Canon RF 100-500 vs EF 100-400 II | Is it WORTH UPGRADING to the RF 100-500? Bird Photography Review

[Music] 100 to 400 or 100 to 500 hi guys and welcome to this video i'm happy you're joining me today if you're new to my channel please make sure to hit that subscribe button and all of you please hit that like button under the video it really helps the algorithm to figure out that this is valuable content i have two very interesting lenses here with me today the 100 to 400 version 2 and the 100 to 500 millimeters rf lens the 100 to 400 version 2 has been one of the best and most popular zoom lenses on the market and now there's a new kit on the block the 100 to 500 millimeter rf lens if you've watched my last video reviewing the 100 to 500 millimeter lens you know that i'm really really in love with that lens so i was really interested to see how would the 100 to 500 compare to the 100 to 400 in the field and could you possibly just add an extender to the 100 to 400 and get a similar lens at slightly cheaper costs with similar image quality the first thing you notice when you grab these lenses is that the 100 to 500 feels lighter than the 100 to 400 version 2 even though they're pretty much the same size when it comes to how they function both lenses work essentially the same they just have a nice big zoom ring at the front and then just zoom out to 400 or 500 millimeters on the 100 to 500 rf lens so i'm not going to go into too many details of what the lenses do or what buttons they have because they're very similar and i've already done an in-depth review on the 100 to 500 so check that out for some more information what really interested me when looking at these two lenses and i think that's what interested you as well especially if you're already owning 100 to 400 is it worth upgrading from this lens to that lens or could you possibly buy a 100 to 400 maybe even used and get a much cheaper lens than a brand new 100 to 500 when you adapt this lens with the adapter to like a r5 or r6 [Music] [Music] do [Music] so [Music] so i got a lot of really interesting results for you that i want to share with you now so the first image here is of the cape baron goose and some really nice light with the r5 and the 100 to 500 millimeter lens and when we zoom into that we just see that amazing sharpness and detail of this lens right on the eye in all this amazing feather detail all in all a really nice image then here the next image is 100 to 400 on the r5 at 400 millimeters and if we zoom into that without the extender just at 400 millimeters the image quality is actually pretty good as well and then we can look at these images side by side as well and straight away we can see the difference between 400 and 500 millimeters as well on the left hand side the 500 millimeter the head of the goose is significantly larger in the frame and if we zoom in to 100 i think we can see that both of the lenses deliver great sharpness and detail but overall i think there's a slight edge in image quality when it comes to the 100 to 500 millimeter lens so the next image is of the cab baron goes with 100 to 400 and the 1.4 extender stop down to f11 why do i stop down with 2f11 if i use the 1.4 extender on a zoom lens it's pretty simple there's a decent increase in sharpness and image quality if you stop down at least one stop from wide open fa to f11 so at f11 the image quality was much better than wide open and f8 so this actually is quite important to remember when we compare these two lenses as well because realistically it's not really f8 560 millimeters worth is f 7.1 500 millimeters more realistically if you want to get the maximum sharpness it's f 11 560 millimeters versus f 7.1 100 to 500 millimeters so there's a slight edge that goes to the 100 to 500 millimeter lens because it's just a lot more wide open when it comes to getting the ultimate image quality yes you can shoot this lens wide open at f 8 with the 1.4 extender but the sharpness is just not the same level as it is if you stop one stop down so if we zoom into this image now we can see that the sharpness is still good but if we flick forward to the 400 millimeter image we can see that there's quite a decent drop in sharpness and image quality overall of this lens with no extender and then this lens with the 1.4 extender even stopped down and if we compare the 560 millimeter shot to the 500 millimeter shot on the left hand side now i think we can see that there's an image quality advantage on side of the 100 to 500 millimeter lens compared to the 100 to 400 millimeter lens at 560 millimeters even stop down you can definitely see that you're using an extender and the image quality is not as good as the 100 to 500 now without any extender the image quality is pretty similar but putting an extender onto this lens shows quite a drop in image quality if you compare to the bare lens over there here's another image of the cape baron goose with a nice blue ocean background and this time i decided i want to use the two times extender on the 100 to 400 and also shoot the goose with the two times extender on the 100 to 500 millimeter lens so 800 millimeters versus a thousand millimeters and this is where i couldn't really get much good sharpness on the 100 to 400 with the two times extender it still delivered some decent images but overall the images were all a little bit soft and if we zoom in to this image here we can see that there's still okay sharpness there and some nice details around but the image quality over there isn't comparable to the lens with the 1.4 extender or no extender and then here's an image of the same goes at a thousand millimeters if we zoom into that we can see that the 1000 millimeters the 100 to 500 with the two times extender definitely holds up the quality a little bit more so we can look at these side by side as well and see