing]

Yes, I have the 100-400 and and GH5 which does everything these small Canon lenses can do and more. By the looka of it, it does it better as well. It is superb for wildlife video as well.

[@youknowwho9247]

The issue is that you're investing into a very limited system with MFT. A Canon shooter can turn around and put a 50mm f/1.8 on. A Panasonic user is stuck with the low end.

[@thedondeluxe6941]

@@youknowwho9247 I shoot both Canon full frame and Panasonic mft, and I think you're underestimating it a bit. Mft can yield very impressive results for nature photography. And it's a whole lot easier to deal with on hikes. The pro lenses are very high end in optical quality.

[@youknowwho9247]

@@thedondeluxe6941 The pro lenses are also a lot less cost efficient than their equivalent full frame counterparts. Not to mention that for landscapes work specifically, a 20 mpix sensor is hardly anything to write home about. And then there's the issue with lack of dynamic range. I did use the E-M1 II for a while. However I eventually stopped because the resulting images were nowhere near as nice as what I get out of my full frames. They're fun little cameras to use - until you import the files into lightroom and have to deal with the limitations.

[@thedondeluxe6941]

@@youknowwho9247 That sounds kinda weird to me, the raw files from Panasonic mft are very nice to work with. I've never used Olympus. Medium format is obviously the best digital alternative. But if you want high dynamic range and resolution, 8x10 Ektar negatives and a drum scanner is unbeatable. Bit of a pain to haul around on hikes, though!

[@harnoorsingh2866]

Compare Canon R5 vs Sony A7S 3 in photography

[@markgreenwildlifeimages]

What about the Nikon 500pf !! Super light combo

[@youknowwho9247]

Yep, best wildlife lens on the market in my book. With a D850 it's portable enough to hike with and hand hold all day, it's rugged and robust and the images are fantastic. Sure, it's not on par with the f/4 in terms of raw IQ, but it does hit the sweet spot between that and portability perfectly.

[@markgreenwildlifeimages]

Landscope 360 agreed bokeh is everything in wildlife photography to me ! I just cannot work out F11 ?? Would rather use the tamron 150-600 as does morten hilmer with his z6 !!

[@youknowwho9247]

@@markgreenwildlifeimages I'm not entirely sure about that. It'd imagine af with a third party super zoom isn't stellar. Admittedly, I haven't used the 150-600, but I did have to return my Tamron 100-400 because if very inconsistent focus. Then again, f/11 is a real bummer. I mean, it's OK for the price and its great that it's portable, but I personally don't enjoy shooting at ISO 6400 and up...

[@poudrieres]

Birders with M43 use Topaz Denoise AI to reduce noise ;-)

[@MadEnglishTV]

I thought I'd be more excited for these lenses, but I just can't see myself buying one.

[@minusinfinity6974]

Why would you, get a 150-600 f/5-6.3, almost two stops faster and you can add a 1.4TC and still be 2/3rds stop faster. I own the Sony 200-600 and even with 1.4x TC it's IQ is excellent and AF is superb on the Sony A9.

[@ayayoutuber]

@@minusinfinity6974 The sigma 150-600 is $800....plus the cost of the 1.4 extender and all the weight and length and extra money for 2/3 stop....plus we are talking canon camera here...not sony.

[@thewatchkeeper3619]

I have the 800 for my R5 and RP. It's genuinely brilliant

[@alansach8437]

I know. Me too. The high iso capabilities of the mirrorless cameras is impressive, no question. But it's not THAT good, IMHO. I am constantly shooting wildlife in cloudy, drizzly early morning and late evening conditions. F11 just doesn't cut it in those conditions. I could imagine some conditions it would be good, but the vast majority of time, not so much. I've considered the Sigma as well, but the reviews are all over the place. I've read everything from it's the best thing since sliced bread to it is dog slow focusing and image quality is great up to about 400, then drops off significantly. I read one and convince myself to buy it, then I read another and unconvince myself.

