CANON RF 200-800 VS RF 100-500 + 1.4 TC on the Canon R7 | IS THERE A WINNER? IQ Test | Part 2 of 2

[@garyrothstein4468]

Another great video... Thanks.. I have been using the 200-800 for 4 days now and I also think that the quality is right on. Shooting with an R5.

[@WILDALASKA]

Very nice

[@yoki9743]

This is the 2nd video I have watched by this channel... what a joy ... a really nice watch with all the info required... the actual difference is that this is all shot in the real world... so well done... You have got a new subscriber who is about to look at the back catalogue of videos whilst waiting for the new ones to land.... Just love Scotts attitude and superb way of teaching/giving out info... some of the shots especially the eagle ones are just sublime... so again well done... Keep up the excellent work.... cheers... Yoki...

[@WILDALASKA]

Thanks for the kind words.

[@deegreen3351]

Canon will sell bucket loads of these also to aviation photographers they will be all over the air show circuit. Thanks for the great review, don’t forget there’s the RF800 f11 to get the 800mm fix which is also immense for the price

[@WILDALASKA]

Yes I didn't include that as it was f11 but I should have as it exists> if I can get hold of one we will compare the IQ

[@mickeyjetpur7998]

Can you compare the 800 f11 with the 200-800 @ 800mm? Thanks.

[@bavarianbellephotographytm9819]

This was an intensive deep dive. Thank you for the superb work and expertise.

[@WILDALASKA]

Glad you enjoyed it!

[@richardsak2741]

By far the best review on this lens!! Great Job and thank you!

[@WILDALASKA]

Glad it was helpful!

[@Joya5545]

Terrific in-depth video Scott.I finally got my pre-order and couldn’t be happier. First shots of BIF have been great as have pretty much everything else. The weight is not an issue and the focus is fast and accurate. I have the 100-500mm too but I anticipate when it comes to wildlife I’ll be using it less and less, for people and events yes, but reach is what I want most at the moment. Love your toque!

[@WILDALASKA]

Thanks. The lens was a surprise in performance to me

[@mvp_kryptonite]

The lens is awesome! Canon done well with the 200-800. Great review and thanks for putting it together. Look forward to more. I still can’t resist the EF100-400ii as with the normal adapter and 0.71x adapter I get 2 lenses in one. Plus I can pop on any extender I like for those rare occasions I need 800 odd mm. however, native RF lenses are better in terms of weight, speed and d accuracy.

[@WILDALASKA]

Very true

[@bobcat65a]

Scott, Thanks for this comprehensive review of the RF Canon 200-800mm. Anyone interested in wildlife photography and the RF 200-800mm should watch this video. Suspect your viewers will appreciate the fact that you did this video under the harshness of Alaskan weather and have not worked with merely studio and backyard comparisons. Best of good light and wildlife for 2024! I'm looking forward to your next post.

[@WILDALASKA]

Thanks. Forecast is a lot of snow and cloudy days. So it will be more low light work 🤪

[@willonthewing2860]

Thanks your detailed review and usage experience!

[@WILDALASKA]

Glad it was helpful!

[@Xirpzy]

Of course we had similarly bad weather for my week off and as soon as I get back to work the sun is out. Everything looks gorgeous now, especially with snow.

[@WILDALASKA]

Sun? what is this Sun thing you speak of 🤣

[@PatrickMartin-lw7tu]

Great in depth review. Looking forward to the full frame comparison. Running an R6 with the 100-400II with and without a 1.4X III, and price of the 100-500 is a pill I’ve just never been able to justify to upgrade. For the price difference, my 200-800 that is on pre-order will make a great partner to my EF zoom.

[@WILDALASKA]

Thanks

[@SB-tn1xm]

Great effort Scott. That Harbor seal puppy was just adorable 😀 You are correct. Nikon PF series glass is setting new standards. I don't know why Canon does not make lenses with built in TCs. I hate the TC limitation on 100-500 hence i am still using the EF 100-400 II with 1.4x on R7. Looks like Canon has a winner in 200-800mm.

[@WILDALASKA]

thx

[@ptvfr800]

Thanks again Scott for a great review and demonstration, My wife is buying the 200-800 for my 65th birthday in May, I will use it on my R8, the only downside to this lens as far as I am concerned is the fact it is so popular there is a waiting list for it to re-stock in Australia.. We hope your recovery is going well 🤞

[@WILDALASKA]

Grats and hope it gets to you soon. Its a great lens

[@ptvfr800]

Hi Scott, My lens arrived and I could not be happier, images are really good and the slight aperture advantage over the RF800 is worth having, especially if you are in shady areas. I should mention that the lens hood on mine seems to fit really well, it ‘clicks’ into place and stays there. Also I agree about the zoom ring resistance, it’s perfect. this is the 4th time I have watched this particular video, it’s the best one on youtube regarding the 200-800..

[@bowdenimages1197]

This really was a great video. I rarely find myself admiring photographers on KZbin, but this was one of the best videos I’ve seen on this topic. Also wanted to add that with the teleconverters, while reaching the same distance, are significantly worse quality than without. With my R5, I get close to the same quality as the teleconverters just cropping the image.

[@WILDALASKA]

Cropping you lose MP on subject also. Tradeoff there.

[@bowdenimages1197]

@@WILDALASKA Well that’s definitely true.

