Canon RF 100-400mm f/5.6-8 IS USM discuss and post images

[Jeff USN Photog 72-76]

I picked up the RF 100-400 after seeing a few reviews of it, since it was so cheap I didn't rent it first. I am very happy with it I seem to get good IQ and sharpness with it. It also accepts the RF extenders without any issues.

The really nice thing is the light weight this is a lens you can carry all day and still get good results.

Here are some shots with the R6 mark 2 and the RF 100-400 AND the RF 1.4x extender. I am really surprised at the sharpness of it.

close up is a 100% crop of the main image, the main image is the full frame from the sensor.

 

[Jeff USN Photog 72-76]

Seagull at work and play

 

[Scott M]

I think this lens is a great bargain. It's small, light weight, and provides very good image quality. When paired with my R10, it's a terrific travel wildlife setup.

Here are a few shots taken from our trip to Colorado this summer.

 

[milo]

respectfully .... this thread already exists:

https://focus-on-photography-forum....0mm-f-5-6-8-is-usm-official-image-thread.378/

 

[Jeff USN Photog 72-76]

respectfully .... this thread already exists:

https://focus-on-photography-forum....0mm-f-5-6-8-is-usm-official-image-thread.378/

I had searched but didn't see it, I will ask to see if we can move the posts over to it, Talked to Lovina and the other thread is in the Lens sample area for the best of the best images, this one is in the gear discussion area so that we can post and discuss images taken with the lens.

 

[Jeff USN Photog 72-76]

on the RF 100-400 I have tested it with my RF 1.4x extender, I wish I had a RF 2.0x to test it with.

Anyhow with the RF 1.4x I hardly see any degradation of image quality or sharpness. I know with my ED 100-400Lii when I put the EF 1.4x mk iii there is a noticeable softening of the image, and with the 2.0x it is almost unusable.

I might try renting a RF 2.0x at some point but with the lens being f/8 at the far end it would really cut down the light.

 

[milo]

Anyhow with the RF 1.4x I hardly see any degradation of image quality or sharpness.

This is great to hear. i plan to buy one eventually as well

 

[Jeff USN Photog 72-76]

went to the pond again today, a tad chilly, 35 F. with a 6 mph wind. Not as many birds today but still plenty.
I continue to be pleased with this lens with the RF 1.4x have no complaints about sharpness

 

[Jeff USN Photog 72-76]

Seagull and swan

 

[Jeff USN Photog 72-76]

Oh by the way these last 4 images were all taken as JPG's not RAW

 

[mcoren]

Fantastic lens! It's my favorite air show lens with the R7.


20231029-FlyingCircus-499-Edit by mdc_com1, on Flickr

20230916-Oceana-1048-Edit by mdc_com1, on Flickr

 

[Jeff USN Photog 72-76]

Michael
Great shots! I love this lens, it is so light you can hold it all day! Also the sharpness has to be seen to be believed. Some look down on it because it is not a L lens but I love it

 

[Paul D. (Cyberex)]

Klaus reviewed this lens. Of course he is not satisfied with the charts, but all test shots that he made - I found very good, yes, I see smudges in the corners, but only on 100% view.
On my 4K 32" monitor his samples looks very good without zooming, no fringing, no distortion, no lack of contrast, sharpness is higher than on many EF lenses. My copy still on the road to me, but I like this lens even now

Canon RF 100-400mm f/5.6-8 USM IS - Review / Test Report

Canon RF 100-400mm f/5.6-8 USM IS - Review / Test Report

www.opticallimits.com

 

[Jeff USN Photog 72-76]

I think you will really like the lens!

 

[mcoren]

My only (slight) gripe with the RF 100-400 is that I wish the focus and zoom rings were swapped. I like the zoom ring to be farther from the camera body so I can hand-hold it more steadily when following a moving subject. Lately I've been gripping the hood and zooming by pulling that, and that works although it's tighter and less precise. The hood also flexes a bit when I hold it that way. I have a cheapie Amazon hood but I don't know if the Canon hood is any more sturdy.

 

[Jeff USN Photog 72-76]

interesting gripe. I find the lens so light that I have no problem holding it even just by the camera. That is one of the things I like about it.

 

[Jeff USN Photog 72-76]

My only (slight) gripe with the RF 100-400 is that I wish the focus and zoom rings were swapped. I like the zoom ring to be farther from the camera body so I can hand-hold it more steadily when following a moving subject. Lately I've been gripping the hood and zooming by pulling that, and that works although it's tighter and less precise. The hood also flexes a bit when I hold it that way. I have a cheapie Amazon hood but I don't know if the Canon hood is any more sturdy.

I wonder what pulling the front element out might have on the lens?

 

[mcoren]

It's pulling the entire inner barrel and not just the front element, but still, that's a good point.

 

[Erik The Red]

I have this lens, love everything about it except f/8.
I would prefer it to be f/6.3, which means bigger and heavier.
I had a Sigma 100-400 f/5-6.3 for Sony mirrorless and it was very good, unfortunately such a lens does not exist for Canon.

 

[Jeff USN Photog 72-76]

I have this lens, love everything about it except f/8.
I would prefer it to be f/6.3, which means bigger and heavier.
I had a Sigma 100-400 f/5-6.3 for Sony mirrorless and it was very good, unfortunately such a lens does not exist for Canon.

To me F/8 if not that big a deal unless your subject is close to the background. For high ISO my R6 mkii handles 12,800 without much problem. I am impressed with its IQ