that overall the image quality is just a lot better of the 100 to 500 with the two times extender compared to the 100 to 400 with the two times extender so when it comes to the use of extenders i think with all zoom lenses you have to be careful ideally you don't want to use an extender on a zoom lens using an extender on the zoom lens is always a compromise to some degree extenders are really made to be used on fast and expensive large prime lenses and that's where the image quality loss is basically not visible at all they work quite well on these lenses but they do come with quite a decent loss of image quality autofocus speed and autofocus accuracy as well so when considering all these lenses with the extender the 1.4 enter two times extenders i think it's important to know that they work with them but they're always a compromise and ideally you're using the lenses without extenders so that's where for me personally the difference of the 100 millimeters actually becomes quite important because i can get super clean really crisp sharp 500 millimeters on this lens and i have to use the extender on the 100 to 400 which means i have to stop down and actually have to physically put on an extender to get to that 500 millimeter range and sometimes in the field that might already take too long and you might miss the shot and because of the decrease in image quality with the extender you also don't want to leave your extender on the 100 to 400 all the time because then if you zoom back for instance and you still have your extender on you're still suffering from an image quality loss let's say you're shooting at 300 millimeters zoomed out with the extender versus shooting at 300 millimeters without an extender you will see a big difference in image quality so in my opinion leaving an extender on these zoom lenses at all times is a mistake and you're sacrificing image quality so if you're always shooting on the long end i think there's quite a big advantage of the 100 to 500 millimeter lens when it comes to using extenders the 100 to 400 actually has one distinct advantage and that is that you don't have to zoom out or do anything to attach an extender so the 1.4 extender slides on just like that if i want to do the same thing on the 100 to 500 i actually have to zoom out because physically the extender doesn't fit in the lens in the zoomed in position so i have to zoom out to over 300 millimeters put the extender on and then i can also not zoom back any further than those 300 millimeters so that's the only thing where the 100 to 400 really wins because this is so much more convenient having the lens like that and it's actually quite annoying in the field to have the lens always stuck in this 300 millimeter zoomed out position when you put on the extender so in that regard the 100 to 400 is definitely the better design next i took the lenses to my trusted yellow robins in the rainforest the first thing i noticed at that spot where i had previously only shot with 500 or 600 millimeters is that when i put 100 to 400 millimeter lens in and zoomed to 400 millimeters then it felt quite short so here's the image at 400 millimeters you can see the background is still quite not dissolved and compared to the 560 millimeters for instance that's quite a dramatic difference in focal length so overall the first impression was that 400 millimeters in the rainforest would be quite a challenge simply because i couldn't really get much closer to the bird than i already was so would have to zoom in or crop in a little bit more but overall clicking on here we see the image quality is quite decent at these high iso with the bad light in the rainforest and here we have a comparison now between the 100 to 500 at 500 millimeters if we zoom into that we see some pretty nice sharpness overall and here's the same shot on the 100 to 400 with the 1.4 extender wide open at f 8 and 560 millimeters and as you can see the sharpness is still good but looking at them side by side we can see that both lenses delivered decent sharpness under these challenging conditions but there's an advantage in sharpness of the lens that doesn't have any extender on it and that holds true for every lens whether it's a big expensive prime lens or zoom lenses like glaze a lens without an extender will generally outperform a lens with an extender it's just physics essentially you're adding more glass to it it's a bit more hard for the autofocus and image quality just suffers so overall in all the tests i definitely noticed that the 100 to 400 with the extender even in perfect conditions could never quite reach the level of the 100 to 500 when it came to image quality it was still very good but in all these images you can definitely see a little bit of a difference and lastly i just wanted to show you a few gang gang shots here's the 100 to 400 on the r6 at 300 millimeters zooming in quite nice sharpness and then here we have a shot zoomed into 500 millimeters all the way for nice portrait on the r5 and if we zoom into that we just see this insane image quality and sharpness and even on close-ups i've never quite gotten to the same level of sharpness and just brilliance in the images with the 100 to 400 it's an amazing lens it's really really good but there's just something about the 100 to 500 that has that brilliance and extra sharpness in the images that i just couldn't get on the same level at the 100 to 400. here's a closer up shot with the r6 and the 100 to 400 at 400 millimeters this time and zooming into that the image quality is really nice again but just not the same sort of level as the 100 to 500 here's a shot a bit zoomed out with the 100 to 400 and the 1.4 extender on and we can see again it's good sharpness it looks very nice and if i didn't have to 100 to 500 i would be pretty happy with that shot but if we look at the similar