[@eduardoc.jimenez3388]

This review is brilliant, thank you!

[@WILDALASKA]

Glad it was helpful!

[@matthewsequoyah2665]

S O L D !! 😃👍 200-800 it is for me. If I could afford both lens that would be ideal of course but having to choose, the price on the 100-500 plus a teleconverter is a deal breaker. Awesome video and analysis! ! Thank you 😄💥💥

[@WILDALASKA]

Good choice!

[@garyrothstein4468]

Can you pass on the info on a replacement lens hood for the 200-800. Thanks, Gary

[@WILDALASKA]

The lens hoods I use are form Zemlin Photo. Custom made hoods and lens caps for the large primes. He doesn't have the 200-800 yet, but does have the Nikon 180-600 and all the primes. Also looks like the site is under maintenance and you can't order atm, but you can see all the products they offer. www.zemlinphoto.com

[@garyrothstein4468]

A big Thank you for the R7 setup! I used it yesterday with my RF200-800 (posted images on Facebook) and had great shoot. I did add the grip extension from Amazon ($70) and was a great help in holding the small R7.

[@WILDALASKA]

glad it was helpful

[@VABrowneMDPhD]

Excellent video! Great comparison of the Canon 100-500 and the new 200-800. I was surprised by the image quality that you were able to achieve despite the small apertures in very low light conditions. This says a lot about the optical quality of the lenses and also about the sensors in the new RF mount mirrorless cameras.

[@WILDALASKA]

Thanks for watching!

[@DKtracks]

Awesome You just answered almost all my questions about this lens. I don't need to rent both and test them for a weekend. So you saved me a lot of work time and even money for renting both lenses! I am a bit jealous about your snow. We rarely get that nowadays due to climate change. (Used to be different) Big thanks and greetings from Germany

[@WILDALASKA]

Just a cycle on the weather. We went for a couple years with very low snowfall up here also.

[@afriquelesud]

I grew up where the tarmac melted. It rarely snows, and when it does, it ends up on international news channels. Pity some lens manufacturers such as Nikor refuse to make white lenses. In the Karoo, Kgalagadi and Richtersveld deserts, black attracts just too much heat. Temperature easily goes into 48+ Celcius, or above fifty. And you can't live without Polaroid in such a place. Very bright sun at mid-day.

[@steevewhitehead1416]

Thank you. I'm considering as my next long lens, and here in Australia we have plenty of light, so it should work out well. Also I was thinking apsc r7, so good to see your results.

[@WILDALASKA]

Good choice!

[@IntothewestOkotoks]

Great review and thank you for showing the detail in LR. I’m not sure what Canon left out to not make this an L lens, but I think you’ve done a great job showing that the IQ and AF doesn’t suffer - and at substantial cost savings to the 100-500. We get a lot of bald eagles and hawks around here, and my Tamron 100-400 just has so many issues lol. Thanks again, and look forward to further videos!

[@WILDALASKA]

Thx

[@PeteCroft1]

Looks like a keeper Scott! It should pair well with my ef 100-400 mk ii on the R7, just got to wait for Canon to catch up with orders! Thanks for all the work you do, excellent images and video given the conditions 👍

[@unknownKnownunknowns]

Would be curious to hear your report after comparing the two. Test chart shots ive seen show the EF 100-400 ii to be far sharper than the 200-800 in the 200-400 range

[@WILDALASKA]

Fingers crossed!

[@ElBoyoElectronico]

The 200-800 seems perfect for a general wildlife one and done solution. I own the 100-500 and love it, especially for hiking, since it can also do some macro and works well for people too. I am saving up for a used EF 600 (will take a while) for the times I sit in a hide and want more light/bokeh, which should be a great combo with the 100-500. Right now the 100-500 also works ok, when sitting in a hide, but for the morning hours, I really could use more light, especially when using a tc with it.

[@WILDALASKA]

yes defiantly shoot for the big white. the color rendition, fall off, bokeh, etc are magical on all the big whites

[@cheungching9430]

Very detailed review. absolutely agreed with your comment about the lens. I dont have the 1-500 but 100-400mm. Absolutely love it. My order is expecting to arrive today. Cant wait to yest it out with this beast with R5 body on. Happy New Year man, looking forward to see more clips from you.

[@WILDALASKA]

Thanks for watching!

[@Chris_Wolfgram]

Great video Scott :) So pertinent for what I do :) Loved the Grey Crowned Rosy Finch. For myself, it will be the 200-800 all the way.

[@WILDALASKA]

Glad you enjoyed it

[@Those_Weirdos]

I liked seeing this review - I've watched a ton of reviews of the 100-500 and 200-800, and no offense to any given body type, but the reviewers were on the smaller side physically and stature-wise. There, weight is a far bigger concern than a Truckasaurus accustomed to trudging through snow. It was nice to hear this perspective in that respect.

[@WILDALASKA]

👍

[@ncbmx64]

Thank you for the videos. Sounds like the 200-800 will be better for my needs. Now just need to find one in stock.

[@WILDALASKA]

its better than expected.

[@brentpendgraft60]

This is such a great video! I’ve been comparing these two lenses for my own shooting for a while and all of the in-depth information you presented here truly helps. I also believe I’d benefit from the 200-800 more than the 100-500 even with the TC. Thanks, Scott!