[@tc6912]

Entertaining, with points for being first. But there is so much more to consider if you are willing to sacrifice image quality for portability. Better image quality has a greater value than just 1 point in a simple comparison like you have shown. Your D850 rig is a great example of how much people are willing to spend or carry to get better image quality. F11 seems so restrictive for wildlife that is usually in shadows or at sunrise/sunset lighting conditions. Nikon D500 with the 500PF is not all that much more money or weight and will provide much more flexibility with better image quality. Also, my local camera shop highly recommends the Sony RX10 IV for a portable wildlife camera. Comparing these F11's to other options that provide similar image quality or restrictions might make more sense.

[@GenericPast]

I was just thinking about buying the $13,000 Nikon lens. Thanks lol

[@ushanastrivedi368]

Still, you should because f11 lenses are crap. If you go by sunny 16 rule, you can shoot flying birds @1/2000 shutter speed with minimum 1000 ISO in midday sun. Little away from midday, it will increase to 2000 ISO. In overcast conditions, it will hover between 4000 to 8000 ISO depending on light conditions. Guess what, around sunrise & sunsets in dense forests (most useful time for wildlife), you will be among 12k to 16k ISO. Of course for still subjects, you can gain, 2 to 3 stops of light but I believe, you don’t want to shoot only still subject being wildlife photog. Please bear in mind that when it comes to Canon, Tony’s Review are always little favourable & biased having soft corner. They will always find some ways to highlight some positive side of crappiest gears from Canon. When you use, one brand of gears for more than couples of decades with good success, you develop preference for your brand of choice. It’s only natural but we need to take these advices with pinch of salt. If you want something lightweight, go for Nikkor 500mm f5.6 PF

[@Libinkttm]

@@ushanastrivedi368 so nikkor f5.6 pf available around 1000 usd ? be sensible , you cant call this lens crap ..its genious idea to get them less than 1000 usd ..its not for professionals , its for enthusiastic ..they will not be able to spend 130000 usd for a lens ..

[@shang-hsienyang1284]

Nikon 300 PF+2X TC would still be a better combo. Unfortunately at the moment, you still need to use a Nikon DSLR if you want good autofocus performance. Nikon mirrorless are still behind the competition.

[@ushanastrivedi368]

@libin thomas it’s not but context was that Jon Bothe was thinking of buying $13,000 lens & he is clearly not short of budget & wants high quality. Engineering is all about striking right balance. In my opinion, there is too much of compromise with f11 in order to achieve cheap, compact & light lens. If someone is having only $1,000 budget, he is still better off with lenses like 150-600mm f6.3 types. I still think, it is good that manufacturer like Canon came with different option & having more options provide more choices. Problem comes when incorrectly compared & disguised to make people believe they can do away with their f4 superteles in favor of f11 lense.

[@Libinkttm]

@@ushanastrivedi368 I was replying about you called this f11 set up crap ..it's not crap ..it's a great idea to get them under 1000 USD ...

[@nuclear64_]

Some people are saying that f11 is too high and would have been happier with an f8 or lower. Then I say to them, they should have made it smaller, lighter and cheaper with an f1.2, that would have been better. This was a great video! cant wait to get my hands on this one for sure!

[@omegavladosovich6757]

They know that most enthusiasts are coming from APS-C. You're getting less light, but the bokeh would be closer to f8 on an APS-C. I generally shoot my Tamron 150-600mm G2 at f8-f9, because the sharpness at 6.3 on a crop body like the 80D is unreliable. (cansometimes be sharp wide open, but often becomes hazy)

[@triplescale]

3:38 "I can do this all day Northrup" hahaha

[@williamblackwell9558]

Did you say the R5 is the best low-light camera you ever tested..lol. THE BEST LOW-LIGHT CAMERA IS IN TONY'S HANDS D850.

[@JohnDrummondPhoto]

That 800mm is definitely on my radar.

[@onlysublime]

yikes! I just bought both of these lenses because they were available refurbished at sale prices. I bought both together for $1400 and that's after California taxes and shipping!

