Canon RF 100-500mm REVIEW vs EF 100-400 - BEST telephoto zoom

hi i'm gordon from camera labs and this is my in-depth review of canon's rf 100 to 500 millimeter along telephoto zoom for the full-frame esr mirrorless system this video delves into the performance and quality of the longest reaching rf zoom to date and in particular how it compares to the older ef 100 to 400 millimeter which you can of course adapt very successfully to eos r bodies and from this point on when i mention this lens i'm talking about the latest mark ii version officially announced in july 2020 the rf 100 to 500 cost 2 699 us dollars or 2 899 british pounds making it 400 or 600 pounds more expensive than the earlier ef 100 to 400 so let's find out if it's worth spending the extra like my other reviews to date this video is sponsored by you dear viewer so if you find any of it useful the best way to support me is with a like and a follow so if you haven't already subscribed come on please give that button a click thanks now on with the video before anything else i updated my 100 to 500 and eos r5 body to the latest firmware available at the time of testing and this resolved some early issues with stabilization that's been reported so all of the results i'm going to show you in this video we're using version 1.1.1 for the r5 body and 1.0.7 for the lens be sure to update your body and lens to the latest firmware versions okay so here's the new rf100 500 on the left joined by the ef 100 400 on the right and the first thing you'll notice is just how close they are in length 208 mil for the rf versus 193 for the ef when both are fully retracted making the new lens only 15mm longer but once you add the adapter to mount the ef lens on an esr body the combination actually becomes a little bit longer than the native rf version but the take home here is both will occupy roughly the same space in your bag despite the new model zooming 100 millimeters longer once you pick them up though you'll notice a bigger physical difference is the build material the older ef 100 400 has a mostly metal barrel versus mostly engineering plastic on the rf model now this is no different to other high-end ef versus rf lenses and while you may assume that metal is superior modern plastics may actually perform better now i've not dropped or banged either end so i can't say whether one is more resilient than the other but canon's adopted engineering plastics for all of its rf lenses so far without complaint the change of materials allows the 100 to 500 to actually weigh a little less than the 100 to 400 even more so when you take the adapter into account plus it's less cool to the touch which could be a benefit in very cold conditions both lenses are weather sealed including rubber grommets at the lens mounts and both walls are supplied with padded zipper ball carrying cases the rf 100 to 500 features four rings on the barrel starting with the customisable clicky control ring closest to the mount followed by a fairly narrow but smooth manual focusing ring like other rf lenses there's no focus distance markings on the barrel as these are instead displayed graphically in the viewfinder or on the screen on the other side of the controls is a twistable ring to adjust the stiffness of the zoom like the similar ring on the earlier 100-400 this is more of a clutch than a lock still allowing you to zoom even at the stiff position but reducing the risk of creep when the lenses are pointed straight up or down and the barrel slowly retracts or extends under its own weight now mechanisms inevitably loosen over time but even when set to the loosest position my 100 to 500 sample didn't suffer at all from creep meanwhile at the end of the lens is a large zoom ring which extends the barrel by 90 millimeters and the filter thread remains 77. like other canon l lenses it's supplied with a hood and this one includes a sliding window allowing you to turn circular polarizing or variable nd filters coincidentally like the rf 70 to 200 the hood is coloured white like the high-end ef super telephotos while a rubber coating around the outer rim allows you to stand it upright with less chance of slipping the lens is also supplied with a fully removable tripod collar and foot which allows the barrel to rotate freely within great for switching to the portrait orientation without removing the setup although i do wish canon made clearer marks on the barrel or perhaps provided a click to better confirm those 90 degree intervals for comparison here's the ef 100 400 mounted to the sr5 via the canon adapter pushing the body further away from the tripod mounting notice the absence of the rf control ring and the tapered style of the focusing ring meanwhile the lens extends by 77 millimeters when zoomed to the longest focal length and canon supplies this model with a black hood again with a filter window but lacking that rubber coating on the end the tripod collar is a little different too with the collar and a basic foot permanently mounted to the lens adding to its weight although the lower foot portion can be removed as i turn the camera to portrait you'll also see the focus distance window on the lens this model doesn't support the digital scale on the esr cameras taking a closer look at the control panel of the rf-100-500 you'll see essentially the same four switches as the 100-400 with a focus limiter of three meters to infinity and the choice of three stabilization modes mode 1 stabilizes in all directions all of the time mode 2 attempts to recognize panning and disable stabilization at right angles to the panning direction while mode 3 works like mode 2 but only