[@WILDALASKA]

Glad it was helpful

[@gabeclements1240]

How many megapixels is that microwave? lol Thanks for the great quality videos! I love these detailed reviews. Well done, Scott.

[@WILDALASKA]

Thanks for watching!

[@abnerlu8798]

This review finally help me decided to get this lens. Thank you.

[@WILDALASKA]

Good choice!

[@williamchan8866]

No question your analysis is great. You walk the viewer through your thought process, back by hands on shooting experience and example.👍

[@WILDALASKA]

thx

[@JennaCee]

Great video - super informative and backs up my decision to get this lens. Thank you.

[@WILDALASKA]

Glad it was helpful!

[@allenfutrelle9090]

Great video, I have sent this to my good friend who shoots wildlife with me. He has aleady ordered the R7, he has a R5, and is now seriously considering the 200-800mm lens. Again, thank you so much for the informstion you provide to all of us.

[@WILDALASKA]

Thanks for sharing!

[@johnkleinphoto]

Great Video Scott, You helped me make a purchase of this lens, thanks for you in-depth reviews. Subscribed now :)

[@WILDALASKA]

👍

[@WernerBirdNature]

Thank you Scott, it was a joy watching both parts of this comparison. Your Harbor seal was clearly the star of the show 😀 Really amazed how much detail you had at 1280mm and the show wasn't spoiled by heat haze 👍 Given that I don't have any long prime, I'm going to keep my beloved 100-500 for the lowest light, bird hides and cases where 500mm is enough like on the puffin island I'll visit this summer in Scott-land. However, in all other conditions I was usually making it a 420-700, but instead I'll be swapping it for the 200-800 (once it arrives) .. and the 1.4x will only be used when I'll need even more than 800mm on my R5 ;-) In between the lines of your video, I assume this shall be my best strategy. My guess is Canon already knew they planned this 200-800 when they approved the design-flaw of only making the 100-500 half-way compatible with extenders. And when adding both the 1.4x and its tripod foot, the 100-500 is only a power bank lighter than the 200-800. Your lens hood is likely a bit angry you used it as a snow scoop in your unboxing video 😛 I guess using this 200-800 on a stacked FF sensor would be heaven .. Is their any way you could Frankenstein this glass on your Z9 .. or will you patiently wait whether the R5ii will have such sensor ? I don't expect Nikon to counter this lens pretty soon.

[@WILDALASKA]

The Nikon 180-600 with the 1.4 is as good or better in my experience than the 200-800 or even the 100-500. A beast of a lens. The reason for the 100-500 design was to get the elements as close to sensor as they could to over come some of the weight design elements for image quality.

[@WernerBirdNature]

@@WILDALASKA The 180-600 certainly sounds good, but how do you compare ? On a Z50 to have a similar sensor like the R7 ? A Z9 or Z8 is due to their stacked sensor no fair comparison to the R7, plus you'd need a 2x to approach the 1280mm. The tricky Q for me here is whether the 180-600 and for example 600/6.3 look so exceptionally good because of the glass alone, or because the great stacked sensor lets them shine ? My friend moved from a Z50 + 200-500 to the R7 + 100-500 and he was blown away by the improvements. I believe the 180-600 will have improved upon it predecessor, but a night and difference between both Nikon lenses would surprise me ..

[@subliminus]

Great review. I am looking forward to your video with the R5 as that is what I am considering pairing this lens with. I own an EF 100-400 v2 and a EF 600 f4 v2 and EF TCs that pretty much covers anything I could think of for higher IQ. The 200-800 for me looks to be a very appealing travel option to give me a lot of reach for wildlife on the go, as well as landscapes when I can find them. Recently a Sigma EF 60-600 on loan from a friend went with me to Yosemite because I couldn't travel with the 600 f4 (work travel), and some of my favorite images from that stop along the way were with the Sigma due to the ability to get in tight on the shot in a location where everything is gigantic and far away. Thank you again for putting in the work for those of us still on the fence.

[@WILDALASKA]

It will be this Sundays video. The R5 and RF 200-800

[@subliminus]

@@WILDALASKA thank you sir, also it is great to see Alaska again in your videos. I haven't seen your beautiful state since 2008. I miss it very much.

[@mariannejohnson5357]

Great in depth review, very helpful. Thanks so much. Can’t wait to try the new lens. Let’s hope we won’t have to wait much longer!

[@WILDALASKA]

Fingers crossed!

[@mikeymike4366]

Thank you so much for the review Scott. Can’t wait to see how it does on the r5 compared to the r7, more keepers?? We’ll see.

[@WILDALASKA]

That's the plan!

[@ts76751]

Hey nice video. Thanks for sharing it. Maybe an oversight but when you show the two eagles at 500mm with the 100-500 and you say it’s at 7.1, the metadata on the right show it was shot at f9.

[@WILDALASKA]

Thx

[@henrievankleef]

Scott, I love your comparrishing video's. Keep up the good work !! Greetings , Henrie

[@WILDALASKA]

Thank you very much!

