Canon RF 200-800mm IS USM (7 Viewers)

[Frank van Drogen]

After rumors for a couple of weeks, now Canon has officially announced their 200-800 mm zoom lens. At 1900$ its price point seems rather attractive, especially compared tot he 100-500 mm lens. I will be awaiting some reviews, if those are as positive as I hope for, this will definitely get a prominent place on my Christmas wish list!!

(Apparently, it is also supposed to work quite well with teleconverters, but I am a bit dubious at the amount of light needed with those on.)

 

[SimonG4ELI]

Seems very attractive, I have the 100-500mm and 800mm f11. Am trying to determine the advantage at 800mm compared to the 800mm f11. Doubt any availability in the UK before 2024.

 

[stevo]

 

[mike nesbitt]

An interesting lens from my point of view. It'll be good to see some actual reviews that aren't by Canon sponsored peeps. The specs look better than I'd expected, it seems to sit somewhere between the black f11 and the L series. I'm hoping that if it turns out to be decent, it can be picked up for around 2K from Panamoz or similar. Some good real reviews and maybe a few box pics on here may twist my arm.

 

[Barred Wobbler]

BulbMogul's got 12 already, but they came without the cardboard box.

 

[The BulbMogul]

BulbMogul's got 12 already, but they came without the cardboard box.

quite honestly you would never ever see a cheap low end piece of optics in my collection ever. That thing is a insult to my lineup.

 

[BoldenEagle]

quite honestly you would never ever see a cheap low end piece of optics in my collection ever. That thing is a insult to my lineup.

How exactly are these "cheap low end piece of optics" an insult to your lineup; many many nature photography competitions are won with optics in 2000$ price category or clearly less? They can be extremely cabable tools just as the more expensive ones.

Regards, Juhani

 

[Mikbul]

Canon 400L f/5.6

 

[Mikbul]

Canon 300L f/4 IS

 

[mike nesbitt]

A couple of images taken with the R5 and 200-800. These are not my images. Raw images were on the internet for download taken by Damien Bernal, I just converted and processed them, DXO didn't have lens profiles for the 200 - 800 so conversion was basic. I've read several comments and remarks about the lens being soft at the long end, if this is the case it's a softness that I could live with.

 

[Frank van Drogen]

A couple of images taken with the R5 and 200-800. These are not my images. Raw images were on the internet for download taken by Damien Bernal, I just converted and processed them, DXO didn't have lens profiles for the 200 - 800 so conversion was basic. I've read several comments and remarks about the lens being soft at the long end, if this is the case it's a softness that I could live with.

Those images looks awesome indeed!

Was it indicated whether they were taken at 800mm, or at an intermediate length? With the 100-500 being extremely good, I am wondering whether the 800mm outpaces the 100-500mm with an 1.4x converter (using my R5). Regardless, it would be less hassle, so I am very tempted to get one, unless further hands-on reviews are much worse than the current ones.

 

[pppppvvvv]

It would tempt me, in the opposite direction, back to a "proper" camera system, from my current p1000 superzoom.

 

[mike nesbitt]

Those images looks awesome indeed!

Was it indicated whether they were taken at 800mm, or at an intermediate length? With the 100-500 being extremely good, I am wondering whether the 800mm outpaces the 100-500mm with an 1.4x converter (using my R5). Regardless, it would be less hassle, so I am very tempted to get one, unless further hands-on reviews are much worse than the current ones.

Yes, I should have stated both at 800mm. Like you, I'd be interested to see how the bare 800 compares with the 100-500 +1.4x.

 

[BoldenEagle]

A couple of images taken with the R5 and 200-800. These are not my images. Raw images were on the internet for download taken by Damien Bernal, I just converted and processed them, DXO didn't have lens profiles for the 200 - 800 so conversion was basic. I've read several comments and remarks about the lens being soft at the long end, if this is the case it's a softness that I could live with.

These images look very good to my eyes, I would be happy with results like these @800mm. Were these at wide open f9 or stopped down?

It's also worth to keep in mind that not all lenses, even the expensive L- series ones, are allways optically equal samples.

Regards, Juhani

 

[mike nesbitt]

These images look very good to my eyes, I would be happy with results like these @800mm. Were these at wide open f9 or stopped down?

It's also worth to keep in mind that not all lenses, even the expensive L- series ones, are allways optically equal samples.

Regards, Juhani

Hi, both taken at f9 and 1600, 1250 iso respectively.

 

[Roy C]

There is no reason why this should not be a sharp lens and f9 is nothing these days with today's noise reduction software (I use Topaz Denoise AI) high(ish) ISO is no problem.
I have a 800 f11 (£650 new) and that's plenty sharp enough so the 200-800 should be fine.

 

[antonysh]

A couple of images taken with the R5 and 200-800. These are not my images. Raw images were on the internet for download taken by Damien Bernal, I just converted and processed them, DXO didn't have lens profiles for the 200 - 800 so conversion was basic. I've read several comments and remarks about the lens being soft at the long end, if this is the case it's a softness that I could live with.

Overall the image quality is good

 

[Bafty]

Personally as a UK shooter I'm little disappointed with this lens even more so with Canon generally, I didn't particularly rate the extending 100-400 taking a long time to get used to the 100-500. Whilst Nikon and Sony are churning out some interesting lens at lower price points we get this "slow pole" of a lens. Based on Canons previous extending zooms I personally won't be rushing out to pre-order.

 

[Roy C]

I will not be getting one as I already have the RF100-500 (brilliant lens even with the 1.4x tc attached) and 800/11 - what puts me off the 200-800 is the addition weight over my two current birding lenses (albeit it is still relatively light for what it is). I some times use the 800/11 in preference to the 100-500 because of the lighter weight so at my age I am looking for weight reductions not increases !.
I think the lens will sell in very big quantities and sure it will deliver sharp shots.

 

[pppppvvvv]

I think it has the best zoom range for bird photography in a single lens, ever!