[@alexnewton7484]

Or just send the spotting scopes back to canon and put a 500 pf on the d850

[@mmpllc77]

I got the 800mm rf and took some pics with the Eos R and got Saturn and Jupiter handheld last night. Can't wait to get one of the new bodies for even more stabilization

[@davecavanaugh3300]

Picked up the 800mm for my EOS R, surprisingly, it’s been great and a lot of fun.

[@cornishblue58]

I’m waiting for my 800mm to arrive to use with my R. I am pleased to hear it works well with the R. No reason why it shouldn’t I guess, but clearly designed for the new cameras.

[@alejandrocifuentesh]

And how about the Sony 200-600mm F 5.3-6.3? cost 2.000 USD, but you get a middle point between the two configurations that you show.

[@eosuser1]

Good question...they said there is lag on all mirrorless cameras but have not seen that on my Sony A9 which Tony has used for sports so I am a bit confused. Also no mention of rolling shutter on R5 when panning so I assume in electronic shutter mode R5 at 20 fames/sec it’s fine. Look forward to a review between R5 and A9 action.

[@JACKnJESUS]

Why shoot at 6.3 when you can shoot at 11? (sarcasm off). Save some more dough...get the Sony...which is razor sharp.

[@kevinandrews1073]

@@eosuser1 I think that "lag" is the blackout most mirrorless have (a9 however does not have this )

[@JennaCee]

When it was first announced it was laughed at. Who is looking like they have the last chuckle?

[@aussie8114]

Why not use the Nikon 500pf lens on the D850. It’s a lot cheaper than the 600f4, it’s much lighter and smaller and almost as sharp. Not much difference between 500 and 600 in magnification.

[@stevevuoso8411]

Do they own that lens?

[@aussie8114]

Steve Vuoso Not sure but Tony did a review of it.

[@messylaura]

i prefer the background blur from the R5 vs the other one in that test, sometimes having a completely blurred background can take away from the image, i found that the image looked better showing some detail in the water

[@forbesjeff]

You can stop the big lens down if you want more depth of field... though you're carrying something that's much bigger, too.

[@simrankhurana4396]

Well in that shot it was a bit too much. 6.3 would have been better but these were just test shots

[@michaeldande]

i think its important to buy gear that are practical, personally i think these two canon lenses are not lenses 4 professional wildlife photographer, 4 beginners learning about aperture iso shutter speed n lighting yes u can try Toni tell me u r in wildlife scene with a cheetah planning an attack, u need at least 1/1500 sec Shutter to 2500 speed, where will your ISO BE when u already have f 11, even in normal shooting i seldom go to f4 nope

[@pixel_overkill]

This is awesome to watch but I'm on that budget life. T7i with a Sigma 150-600mm Contemporary lens. Has so much Sharpness and zoom on a crop sensor.

[@kansascityrc]

That's what I had, just upgraded to the R5 and took the sigma 150-600 contemporary out to the zoo today. I thought that lens was sharp before but wow! R5 rocks 100%

[@pixel_overkill]

@@kansascityrc Dude, that's so exciting to hear! My goal is to eventually afford the R6. I keep seeing amazing results of EF on the RF platform. My buddy has the R5 I can't wait to try it out tomorrow with my Sigma 150-600mm.

[@Abhishek98317]

@@kansascityrc How are all the R5 features like Animal Eye Tracking working with 150-600C. I have that lens that's why I am asking

[@kansascityrc]

@@Abhishek98317 the animal eye detection worked really well. The only times it had issues was through fences sometimes. When that happened, I just switched to single point focus and was able to quickly move the focus point to where I wanted it with the handy joystick. Also, in case you're wondering, I shot all day in 95°f with no over heating at all and was able to get over 1000 shots on a battery charge. If you're interested, you can find me on Instagram @mikedyephoto I'll be uploading some r5 images soon.

[@RichFreeman]

@@kansascityrc thanks for the report. I'd end up with the same setup if I upgrade. I'd love to see somebody compare the new f/11 primes to that sigma 150-600 both in terms of IQ and AF. Certainly the prime would be lighter in my bag!