corrects at the point of exposure and therefore may be better suited to tracking erratic subjects as always it's a case of experimenting i actually ended up sticking with mode one most the time even for panning when following birds in flight as i found the stabilization beneficial when initially composing at these longer focal lengths to test the stabilization here's the view with the rf 100 500 on the eos r5 at 500 mil with all stabilization disabled where the view is understandably very wobbly and now with the is switch on the barrel enabled this is mode one that you're looking at and like all canon lenses with is on the r5 and r6 it uses a combination of sensor shift that's ibis and optical stabilization note the plus symbol next to the hand icon indicating that this is canon's best is technology in action although the length of 500mm means you're unlikely to enjoy absolute locked-on steadiness when handheld in terms of effectiveness for still photos canon claims the lens is good for five stops of compensation on unstabilized bodies like the r and rp or six stops when used alongside ibis on the r5 and r6 in my tests i needed a shutter speed of at least five hundredths of a second to hold a sharp result at 500 mil without stabilization in mode 1 i enjoyed perfectly sharp results at a 60th of a second and very good results as slow as 1 8 of a second giving me three to six stops of compensation in practice i'll show you how it looks for video later on and just briefly here's the control panel on the ef 100 400 when adjusting these switches you'll notice the cooler touch to the metal barrel of this model okay that's enough the physical tour so now let's see what these lenses can do in practice to illustrate the range of the rf 100 to 500 in action here's a landscape filmed in 4k hq using the r5 at 100 mil before zooming into 500 millimeter allowing you to get close to distant details to compare the range against the ef model here's the rf 100 to 500 again there's a still photo taken at 100 mil and now for the ef 100 to 400 also at 100 mil now don't always assume that the same quoted focal length on two different lenses will actually deliver the same coverage in practice but when focused on a distant subject these two lenses are sharing essentially the same field of view when set to 100 mil now for the ef 100 400 at 400 millimeter its longest focal length followed by the 100 to 500 at 500 mil where it's obviously capturing a tighter field of view if you scale the first shot you'll see the new lens is indeed delivering 25 percent tighter coverage as you'd expect so the practice thankfully confirms the numbers of course there's nothing stopping you from just cropping into the 400 mil shot to deliver the same field of view as 500 but you'd obviously be left with fewer pixels to play with on the eos r5 the resolution of uncropped images starts at a maximum megapixels but falls to around 28 megapixels when you crop a 400mm image to match a 500mm field of view now that's a big reduction but on high-res bodies there's still loads of detail remaining i mean there's nothing wrong with 28 megapixels right on the left is a closer look at the 100 500 at 500 mil and on the right is the 100 to 400 at 400 but cropped and enlarged using final cut in the edit now obviously the shimmering from heat over this kind of distance reduces the potential quality of both results and it's another factor to consider when shooting over distances with long lenses but while the native 500ml on the left is resolving finer detail the scaled result on the right still looks pretty close if you want even more reach from the rf 100 to 500 you can fit either the rf 1.4 times or rf two times teleconverters extending the longest effective focal length to 700 or 1000 millimeter respectively annoyingly though the teleconverters will only work when the zoom is set between 300 and 500 millimeter as the rear elements physically get in the way at shorter focal lengths you won't even be able to mount the teleconverters unless the zoom is set to at least 300 mil and once fitted you won't be able to zoom wider without first removing them that's something to think about when transporting this combination if you want even longer than 500 millimeter in the native rf mount how about the rf600 or rf 800 millimeter repair of extending telephoto prime lenses with fixed f11 focal ratios now they're optically dimmer and lack the ability to zoom but they provide greater reach at a much lower price and they'll also work with the teleconverters albeit within the reduced autofocus area the extra reach of the rf 100 to 500 is a key benefit it has over the ef 100 400 but inevitably comes at the cost of a dimmer aperture at the long end i made this diagram to illustrate where the two lenses vary their apertures with the ef 100 400 in the top half and the rf 100 500 in the lower half as you can see the ef 100 to 400 operates at f 4.5 up to 135 mil before closing to f5 between 135 and 312 mil then to f 5.6 between 312 and 400 mil meanwhile the rf 100 500 offers its maximum f 4.5 aperture up to 151 mil then closest to f5 up to 254 mil then to f 5.6 up to 363 mil then to f 6.3 up to 472 mil before reducing to the minimum of f 7.1 up to 500 millimeter now there's plenty of overlap between these two lenses but while the newer rf model maintains f 4.5 for a little longer it begins to slow down much sooner that said at the long end the rf version only misses out on their 5.6 beyond 363 mil versus 400 on the ef so it's not a huge compromise by any means in terms of optical construction the rf 100 to 500 employs 20 elements in 14 groups with 9 aperture blades