[@jeffolson4731]

Scott, Great review. The lens hood being loose surprised me too. I have the same hood for my RF 800 f11 and haven't noticed it being an issue there but I have on the RF 200-800. I haven't had to go on a long walk to find it but I can see how that would happen. I was shooting Short-eared owls this last Sunday and I was the only one shooting with this lens. There were several people using the RF100-500, some with a 1.4x. I got great images that I will be posting to IG soon, got a lot of images to go through from the weekend. I was able to get BIF images with this lens at 800mm on my R7. By using the lens on my R7 instead of my R5, I was able to fill the frame with the owl. I think people forget that you can stitch images. I was actually too close to a Bald Eagle one time when I had my RF 800 f11 on my R7. I took a picture of the top half, then the bottom half and repeated a few times then stitched two together. I had a lot more detail in that image than my R5 with the RF100-500 could give me in a single image. I am really enjoying this lens. If I was going to recommend a single lens for a wildlife photographer that doesn't break the bank, it would be the RF 200-800. I am glad I was able to get mine right away.

[@WILDALASKA]

Very nice. Look forward t seeing the images you captured.

[@AndrewCCM]

Good observation about bumping up SS with R7/Crop sensor. The pixel density definitely affects lower shutter speeds as you mention. Take the good with the bad with high density crop sensors... Still love the R7

[@WILDALASKA]

👍

[@unclebuck5957]

I have the 100-500 waiting for the 200-800 thanks for the great review

[@WILDALASKA]

Hope you enjoy it!

[@deenamariebehindthelens]

I completely agree ( rare statement in my world). I tried hard to love the 100-500 but that awkward having to extend and then put on 1.4 add to it the canon caps that can be a struggle to put on and off…. Takes way too long when shooting wildlife. It’s noisy messing around with it and to much exposure to elements because the change takes too long. Not going to dump the lens because without extender it’s a sweet walk around lens. I’m digging the 200-800 paired with R6 is as good as you can get when you don’t have the money for an f2 or f4 anything 😂 Live your reviews! Stay warm

[@WILDALASKA]

Thanks

[@drummerg3331]

Another great review. Can’t wait to see how it does on a full frame camera.

[@WILDALASKA]

Working on it this week. Got some swans back on my favorite spot in the winter. Same place as this video. kzbin.info/www/bejne/noO1d3htn7h8rpI Ill be testing the r8 and r5 there for sure

[@AlKnightbird432]

Really Awesome review. Really well done!! Image quality looks better than expected. R7 with this lens is an incredible combo for perched still subjects. And, looks like exceptional performance with the 1.4x teleconverter. I'm not sure If everyone really appreciates what 1800mm means, because just 1300mm with the bare lens is an incredible gift for us. We all dreamed of having this for years!!! Great Video!!!

[@WILDALASKA]

The lens surprised me for sure. Enlarging this small birds is very nice

[@todddrew1192]

Good morning.. What is the name of the lens hood you are recommending for the 200-800.

[@WILDALASKA]

Zemlin. Custom made hoods and lens caps. They don't have the 200-800 yet, but should in the near future. www.zemlinphoto.com

[@wellingtoncrescent2480]

Excellent video, and much appreciated. I know you're a big guy, but it's good to remember than not everyone can cope with a hand-held 4 1/2 lb lens. I have a progressive neurologic disease, and I already had to trade in my Sigma 150-600C, which weighed 4.7 lbs. It had simply become too unwieldy, and I found it much easier to hoist the RF 100-500 at 3 lbs. Unfortunately, I'm now starting to struggle even with the lighter lens, and I've started to wonder about the RF 100-400 (1.4 lbs). Clearly, that only applies to me, but it's good to remember than aging joints and individual preferences make it difficult to generalize, since not everyone will find 4 1/2 lbs lens so effortless. Keep up the great videos.

[@WILDALASKA]

The RF 100-400 is a great lens. Its one I keep in the vehicle attached to the r7 or r8 at all times.

[@NECPER]

Great video again. I value your honest opinion and I agree with you. I will keep my RF 100-500 together with this RF 200-800 and use them depending on the scenario. I agree that the two lenses are on par. I’m not a skilled photographer as you, but your videos help me becoming better. Thanks again for sharing your video. Greetings from Per Christensen, Denmark

[@WILDALASKA]

Good choice!

[@frankanderson5012]

I do have both and the Rf100-500 is a must for me. You don’t cover carrying these two lenses. I do a lot of walking around and you will definitely feel the weight over time with the Rf200-800 and if you’re shooting birds in flight your arms start to ache. Also the 100-500 is more compact and fits into a much smaller bag whereas the 200-800 only fits into the larger, heavier bag I use for my 500 prime. Finally, at 100mm I’ve taken a surprising number of landscapes and its closer focusing enables some ‘macro’ imagery. I’ve found it’s not just about reach.

[@WILDALASKA]

I covered the weight of both lenses and talked about the weight with the TC attached on the RF also. Pretty early in the video.

[@guylorenzo5324]

Excellent video as usual Scott, with a great detailed review. I'm a Nikon guy, but it's always interesting to find out about what other brands have to offer. BTW... nice sunstars next to your head in the closing minutes of the video!

[@WILDALASKA]

Thanks. It was annoying editing that section with the sunstar popping in and out lol. If canon doesn't get it together this year on the r5mkII and the R1. I may shift from prime canon to prime Nikon. I will always shoot both, but the new lenses form Nikon are so so good and the z9 produces such amazing images. The 180-600 out kicked its price point by a long shot. Love that lens. Now to get my hands on one of the built in TC lenses......😈

[@gimaru1]

Nothing beats reach! That 200-800 is spectacular!