[@ochjoo77]

Well, in 2012 I used something quite similar: Sony A77 with a 500mm mirror lens..the only autofocus mirror lens, that combo is a 750mm equivalent and easily can shoot one handed 😜 ..I have to admit the lens was not super sharp but hey it's a 20year old lens. Too bad Sony never bothered making something comparable and more modern.

[@adityal]

I've been tracking this lens (SAL500F80) on eBay for ages ... Do you have any image galleries or videos i can look up?

[@valdemarjrgensen8072]

Honestly think the people calling the F11 useless are completely clueless. 400mm F5.6 have been considered perfectly useful for what +20 years? F5.6 to F11 is two stops. ISO noise performance has improved way more than two stops worth of performance over that time. And those 400mm back then (that is still used mind you) were without IS, these new lenses have the best IS (when paired with the new IBIS) we have probably ever seen, that is also plenty good to compensate for the lower aperture in many situations (as demonstrated in the video). So if a 400mm F5.6 was useful 20 years ago then of course a 800mm F11 will be useful now. No one will bat an eye at someone showing up birding with a 7d ii and a 400mm F5.6, that's a legit setup that produce professional quality images but I really doubt it will produce better image quality under similar conditions when compared with a r5 or r6 with an 800mm F11.

[@DrummingTmate]

Where are the pictures up in the trees in that forest they were in? Can't do it with F/11. You really need an F/4 but F/5.6 is possible with low shutter speeds.

[@valdemarjrgensen8072]

@@DrummingTmate If there were enough light to get it with a 7d ii and a F5.6 (which again is pretty much universally considered perfectly adequate for a birding kit), you would be able to do it with an R6 and a F11. Is there situations where the is so little light that you can't use an F11 and you could use an F4, yes of course I'm not arguing against that, I'm not retarded. What I'm saying is that these lenses with the cameras they are intended to be used with are just as capable as other kits that has been used for decades where basically no one argued against their usefulness (they did however acknowledged their limitations and were smart enough to realise that didn't make them useless).

[@originaljoie]

How about a comparison closer in budget with the Sigma 150-600 and Tamron G2 150-600?

[@GalacticoUC]

I will love to know how this sigma and tamron lenses perform with the new canon R5 ibis

[@johnnybrabus2967]

F11 is not made for wildlife, just for lamelife 😉

[@HappyHubris]

A nice break from F1.2 videos!

[@dtibor5903]

Oh dear, 360p, i have to wait a few minutes

[@emilianocquijano]

I've been waiting a few minutes already and even refreshed... nothing.

[@dtibor5903]

Sometime youtube fails and there will be only 360p version

[@stuartking4128]

Try F11 in a U.K. Winter.

[@peterebel7899]

Yes, try it!

[@robertbohnaker9898]

Canon’s done the “no brained” solution for big and stratospherically expensive lenses for the average Joe. The Cannon R5/600 + 800 mm lenses are the answer ! Another great real world review ! 👍

[@realBatman]

I would have paid $1000 more if it was an F5.6 or F6.

[@DrummingTmate]

F5.6 is the limit. Give me a sharp 500mm F5/6 prime and I'll find the money up to the $3,600 Nikon charges for theirs.

[@vpr5562]

My wildlife is tamron 18-400 :). lol!

[@alphaandomega2709]

Can you use it on the R6?

[@thesharpercoder]

FACT CHECK: Minimum Focusing Distance Test Go to B&H Photo Video and look up the specs on minimum focusing distance for the two lenses. The Canon 600mm is rated at 14.75 ft / 4.5 m. The Nikon 600mm is rated at 14.69 ft / 4.4m. BTW, they tested the Nikon 600 + 1.4x tele against the Canon 800. Why not test the Canon 600 with a 1.4x tele?

[@thesharpercoder]

We should assume that they used the same exposure settings to photograph Pixel. But, why? The R5 has IBIS, which should have made up for the 3 stops of light difference between f/4 and f/11. It could have had its’ shutter speed dialed by 3 stops, and leveled the playing field to match ISO values.