and a closest focusing distance of 90 centimeters when set to 100 mil or 1.2 meters when zoomed all the way to 500. compare that to the ef 100 to 400 mark ii which employs 21 elements in 16 groups has the same 9 aperture blades but will focus down to 98 centimeters at any zoom setting so if you're into close-ups the newer rf model will focus a tad closer when both are 100 mil but forces you to move a little further away as you zoom into longer focal lengths that said the ability to zoom to 500 mil compensates for the overall magnification as i'll now illustrate here's the older ef 100 400 fully zoomed into 400 from its closest focusing distance of 98 centimeters and now for comparison here's the rf 100 to 500 from the same distance but only zoomed to 270 mil which is the most you can zoom and still have a focused image from this distance coincidentally both lenses were working at their maximum aperture of f 5.6 at these focal lengths so from 98 centimeters away the ef 100 400 delivers greater magnification but if you position the rf 100 500 back to 1.2 meters and zoom into its longest focal length you'll actually achieve fractionally greater magnification canon quotes 0.33 times for the maximum magnification on the rf model and 0.31 times for the ef version which is as good as a draw in this regard and while the 100 to 500 aperture drops to f 7.1 when it's at 500 millimeter it is delivering more circular bokeh blobs here which may be preferred now you may not think about using long focal length zooms for macro shooting but many provide excellent close-up capabilities and from a distance where you're less likely to disturb insects or cast shadows on the subject these are a selection of close-up images i made with the rf 100 500 at 500 millimeter from its closest focusing distance of 1.2 meters where again it will roughly match what's possible with the ef 100 to 400 when it's at 400 mil from its slightly closer minimum distance if you have either of these lenses do give close-up photography a try it can be really effective returning to pokeblobs here's the sequence with the rf 100-500 at 100 mil from 98 centimeters starting at its maximum average of f 4.5 and gradually closing to f11 although the minimum at 100 millimeter actually goes down to f32 the blobs are a little elongated into cat's eyes at the largest apertures and have subtle outlining but there's no onion ringing and on the whole the rendering is fairly attractive here's the rf 100 500 on the left and the ef 100 400 on the right both 100 mil 4.5 and shot from 98 centimeters there's some very subtle differences between them if you look really closely but nothing to recommend one over the other here as another comparison here's a portrait shot with the rf 100 500 100 ml f 4.5 where you can see the kind of background blur that's possible it's never going to be huge at f 4.5 but there's a little subject separation and for comparison here's the same view with the ef 100 400 again at 100mm 4.5 where a minor rotational difference aside they look pretty similar once more if you want more significant background blur for portraits at 100mm on either lens you'll need a greater distance behind you like this shot by the beachfront in brighton i'm squinting a little here as the setting sun is shining right into my eyes and i'll turn the camera onto this sun in just a moment if you can step back a great deal you could even attempt to portrait at 500 mil and while it's not exactly practical this is what you'll get at 500 mil f 7.1 again when the background is very distant okay before showing you more examples of what you can do with the 100-500 range let's take a quick look at the focusing speed you're watching the 100 500 focusing here on the esr 5 with a single af area at 500 millimeter f 7.1 where the dual nano usm motors do the job very swiftly and confidently they're really quiet too for comparison here's the ef 100 400 adapted onto the sr5 and set to 400mm f 5.6 the focusing can still be fast but not quite as snappy as the native rf lens and a little less consistent too sometimes slowing down as it finds the target and very occasionally hunting in the wrong direction before correcting itself now don't get me wrong it's still very usable it's just not quite as fast and confident as the native rf model returning to portraits but of the more wild kind here's a few of steven seagull first at 100mm f 4.5 where like my portrait earlier there's some potential for blurring if the background is far enough away and now a couple of 500 ml f7.1 where it's possible to much more easily isolate the subject wildlife photography is one of the core uses for lenses like these and the r5 and r6 make it really easy with animal eye detection keeping the subject focused but static birds are easy so how about some birds in flight for these sequences i used the rf 100 500 mil on the eos r5 mostly at or close to 500mm 7.1 the camera was set to face and eye tracking across the entire frame with animals selected for the subject type the r5 was also set to servo for continuous autofocus and the burst speed to h-plus note that the r5 and r6 require a decent level of battery charge to achieve their top speed at 12 frames per second so i made sure i was topped up before shooting the top speed is confirmed when the h icon is green once the battery level drops below a certain point it'll turn white to indicate a slower speed oh and in terms of the shutter type this was the electronic first curtain the r5 and rf 100 500 are a powerful combination for birds in flight and the extra reach at the long end is always welcome for this kind of subject at 500 mil it can