[@WILDALASKA]

👍

[@hythekent]

Top video for birders. You’ve given me a different line of thought here with DOF etc, although I bought my RF100-500 in December. (Music distracting though, wondering if you need it)

[@WILDALASKA]

Glad it was helpful!

[@hstein27]

Scott, great comprehensive review. I also don't find the zoom lens to be too stiff. I did notice jerkiness in video with the 200-800 on the R5 with video, and also on the R7 with 100-500. As soon as I saw the mention of digital IS for movies I went to both cameras and made sure to turn that on for all my custom modes saved to the dial. I still haven't used the new lens on the R7, because the R5 and TC combo with it is so good! I got one of my best pictures yet, of a bufflehead diving, with the TC attached. I just have to be realistic and not try to get birds more than 50 feet away, even with the TC, if I want to crop in.

[@WILDALASKA]

👍

[@eskrima1]

Great in-depth video. Helped me decide on the 200- 800. Will give my R7 a little more time as I was considering selling it. Your pics look great.

[@WILDALASKA]

Thanks. That the Elusive Alaska Cubacabra !!!! 😜 It was just someone's dog. Popular bit of beach to walk along on the Homer Spit where I was sitting on a Friday afternoon (sunset for us @ 3:45PM)

[@Elco63]

Very nice in depth video for the RF 200-800! But this is not a fair comparison withe the 100-500 L lens. With or without the converter. And I think it can't be, because the lenses are so different. So I see this (excellent) video more of an explanation of the possibilities of the 200-800 and I think you dit a great job with it. For me the 100-500 is a more welcome lens for a lot of wildlife photography for several reasons. The extender only for some special occasions when I need a very long tele.

[@WILDALASKA]

🥺

[@JordanCait]

Hi Scott, I enjoyed your thorough and practical reviews. Please tell me more about the lens cap that you prefer for the 200-800. Thank you.

[@WILDALASKA]

www.zemlinphoto.com Zemlin is the brand. They don't have the 200-800 yet but will im sure soon.

[@jacqueslamarche2091]

Thank you. I have the same as you have and I love it. I juste did'nt know that I could get as low ISO as you go

[@WILDALASKA]

Great to hear!

[@jacqueslamarche2091]

@@WILDALASKA I tried the setting for my R7 that you sayd, and I never catch so perfectly since that. Thank you again

[@AndrewCCM]

Waiting on the R5 test with it next! I expect that it'll hold up quite well with the 45mpix sensor. My "long" lenses are currently a EF 400F2.8L IS V2 and a EF 100-400L V2 (Paired with R5 and R7). Needless to say, this 200-800 is high on my list for next lens. Thanks again for the excellent videos. I never miss one.

[@WILDALASKA]

Thanks for watching. So far it's a great pair to my prime for the zoom factor and that reach is nice.

[@robertbrown6060]

Thank you, this is really useful. I’m glad you came out with a definitive view with regard to the IQ comparing the lens with the 100 x 500 plus TC. I think I’m edging towards the 200 - 800 now but it’s not going to be widely available in the UK well into this year I think.

[@WILDALASKA]

Yes the supply is low on this lens it looks like. My local shop here in Anchorage still hast gotten a second copy yet.

[@adventureswithduck7400]

A well done video, thank you for braving the cold to educate us on this new lens. Looking forward to the R5 review with it. I'm thinking of adding that camera to my bag as well

[@WILDALASKA]

Many thanks!

[@bohyahsnacks]

Another great review. Looking forward to the 200-800 on the R5 review. I may be selling my 100-500 when I get my 200-800, judging by what your showing. The 1.4x tele just bugs me on the 100-500.

[@WILDALASKA]

Thanks

[@2224jnk]

Scott - Can you discuss the camera profile concept more in a future video? I only process with Lightroom and just use the enhance denoise feature. Am I missing out? I have FOMO!!

[@WILDALASKA]

you can download dxo purer and try it out. It has a 30 day trial

[@scooter5193]

Great review. Looks to be a good lens but like you point out it’s either one or the other. If I were to choose between the two lens I’d probably go with the 200-800. I enjoyed watching - thank you.

[@WILDALASKA]

yup. Just depends on how and what you shoot really.

[@raylo1017]

Great in-depth video!!! Very truthful and informative. I appreciate your efforts. My questions is where do I get an Arca Swiss plate for this??

[@WILDALASKA]

Good question! If you mean replacement foot as getting the foot off will take work. A plate to add to the bottom are pretty common though

[@raylo1017]

@@WILDALASKA Oh what I meant was, the ARCA Swiss plate you have added on the foot. I’m looking for one to add on my 200-800mm. As of now, I have a small one, just need a longer one. Which do you have?

[@stephenthompson1998]

Excellent work Scott. The lens is sold to me, however I don’t think I want that weight on a long walk or if I can hold it steady enough for still photography. Think I will bide my time

[@WILDALASKA]

👍

[@Running-withscissors]

This was pretty helpful. Thank you. I have been using the Sigma Sport 150-600mm for hunting a herding dog trials, with a Canon R3. I've been thinking of renting the 200-800 f/9 for when the trials start again in the fall. I am still a bit concerned about the f/9 as it can get pretty dark here in Florida, with a heavy cloud we often see in the afternoons. I "think" the R3 can handle the higher ISO without noise becoming too much of and issue as I really can't shoot slower than /2000 much of the time. There's plenty of slow to moderate "action" interspersed with sudden charging dogs in both sports.

