Header banner
Revain logoHome Page
Anand John ᠌ photo
1 Level
98 Review
84 Karma

Review on πŸ“· RF 100-500mm f/4.5-7.1L IS USM Canon lens in white by Anand John ᠌

Revainrating 5 out of 5

The best thing for the money, Im glad I chose this option.

After 70–200, I wanted something more telephoto. The choice of RF lenses at the end of 2022 is not so great - RF 600, RF 800 or RF 100-500. But I wanted the lens to focus from 90 cm, and not from a few meters, so I settled on RF 100-500. Of course, I compared it with the EF 100-400, primarily in terms of aperture ratio. So, characteristics 100-400 in parentheses, RF 100-500 in square brackets. F 4.5 (100–135), [100–151]; F 5.0 (135–312), [151–254]; F 5.6 (312–400), [254–363]; F 6.3 [363–472]; F 7.1 [472–500]. There is no fundamental difference, the main darkness begins where the EF 100-400 ends in the focal range. If you want to caress your eyes with a lighter number, then you can set the exposure compensation step to 1/2 stop (instead of 1/3) and f / 6.7 will be found at 500 mm. However, I believe that this is a rounding step (bug). The lens is very, very sharp. Similar in design to the RF 70–200, but larger. The stabilizer is just great. You can shoot at 1/100 by 500 mm without worrying about anything at all, except perhaps about the mobility of the object. The rest is a classic L-zoom. : at night, autofocus is of course weak, you have to switch to MF. : visually sharpness is not inferior to EF 600 mm f/4 IS L.

img 1 attached to πŸ“· RF 100-500mm f/4.5-7.1L IS USM Canon lens in white review by Anand John ᠌
img 2 attached to πŸ“· RF 100-500mm f/4.5-7.1L IS USM Canon lens in white review by Anand John ᠌

ο»Ώ

Pros
  • Instant autofocus, high sharpness.
Cons
  • The extender works at focal lengths of 300-500mm, although extenders are generally best avoided.