be tricky to initially position an erratic bird on the frame but once the r5 recognizes the subject you'll rarely need to worry about the focusing even if the bird moves towards the corners a key benefit of on-sensor autofocus systems over dslr viewfinders that said the relatively broad depth of field from the f 4.5 to 7.1 aperture means backgrounds can become less blurred than you might desire which in turn can make it a harder job for the autofocus system to lock on compared to using brighter lenses especially with busy scenery in the background like brian c from but that's an issue facing all lenses of this class the bottom line is i scored a high percentage of keepers with this lens long telephoto zooms are also ideal for sports in action so i headed to hove lagoon to photograph some wakeboarding once again i found i could rely on the r5's face and eye tracking across the entire frame to find the subjects and keep them sharp even when approaching quickly i love that the best of the modern autofocus systems have now become sufficiently reliable for action wildlife shooters to often dispense with manually positioned autofocus areas and simply rely on subject recognition instead it allows not just for faster acquisitions but the chance to more easily position subjects near the edges or corners 500ml is just about sufficient for surf photography from the shore especially if the camera has bonus pixels for additional cropping these are all uncropped straight from the camera again simply using face detection to lock onto the approaching subject this proved fairly reliable in this scenario although if the face became obstructed the camera would inevitably prioritize on the sail it did at least avoid focusing on the closer waves most of the time making it easy to grab large numbers of decent images it also worked pretty well for video and i'll show you some examples in just a moment long lenses may be primarily aimed at sports and wildlife but can also deliver unique perspectives on landscapes and urban scenes these were a few that i took around brighton at the longer end of the range long focal lens are also perfect for solar and lunar photography so here's a few of the settings sun at 500 mil and again all of these are uncropped and now here's the moon at 500 mil first uncropped but i can't resist zooming in for a closer look at those craters if you'd like to get into moon photography check out my tutorial all about it before moving on to video and then my final verdict i wanted to show you how the quality of the rf-100 500 compares against the ef 100-400 in terms of sharpness across the frame at various focal lengths let's start with the rf-100 500 at 100 mil f 4.5 where it's delivering very crisp details across the frame even wide open as you move into the corners there's no softening to mention there's minor benefits to closing it down but it's really very usable wide open but now here's a close look at the older ef 100 400 also 100 mil 4.5 on the right and it looks pretty good too there's a minor reduction in contrast here but that's actually down to the lighting conditions changing a little so i'm going to call it a draw 100 mil next here's the rf 100 500 at 200 mil where the maximum aperture reduces to f5 taking a closer look again reveals excellent detail across the frame and no softening in the corners to mention even at the maximum aperture but here again is the ef 100 400 on the right again at 200 mil f5 where again it's essentially delivering the same degree of detail albeit with minor variations on the lighting and now the rf 100 to 500 at 400 mil where the maximum aperture becomes f 6.3 taking a closer look tells the same story as before with sharp details within the depth of field at these kind of longer focal lengths rising heat in the atmosphere becomes an issue when evaluating resolution but it's still clear that lens is delivering great results but guess what yep the ef 100 400 on the right also looks great at 400 mil where it additionally has the benefit of a slightly brighter maximum aperture of f 5.6 versus f 6.3 of course that's where the comparison has to end but for completeness here's the rf 100 to 500 now at 500 mil where the maximum aperture drops to f 7.1 as you take a closer look the effect of rising heat becomes ever more apparent but again the potential definition is clear so after examining a wide range of shots across the full range of focusing distances and apertures i can confidently say the rf 100 to 500 is capable of delivering excellent results but as you've seen so is the older ef 100 400 mark ii just before my verdict i wanted to show you a few videos i filmed with the rf 100 500 on the eos r5 starting with a face tracking demo at 100ml 4.5 where canon's face recognition and dual pixel autofocus effortlessly follows me as i move back and forth and in and out of frame canon really are very good at this prefer videos of birds okay here you go with the r5's auto focus system switched from human to animal after which it locked onto stephen's eyeballs while filming right how about those sunsets again at 500 mil but with the benefit of motion i know some photographers are strictly stills only but i love shooting a mix of photos and video these and the bird shots were also entirely handheld showing off the stabilization in action in fact here's a quick before and after for handheld video filmed at 500 mil first without stabilization and now with it stabilized again this uses a combination of optical and sensor shift where available and while it lacks the eerie lock-on of the best image stabilization systems out there i'm looking at you olympus it's