[@WILDALASKA]

If you set a 1.4tc on your sigma its same aperture as the 200-800. Plus the AF is somewhat iffy with the sigma lens and the 200-800 AF will be night and day in comparison. And yes rent it and see what you think. You can shoot some pretty low shutter speeds also with the IS of the body and lens which is nice.

[@robertharvey2580]

Thank you for the detailed review. I always enjoy your videos… I only ask the rhetorically because I would never put anyone on the spot: I wonder if Cannon has a marketing issue with the 100-500? Where’s the value at this point?

[@WILDALASKA]

Thanks. No I think Canon is ok with the marketing. And I can see it in the comments. The 100-500 market and the 200-800 market are pretty separate needs and preference. The 200-800 crowd I think live in that 400-800 world and the 100-500 crowd will work in the 100-400 world more. And there the whole L glass camp. I used to be in that L glass camp a lot. You get what you pay for thing until Canon released the RF 100-400 and RF 35 1.8 lenses. Made me look at all the new glass more. But in all honest comparison. The performance and IQ is close.

[@robertharvey2580]

@@WILDALASKA I appreciate your honest and objective insights. Helps a lot when you’re just getting into photography.

[@stpetal]

Excellent videos all around, both part 1 and part 2. Would love to see your DXO PureRaw pre-Lightroom import workflow in a video sometime! (I'll check the channel too to see if maybe you already produced that video and I just missed it.)

[@WILDALASKA]

I did on a while back. My editing workflow is still very close to this but the editing process has changed some since then. kzbin.info/www/bejne/qYK3dqSmZpdshJo

[@stpetal]

@@WILDALASKA Thanks! I'll make sure to watch it!

[@dbv11]

Love the videos! What’s your preferred cold weather (0 or below) outerwear? Thanks!

[@WILDALASKA]

Warm ones 🤣 Really just dress in layers. base layer thermal, shirt, sweatshirt, then a coat, and maybe a rain or waterproof layer over that if needed.

[@boriscareaway5862]

Awesome video as always, thank you! What's your preferred function on the control ring for R7 body?

[@WILDALASKA]

Thanks and think I covered it (its all a blur at this point), but in stills its for subject detect on/off and video its for zebras on/off

[@boriscareaway5862]

@@WILDALASKAthanks, appreciated!

[@edwardmorton7246]

Great video! You sold me on the 200-800

[@WILDALASKA]

👍

[@dscottstoness2436]

Great video. I have the 200-400 and am not much interested in the 100-500 because of it (slower and lessor iq). But the price and reach of this zoom and its size just seem to make it a perfect complement to my 600/f4, 200-400 and 100-400's. Thank you.

[@WILDALASKA]

👍

[@MarzioMoretti-x3w]

Thank you so much for the great review. HI.

[@WILDALASKA]

Thanks for watching!

[@LaytonParham]

Keep the videos coming! Thank You!!!

[@WILDALASKA]

👍

[@Kellysher]

I’m fairly new to wildlife photography. R5 100-500 shooter. Maybe it’s strength or technique, but I don’t shoot below 800 shutter most times. I do struggle in lowlight. I’d love to see a video handholding this gear in low light at low shutter speeds. I own the 1.4 tc but rarely use it. I got it for reach across a local wetland,but have discovered that’s still not long enough without a lot of cropping. I’m not sure how to estimate the distance. Maybe it’s just too far due to atmospheric conditions. Maybe it’s “beyond stupid range!” Maybe a teaching video those challenges. Love the gear reviews, but I do appreciate teaching segments too!

[@WILDALASKA]

All the work in this video is handheld, video and stills. The previous video is using the 200-800 at very low shutter speeds. kzbin.info/www/bejne/iYbGmZmIetibbrc The EXIF data under metadata in LR will give you your focal distance

[@VooDooZg]

Very nice review - great job !! Fun fact - for difference in price you can get R7 for nothing and some more money - price of 100-500 + 1.4 vs 200-800 and R7 and some more :)

[@WILDALASKA]

Good tip!

[@petervanvleet8215]

Great review! I didn't see any shots of birds in flight (take off or landing), which is what I use my 100-550 w/1.4 for. Is there any difference w/the 200-800 with those higher frame-rate shots and maintaining focus, even while moving the lens to track the subject? Or for something like a hummingbird?

[@WILDALASKA]

It works the same. No real issues on BIF. I was tracking American dippers at that stupid distance and they were in focus. too far away for a good shot, but it tracked and got them in focus. Fast small bird in flight

[@GB-AK]

Thanks for the in-depth review of this lens. Although it took me a few days to go through the entire video, you did a good job of reviewing it in the field. To me image quality is the most important, what good is 800mm if the images are no good. You showed that it does have very good image quality and good image stabilization. I think the ergonomics are good for a 200-800 lens. To get quality photos at 800mm is going to take some glass that will add weight to the lens and I think the weight for this lens is good considering what it is. Holding it felt good in the hands and I thought the zoom ring felt good (not too loose). Overall, this looks to be a very good lens for the price. Thanks again for your review.

[@WILDALASKA]

Thanks Greg. Hope you are enjoying the hat

[@JeffandLeslie]

Thanks for posting Scott.

