jcollins
Member
(edited - tangential)
Last edited:
For Canon shooters, the 200-800 is out and looks good
- Thread starter Cameron T
- Start date
If you would like to post, you'll need to register. Note that if you have a BCG store account, you'll need a new, separate account here (we keep the two sites separate for security purposes).
Like the 800/11, this lens is perfect for new photographers and will sell like hotcakes. Just like the 800/11. Good for Canon, good for the photographers who buy it, and good for us, as a community that's relying on new blood to keep the industry alive.
jcollins
Member
(edited - tangential)
Last edited:
ajrmd
Well-known member
Phil Thatch comes to mind and has a couple videos out with side by side comparisons. In my neck of the woods, an f/9 lens is impractical for BIF as there simply isn’t enough light on most days.
David Berry
🇦🇺 Australia 🦘
- Below:
Phil Thach (note spelling of his surname) and RF 200–800
The photo below is not a link to YouTube.
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.
Last edited:
I watched that whole video looking for the head to head comparison with the 100-500. Alas, not even a mention of the 100-500. Probably have to look at his other videos.
David Berry
🇦🇺 Australia 🦘
I consider it an important new mirrorless product.
A DSLR rarely auto focuses at f9.
For those on a limited budget or perhaps getting a little old to carry a range of lenses it opens the door to many wildlife photographers having financial access to a longer range of focal length lenses than they previously had
A DSLR rarely auto focuses at f9.
For those on a limited budget or perhaps getting a little old to carry a range of lenses it opens the door to many wildlife photographers having financial access to a longer range of focal length lenses than they previously had
Cameron T
Well-known member
I think 800 at f9 is still pretty good. The 600 at f8 less so, but there's always give and take with budget lenses.
I do think Canon should have gone with a xxx-600 lens like nikon and Sony, but this is still a great "budget" birding option for Canon shooters.
@MrFotoFool: pro designations such as L for Canon or S for Nikon or GM for Sony are that meaningful?
Couple weeks past I was curious about the S on Nikon. Google says it is SLIM series??!! They don't know what they are talking about.
Google: The letter S in the line stands for Slim. These lenses offer high image quality.
Couple weeks past I was curious about the S on Nikon. Google says it is SLIM series??!! They don't know what they are talking about.
Google: The letter S in the line stands for Slim. These lenses offer high image quality.
+1 to that. It wasn't that long ago that Canon purposely imposed a major price barrier if you wanted to go anywhere above 400 f/5.6, which made it tough for amateurs/beginners (like myself at the time!) to really get into wildlife/birding. On most of their DSLRs at the time aside from the 1-series $6000+ cameras, if you tried putting a 1.4 extender on those 400 5.6 lenses you'd lose most, if not all, AF capabilities. Your next option after the 400 5.6 and 100-400 meant splurging for the 400 f/4 DO II (another $7000) before you were able to break through that 400 barrier using a TC, and using the 2x meant being at f/8 again. Hitting 800mm meant jumping up to the 500 and 600 f/4, and we all know how much those monsters cost, so being a Canon shooter and able to reach 800mm at a reasonable aperture for under $2000, is awesome.
I can only speak about Sony but the GM label is more than just sharpness. It’s weather sealing, coatings, focus motors, features such as manual focus override, weight, bokeh and a bunch more sprinkled in depending on the specific lens. G lenses are typically very good for their price point and for many is not a compromise for IQ.
The GM lenses also tend to be the faster F stop lenses as well.
BlackRockArt
Well-known member
Yup, it's called market segmentation: those fabulous L lens creat a halo effect to draw amateurs, once they are hooked, the users are forced to upgrade.
L stands for "Leg and an arm", S stands for "Slim wallet after the purchase", GM stands for "Grandpa's money".
Oliver
L stands for "Leg and an arm", S stands for "Slim wallet after the purchase", GM stands for "Grandpa's money".
Oliver
You get what you pay for, but it can be diminishing returns on how much improved the image will be. It would be crazy talk if the 800 f11 at $800 was as good as the 200-800 at $1900 and that one as good as the 800 f 5.6L at $16000. But maybe the $800 lens gets you 80% there?
Love Duade's videos!
Another YouTuber (Phil Thatch) shared his impressions of the 200-800 on the R7, and says that due to the pixel density of that sensor, it's not a good match. The lower-res'd sensors in the R6/R3, and even the R5, are a better match. Conversely, he says that 100-500 is the best choice on the R7.
100%, if I were shooting Canon, this would be my birding lens on an R5. That, or if Canon were to update the R7 to a more pro-spec (stacked sensor, AF, etc), I'd take the 100-500 instead.
Saw the same video and it did make me stop and think.
Calson
Well-known member
It shows that the camera companies are finally viewing wildlife photographers as a viable target market. For decades the needs of photojournalists and sports shooters were all that mattered. It is most apparent with Nikon and its investing in the mirrorless cameras with subject and eye detection and their lightweight super telephoto PF lenses.