bird on the same branch the same tree with 100 to 500 at 340 millimeters you can see that it's just that bit more edge bit more sharpness bit more brilliance in the files and side by side i think this becomes quite obvious again the 100 to 400 with the 1.4 extender delivered good quality in difficult conditions and 100 to 500 on the right hand side just delivered great quality and lastly there's these cool shots of these eastern rosellas that dwight found while he was walking around with the r6 and 100 to 400 millimeter lens and he told me afterwards this was one of those occasions where he really wished he had that 100 to 500 millimeter lens on because these images are nice at 400 millimeters but he would have really loved to be able to zoom in a little bit more to get that bird a little bit bigger in the frame both of us me and white felt whenever we were swapping between the two lenses that having an extra 100 millimeters available is a distinct advantage in the field [Music] if you're asking yourself how to take amazing bird images and how to edit them so they look absolutely amazing i would highly recommend that you check out my videos and ebooks down there in the description i know that will help you to become a better bird photographer and i teach you step by step how i edit my images check this out and make your own images look absolutely amazing [Music] so when it comes to performance in the field without any extenders as you've seen with examples as well both of these lenses deliver fantastic image quality offer you great flexibility you have nice really short minimum focusing distance good image stabilization also have really nice and fast and accurate autofocus i didn't notice much of a difference between the two lenses other than the 100 to 400 being a little bit heavier the image stabilization was still good it's a little bit better on the 100 to 500 but it's not something that you really notice much of a difference in the field when it comes to the autofocus speed the 100 to 500 is a little bit faster a little bit more accurate but not really something that you would notice straight away so without extenders the lenses are similar but the 100 to 500 has the distinct advantage of having an extra 100 millimeters of reach that doesn't sound like that much at first but when you're in the field and you can't physically get closer to your subject an extra 100 millimeters can sometimes make quite a big difference and can be a real game changer in certain situations and yes you can add an extender to the 100 to 400 millimeter lens but that comes with its own drawback like you have to stop down to get the best image quality you're losing a stop of light your autofocus slows down a bit and your image quality takes a hit so with the 1.4 extender attached the image quality at 560 millimeters at f8 or f11 is just not comparable anymore to the 100 to 500 millimeter lens wide open at 500 millimeters so in that regard the 100 to 500 millimeter lens definitely outperforms the 100 to 400 millimeter lens is that enough to spend a lot of extra money on upgrading from your 100 to 400 to 100 to 500 that's very hard for me to tell personally i didn't own a 100 to 400 so it was a really easy choice to get the 100 to 500 and i just love using that lens in the field if you already have a hundred to four hundred then it becomes a much more tricky question and i don't really know the answer maybe you can tell me what you think you're gonna do if you already own 100 to 400 you're switching to the mirrorless system are you going to stick with the 100 to 400 or you might thinking about upgrading or have you upgraded let me know in the comments personally and i would find it quite a difficult choice whether i would keep my 100 to 400 or whether i would want to pay a bunch more money to get the 100 to 500 overall i think in the end i would probably lean towards getting the 100 to 500 because it has that extra 100 millimeter at a slightly lighter weight so that can be really really nice to have in the field and overall the 100 to 500 also performs pretty well with the extenders you also take a hit in image quality but it definitely performs better than with the extenders than the 100 to 400 the 100 to 400 works alright with the extenders whereas the 100 to 500 still gives me some pretty decent results when the 100 to 500 come out there were a lot of people that said f 7.1 that's rubbish you could never use the lens that wide open at f 7.1 with in the field i found that to be completely negligible the difference between 5.6 and 7.1 is basically non-existence it's one click on your eyes or wheel and you have to same look same shutter speed without any problem and i much prefer this smaller lighter size of the 500 millimeters at 7.1 then getting a bigger heavier lens that might be wide open at 5.6 let me know your thoughts on the 100 to 400 and 100 to 500 are you going to buy 100 to 400 get 100 to 500 stick with your 100 to 400 let me know in the comments i'm really looking forward to what you have to say about these lenses and what you thought about this video give me a thumbs up if you're not a subscriber yet please hit that button and i will see you in my next video very soon bye hey

Channel: Jan Wegener

Views: 29,505

Rating: 4.9398084 out of 5

Keywords: bird photography, jan wegener, birding, birds, wildlife photography, which camera to buy, bird photography equipment, bird photography gear, birding gear, birds in flight, eos R5, Canon EOS R5, animal eye AF, animal eye autofocus, R5, flight photography, EOS R6, Canon R6, R6 Settings, canon mirrorless, RF 600 IS STM, RF 600 F11, F11, RF lens, RF 800 F11, 100-500, zoom lens, RF 100-500, Canon RF 100-500 L IS, EF 100-400 II, Canon EF 100-400 L IS II, 100-500 vs 100-400

Id: dyHodbYrP4k

Length: 20min 39sec (1239 seconds)

Published: Fri Apr 09 2021