still steady enough for very usable handheld footage where the r5 and rf 100 500 really come into their own for me though and when filming slow motion video in 4k so here's a selection of clips for your viewing pleasure that i filmed in 4k at 100p slowed by four times onto my 25p timeline all of these were handheld [Music] [Music] and finally just for fun here's the moon once more at 500 mil from a tripod this time but filmed in 8k video on the r5 this means there's sufficient pixels to punch him by two times on my 4k timeline here for an effective focal length of 1000 millimeters not bad huh now if your timeline is 1080p or you don't mind a reduction in detail here it is punched in again by a further two times for an effective focal length of 2000 millimeter and when comparing frame grabs from 8k video with 45 megapixel stills from the r5 they also shared the same degree of detail at least in the widescreen video shape and since i've now taken you to the moon and back twice there's nothing more to add before my final verdict the rf 100 to 500 millimeter continues canon's approach of adding something new to classic ef lenses rather than simply rebuilding them with a similar spec in a native mount the rf 7200 2.8 is impressively shorter than the ef version the rf15-35 zooms a little bit wider than the ef-16-35 while also including is and now the rf-100 500 reaches further than the ef-100 400 while occupying much the same space in your bag and actually weighing a little less in each case the previous ef models remain excellent performers but by adding something new to the rf versions canon compensate somewhat for their higher prices in my test the rf 100 500 delivered chart results across the frame throughout the focal range and with the aperture wide open sure it wasn't any sharper than the ef 100 400 mark ii in my test but as a stellar lens and the new model maintains this standard while reaching 25 longer i love that you're getting this boost in reach with a lens that's barely longer in actual length and actually lighter while the rubber tipped lens hood fully removable tripod collar and of course the custom rf control ring are all nice additions what's not to like well teleconverters will only work when the zoom is set between 300 and 500 mil which is going to be inconvenient for transportation because that barrel is going to be extended the f 4.5 to 7.1 focal ratio isn't going to deliver the shallowest depth of field effects but that's par for the course for this kind of lens and the rendering looks fine to me the closest focusing is beaten by the 100 400 at the long end but is compensated by the longer focal length and the issues reported by some early owners regarding an is wobble under certain conditions appear to have been resolved with a firmer update at least for my examples the biggest issue beyond the teleconverters is really the higher price compared to the ef 100 to 400 mark ii you're getting similar quality but with the benefits of zooming 100mm further having slightly faster and more confident focusing a fully removable tripod collar custom control ring and slightly lighter weight on the downside it's also around 400 more expensive and can't zoom between 100 and 300 if you have a teleconverter fitted if you don't already own the ef 100 400 i'd say it's worth spending the extra on the rf model but existing owners will probably remain satisfied with what's already an excellent lens if you're looking for a cheaper option though there's a number of alternatives in the native mount you can actually reach further with canon's rf 600 mil an rf 800 mil which may be optically dimmer at f11 and of course don't zoom but you could buy them both and still save a thousand dollars over the 100 to 500. if you're happy to adapt you could look out for a secondhand df-100 400 remember to look out for the mark ii version or consider one of the many third-party options from companies like sigma their 100 400 millimeter is an excellent performer and is around one-third the price of the rf-100-500 there's loads of options out there although i'd also love it if canon considers producing a more affordable 200 to 600 range like sony has sometime in the future as that's a great length for sports and wildlife ultimately the rf 100 500 mil becomes the best overall long telephoto zoom for the esr system and will delight sports and wildlife photographers like other rf lenses it's unapologetically high end with a price tag to match but brings genuine advantages over the already excellent ef 100 400 millimeter if your budget will stretch it comes highly recommended especially to owners of the more recent esr bodies who can use it to really exploit their improved autofocus and burst capabilities right that's it for another lens review cool they involve a lot of work if you found any of it useful the best way to support me is to give it a like and to follow my channel it's so easy to enjoy a video but move on afterwards without realizing you never subscribed but believe me it really helps and if you're feeling extra generous how about treating yourself to my in-camera photography book grabbing some cameras merchandise perhaps or how about shouting me a coffee there's links to do all of this along with checking the latest prices on the lens in the description and pin comment below so let me know what you think thanks for watching and i'll see you next time bye

Channel: Gordon Laing

Views: 159,668

Rating: 4.9497819 out of 5

Keywords: Canon, RF, 100-500mm, vs, EF, 100-400mm, Sigma, Sony, EOS, R5, R6, review, comparison

Id: 0MH34YAWGek

Length: 29min 9sec (1749 seconds)

Published: Mon Sep 28 2020