[@daran0815]

@@thesharpercoder Which would work only due to Pixel not moving. Wildlife is rarely ever completely still. Even birds sitting completely still will breathe, reducing sharpness of any lengthy exposures.

[@TonyAndChelsea]

I show those specs on the screen as well as demonstrating the maximum magnification. We don't have the Canon TC, but also, f16 is getting pretty deep!

[@PaulKentSkates]

The people who are surprised that these lenses are actually decent just suck at math. I feel bad for m4/3s these lense are equivalent to fast lenses on smaller sensors. I'm so stoked on these as practical telephotos that I can carry deep into the mountains. But... I'll still use my fast lenses in the front country.

[@toosas]

1600 iso in broad daylight tho? 10k iso in the shade..

[@cornishblue58]

My 800mm arrives on Tuesday. Sadly my R5 hasn’t arrived yet, and no idea when it will. But I do have my R, so am looking forward to trying some wildlife photography next week 😊

[@popcornparam]

Battery grip and ftp video plz

[@AgnostosGnostos]

The new Canon telephoto lenses are only good for shooting a Flappy Bird.

[@biakmawia]

In good light it surprisingly good, but in the forest under the tree low light 😁

[@aaronvaught8027]

Would love to see what sigma 70-200 f2.8 looks like as well as sigma 24-105 On the r5. Would it be a good match would it function properly would we get sick results. I'm creeping on the channel hahahaha

[@rlpring78]

How does a Sony A9II with a Sony 200-600 lens compare in terms of tracking, AF, image quality, fps, weight and amount of keeper shots?

[@rlpring78]

Can the R5 compete with the A9/A9II in terms of sports and wildlife photography?

[@joe2snj]

The a9ii has a much higher sensor read out speed to minimise rolling shutter. The R5 has awful rolling shutter when at 20fps, saw this on the camera labs review.

[@fmrc69]

I understand the D850 and 600 f4 was used to highlight the price and size difference, but honestly I'd rather use my D500 + 500mm 5.6 PF combo over the R5 and 600mm f11. The Nikon combo is only 5.1 lbs and just a measly 1.4 lbs heavier than R5 and 600 f11.

[@DrummingTmate]

Canon needs to make an RF 500mm F/5.6.

[@fmrc69]

@@DrummingTmate They do have their 400mm 5.6 which is good, but I think someone needs to make a 600 PF 5.6 and even if its a bit bigger and heavier, it should be half the size/weight of current f4 lenses

[@DrummingTmate]

@@fmrc69 The Nikon is high quality optics - sharp - at F5.6 and at F5.6 it's possible to shoot at 100 ISO and deep crop which makes getting pics of birds in trees possible. These F/11 lens are completely useless for that. I'll pay $3.600 for a sharp 500mm F5.6 prime. I can't save up for a 600mm F/4, it's just too much.

[@fmrc69]

@@DrummingTmate Exactly correct which is why I got the 500 PF. Had it since it came out and love it. I would never spend 3x more for an f4 at 2-3 times the weight unless I was getting paid a lot of $$ for my pics :)

[@backroadbirder3316]

So I got the Canon R& last fall, since I can't afford a full-frame mirrorless, and because I thought the crop-sensor would work better for me, given that I mostly shoot birds. Then when my Canon L 400mm f/5.6 died, I got the 600mm RF f/11. I am NOT impressed. I end up shooting ISO 4000-12600, and then have massive amounts of noise. By the time I do noise reduction in Topaz DeNoise AI or Photo AI, the detail is gone. I would love to see alternatives, preferably for Canon, for those of us that aren't flush, money-wise, for something that yields sharp photos.

[@ThreeCeeProductions]

I got the canon setup you tested. I take bird photos at least 5 days/week. The picture quality was better with my canon 400 f5.6 but after editing it was close. I don’t sell as many Bird photos as in the past and for the money the 600 and 800 f11 is good enough. Getting a bigger image on the sensor and 800mm on the R5 is the sweet spot for me. For budget the R6II is also a good deal.