[@WILDALASKA]

👍

[@alcosound]

Thanks for your efforts and sharing of the results. I suppose that using the mechanical shutter or the 1st electronic shutter mode should fix that? As an air shows fan, I am planning on using either my EF 400/5.6L lens or the EF 100-400L II zoom, plus 1.4TC II with the r7 in order to get more reach than my 80D dSLR. Maybe the 200-800 lens will be my next acquisition in the summer, I don't know... (still waiting for that darned EF EOS-R adapter to arrive...)

[@WILDALASKA]

👍

[@PB-qd1il]

Thanks for your videos Part 1 and Part 2. Can you tell me which application you are taking because i saw that you can read FOCUS DISTANCE and this would be help me to make the right settings on my Sigma 150-600mm Contemporary , i completely disalined it with the usb dock... I bought the RF 200-800mm because of that 😥 but i don't have any regret. Thanks for helping me with the name of your application.

[@WILDALASKA]

It's just in Lightroom. Click the gear icon and you can add ALL kinds of information to the EXIF window. I like it because I can just distance and aperture to learn more about what looks good and doesn't at what distances.

[@jTreaks5198]

Wish we could actually get the 200-800 lens from Canon, on backorder and probably months away from delivery still. I just purchased both the Canon 100-500 and 1.4x extender in like new condition for $2400. Hopefully, Canon can start fulfilling orders of the 200-800 in the near future.

[@WILDALASKA]

True. I got lucky on my copy and still waited almost a month. Looks like they are still very rare

[@sebastienmeunier1643]

Great review! Thanks for sharing! I just started out with bird/wildlife photography a few months ago and my biggest challenge right now as a Canadian is finding gloves or mittens that are warm enough so I don't need to get my fingers amputated after a few hours in the field yet will also allow me enough dexterity to operate the buttons and dials on the camera and get enough feel to know when I am actually pressing a button or not. Do you have any wisdom to share on that subject? :)

[@WILDALASKA]

Mittens that flip open to let your fingers free are the best for sub zero

[@sebastienmeunier1643]

@@WILDALASKA Thanks! Do you have a particular brand you recommend? They seem to be very hard to find where I live.

[@mikebrownhill4662]

Thanks for a very in-depth and comprehensive comparison between these two lenses. I found the videos very useful and enjoyed watching them. I agree to an extent that that the aperture limitations of the 200-800 are somewhat overblown. But I would say they still have some validity because the lens does force you to change the way you work if, like me in the UK, you often have to work with very poor light. I think the lens is really going to struggle for birds in flight on a bleak mid-winter day, for example. In good light, I expect it will be a superb option at the price. Depth of field is another area where I think the lens will make people rethink how they work - getting closer to their subject and choosing scenes where the background is distant. I'm used to using a 600mm f4 prime, so I'm lucky in that regard, but I am looking for a new walk around lens. I think I'll probably get more use out of the 100-500 in most situations, but I might treat myself to both lenses to cover my options - especially when I'm working with water birds. I know I'm fortunate to have this choice, and if I had to choose one lens I think I'd go for the 100-500.

[@WILDALASKA]

Thanks. I use my 500 f4 as my favorite wildlife lens. And the 200-800 fits the bill better for me as the walk around vs the 100-500. That lens always stayed at home or in the bag unless I had guest shooters out with me. But this new lens goes out with me more. That's what I have noticed. And yes I covered that in the video that on iffy light days you will have to rethink how you shoot with this lens. And here in AK our light is as bad or worst than what you have in the UK. Always raining or snowing here and the mountains cover the light in the winter and we get no direct light sometimes for days. Such a joy lol. Happy shooting

[@birdingisgood]

Great video, whit loads of good stuff, but I'm really waiting for an autofocus-in flight review, will you do something like that? :) Either with just the 200-800 or in comparison with the 100-500 (+tc).

[@WILDALASKA]

In flight shots work fine. It will be hard to show EVF footage as with canon, once you hook up the external recorder, you can't see through the evf anymore and you are trying to track the bird with a lcd on top of the camera. Pain in the butt, yet we'll see what we can do. You can see the video tracking of the eagle in flight. So image tracking is pretty much the same.

[@xtaki]

am i the only one who is scared about the snow moving in the lens hood? great review anyway :) thanks!

[@WILDALASKA]

Thanks. LOL I saw that when editing the video. The snow was sooooo dry it would have just slide off the lens. Scooped it up forms he table looks like 🤪

[@northernfocuscreative-nfc-2511]

What lens cover did you go with on this lens as an improvement to Canon’s, thax

[@WILDALASKA]

lens hood? still waiting on a couple folks to start making them

[@northernfocuscreative-nfc-2511]

Roger That, my bad. I guess I’ll have to wait too. Glad you guys are ok after that accident with your truck.🙏🏻Love your vids Canon specific ✅. ✌🏻Yukon John

[@northernfocuscreative-nfc-2511]

@@WILDALASKAlens cap i mean, lol

[@thelookoflifefilms]

Did you compare them on a Full Frame camera? I have an R5MKII and am debating which lens to get

[@WILDALASKA]

yes there is a video before or after this one with the R5. I personally prefer the 200-800. But everyone should rent both and test for themselves.

[@thelookoflifefilms]

@@WILDALASKA Thanks Ive actually rented both a few times and still on the fence but your point about price and the aperture on the 100-500 has led me to the 200-800

[@DanielFazzari]

Hi Scott, I'm confused about the section of "What else is out there." Isn't the RF 100-500 (at 500mm) on the R7 an 800mm equivalent at f/7.1?

[@WILDALASKA]

Talking about actual Focal range not effective focal range. If that helps.

[@DanielFazzari]

@WILDALASKA yes, that helps, thank you!

[@vimalneha]

This video is the best video I ever saw on the topic. This directly helps me... 100-500 is great for portraits also that is not that convenient with 200-800. It would be extremely useful if you could mention how far an object is when 800 mm is being used or 1280 on R7 that fills the frame on R7. Say 100 m away eagle how much it fills the frame. I am in the process of coming to Canon from Nikon. R7 + 24-105 F4 (both decided)+ but100-500 or 200-800 I am still undecided. Like shooting from closeup to wildlife.

[@WILDALASKA]

Thanks. Photo Pills app has all this calculation. You can put in subject size and distance, aperture, etc to get this calls. The Eagle pair int his vide and in the last were 52 meters from me according to the EXIF info on the camera if that helps. And I shot it waist the 100-500 with and without the TC and the same on the 200-800 with and without the TC

[@vimalneha]

@@WILDALASKA Many thanks for this information. It was quite helpful. I am seeing all of your detailed videos to get the key understanding. Thanks for your efforts!🙏

[@davidbarr9475]

I'm really getting excited to one day owning the 200mm to 800mm. Nit to bother ya with it but do you still have plans on reviewing the lense on the R6 mk.2? No hurry. Just wondering since that's what I own. Great job Scott

[@WILDALASKA]

I will probably just dot he R8 which is the same sensor and guts minus the IBIS.

[@tonyw3250]

I think it's a great lens for the price, it would really annoy me that I can't take the foot off though as I never use a tripod, why canon didn't make that removable is unbelievable. Still I can't see me selling my 100-500 with the 1.4x to get it, If I had plenty of cash I'd own both. Fantastic review

[@WILDALASKA]

thx

[@dougsturgess2651]

Hi Scott. Thanks for these reviews. They are helpful. I was hoping you could offer some advice. I'm going to Svalbard next August and will be one of 12 photographers on a ship shooting polar bears and walruses that, from what I hear, could be 300-500' away. A Nikon friend of mine just returned from the same ship and had great success with their prime 600 6.3 lens. He recommend I use a Canon equivalent. I have 2 R5 bodies, the RF 100-500 and the RF 400 2.8 and both teleconverters. I would love to have the RF 600 f/4 but that's $13K. I want to do my best shooting on this trip & return with amazing images. Do you have any suggestions re: optimal lenses to take? Thank you.

[@WILDALASKA]

what you got is more than enough really.

[@mazeson]

Excellent video! Having 100-500 already, I had to wait to see with a 200-800, and see how things goes. I really appreciate the minimum focusing distance of 100-500. How do you experience this on the 200-800?

[@WILDALASKA]

The min focus is ok especially with the r7 as you can't get that close to something and keep it in frame lol. I didn't once run into that, the subject is too close. I will at some point, but not since i've had the lens. And it's the only lens I have used since besides the 100-500 just due to testing. I run into it a bit on the EF 500 MKII, so yes im guessing I will at some point on the new lens. If you want a cool walk around with very close min focus check out the RF 100-400. Also se if you can rent the 200-800 first. Always my advice.

[@FredrikStrom-jo2hs]

Very good 👍 rewiew

[@WILDALASKA]

Thanks 👍

[@Media-oq9ux]

Scott, are you able to use auto focus, tracking your subject when at 120fps slo mo on the R7? I have been happy for 10 yrs with a canon crop 7DII. Why not go crop again , R7 and save some money and get some reach vs the R6II or R5? I ask myself !

[@WILDALASKA]

All the video of the animals in these 2 videos were with the R7 1080p @ 120FPS. So yes. It is a VERY good wildlife video camera.

[@Media-oq9ux]

thank you sir. @@WILDALASKA

[@CrisURace]

What's really cool about r7 video mode is that you have 4k60 CROP, it makes some insane zoom videos with it.

[@WILDALASKA]

👍

[@KingLoopie1]

I like the detail in the video even if it's too long for my taste. (unless I have the time like today...) But I just don't see how it could be made any shorter and maintain continuity... Looking forward to more about this 200-800 VS 100-500 lens comparison! And more about that side of Alaska. I spent a winter north of Prudhoe /Deadhorse out on the ice in the late 70's and haven't been back since. No pics of that though. The damn camp attendant threw out my cheap Kodak pocket cam one day while I was in the field and had forgotten to take it with... 🙄

[@WILDALASKA]

Yup they dopnt let you take pics up there on the job sites. 😕 I did split this up in 2 pieces and I cut a LOT out of this video and still ran over 40 minutes. I do include the chapters, so you can just skip to the parts you want to see and revisit again to watch things like the image review when you have more time. Thanks for watching and leaving a comment. Happy New Year 🎉

[@AndrewCCM]

@@WILDALASKA Just to counter... I LOVE long form video from the content creators that make good content. You're definitely in that category and I often find myself wishing most of your content was even longer! LOL