I think so, I hope it was worth the wait, Cheers, Duade

@@Duade it was worth it, thank you!

Thanks for that, I have posted a link to your video a few times for people asking about the Tamron. It is a shame as these zoom lenses are very popular. Fingers crossed they figure out the RF mount as it would be great to have some affordable zoom options as the RF100-500 is very expensive. Cheers, Duade

You both provide such precious information and reviews. Thank you.

@@Duade Agree. Sooner or later they will reverse engineer the mount interface. Well hopefully. Looking forward to your next video as always.

Thanks Sigurd, I am glad you found it helpful, Cheers, Duade

Thanks Bruce, yes, I also liked that one, Cheers, Duade

It is my pleasure Ivan, it still works well but you do get that inconsistent focus which is a shame. But the Eye AF of the R7 means you will likely get more keepers. It is really rough that is for sure. I hope to test out a few more lenses with it soon. Cheers, Duade

Thanks Mohammad, I'm glad you enjoyed the video. Cheers, Duade

Congrats on the gear, I am sure you are having a lot of fun with it. Cheers, Duade

@@Duade thanks

Thanks, yes, makes the buffer much bigger, Cheers, Duade

Thanks, I really appreciate the support, Cheers, Duade

Great idea Tord, I had not though of that, I do like to slide mine on the sand or mud at times so I assume if it was upside down it would grab and you would have to lift it? Cheers, Duade

@@Duade I agree, on sand or mud I would use it in the same way as you do. It takes me 10 seconds to change the orientation. .

@@tordandreasson Sounds great, I would love to see it if you could email me at duade.paton@gmail.com Cheers, Duade

@@Duade I have emailed you. Cheers, Tord

Thanks mate, yes, it was a crazy sunrise that is for sure, Cheers, Duade

Thanks Tony, I totally agree and on reflection you are right that even with the AF issues it still offers exceptional value for 600mm. I think the sport version may have the same issues. Cheers, Duade

Thanks Ben, glad to the video helped give you some peace of mind. I still need to test the Pre-shooting feature more. Cheers, Duade

Thanks, yes, the AF is a big improvement for sure, congrats on the R6. Cheers, Duade

Thanks Matheus, the more you get out and practice the better the images will become. Try and get close and in nice light which will help a lot. Cheers, Duade

Thanks Lau, they are one of the prettier feral species we get down here, I will photograph any birds, even the introduced ones. Cheers, Duade

Thanks May, I agree, it is still a great option. Yes that light was fantastic, we have a shortage down here also. Cheers, Duade

Sadly Canon has no reason to give away it's proprietary data to it's competitors so I can't see this ever happening (and they never did for the EF mount)

Thanks Gary, yes, I wish that was the case but as Noel mentioned they are milking this cow for as long as they can. I hope they do figure out the RF mount as we need an affordable 600mm zoom lens in RF mount. Cheers, Duade

The 150-600mm Sigma I had was EF and I’m sure Tamron made similar. Are you saying they weren’t actual supported mounts?

Interesting just read the tech was reversed engineered by all but Carl Zeiss I believe. You learn something new everyday…

@@noelchignell1048 actually, I strongly believe that Canon is breaking anti-competitive laws by withholding the RF tech. They don't have to give it away either, but they should be legally required to license it to competitors at "reasonable" prices. I hope the US DOJ and the Australian ACCC goes after Canon (and NIkon). I'm about to formally complain to the ACCC about this issue. Canon, and other companies, cannot use IP to strengthen a monopoly on a market, or harm competition. Having only Canon being able to produce RF lenses is not good for the consumer, and imho, from a legal perspective (IANAL), breaches anti-competition laws.

Thanks Bora, yes it was fun, I will try and take more Landscapes but birds are where my heart is at. Cheers, Duade

It is my pleasure, Cheers, Duade

It is my pleasure, Cheers, Duade

Thanks Tremain, it is my pleasure, Cheers, Duade

It is my pleasure, I'm glad you liked it, Cheers, Duade

Thanks James, yes, I enjoyed those, Cheers, Duade

Thanks, yes, it appears that is the case. Cheers, Duade

It is my pleasure, you can still get nice shots, its just the AF gets confused at times. Cheers, Duade

@@Duade I still get some good photos. I should add that I was just happy to hear that it is from the lens and not the camera.🙂 I was almost starting to dought my R5 purchase.

The speed and accuracy of autofocusing using the 100-500 on the R5 is on another level.

Thanks James, yes, we don't have too many introduced species but the Goldfinch and Sparrow are two of the more common ones. Cheers, Duade

Thanks for sharing your experience with the R7 and 100-400, I will be sure to use that combo soon. Cheers, Duade

Wait, does that mean that the crop sensor (1.6x) plus the converter (1.4x) make any lens go 2x its range? So the 100-400mm reaches 200-800mm?

@@vinjass Your focal length becomes 140-560mm with the 1.4, you then times that by the crop factor of 1.6 which gives you a field of view of 224-896. Cheers, Duade

@@Duade Oh wow that's even better!! I'm gonna get that combo, sounds really awesome, thanks!

@@vinjass the 100-400 will be f8 at the long end, so with a 1.4TC you'll be at f11 wide open

Thanks Thomas, I appreciate the feedback, Cheers, Duade

Thanks for sharing your experience, great to hear you are enjoying the camera. Cheers, Duade

Thanks Wolfgang, yeah it happens but does not stop you getting nice shots which is great. I am sure they will figure out the RF mount soon enough. Cheers, Duade

Completely agree Rahul, you will take many wonderful shots with that setup. Cheers, Duade

@@Duade Thanks! Just that the waiting is agonizing..

@@rahul.k.viswanath so how it is? Do you make nice shots?

@@lucas59190 Yes. It's been great. I've been getting good shots with a few hunting for focus. I even made some of the changes that Duade suggested and things have improved.

@@rahul.k.viswanath amazing bro, I think about getting one too for fun, I live animals and I live close to the most beautiful forest of my country

Thanks Jordan, yes, I did notice that also. Cheers, Duade

Thanks Ben, yes it really needs to be stopped down to f/8 to increase sharpness at 600mm. Cheers, Duade

Thanks Angel, I am sure you still got plenty of keepers but some soft shots also. The lens for its price still performs very well. Cheers, Duade

Thanks mate, I agree, the combo has issues but frustratingly you still get very nice shots. So hard to know exactly what the best lens is outside the RF100-500. Cheers, Duade

Thanks John, It still works and takes nice shots, just something to be aware of. Cheers, Duade

Thanks Magoo, I appreciate the support, Cheers, Duade

Sub 1000$ gear user here (with RP too) i got the RF 800 F11... i dont have the versatility of a zoom, but i am pretty good with tracking and getting flying targets in frame so im fine with fixed 800mm. The F11 gets a huge problem with not perfect light conditions anymore bcause of high ISO... but i guess for a price of 700$ 2nd hand with rest warranty i cant really complain. Also, the rf 800 is slightly sharper than the 150-600C sigma, no clue about the more expensive sports version. Since i have to crop anyways a lot at wildlife, i preffered the 800 over 150-600, also because of the price and weight/size. With 2x extender the 150-600 has a very unsharp image, the rf 800 also but not that heavy. The RF 800 F11 is just a awesome "point and shoot" supertele with its criminal weight for hiking and so. Im going out normally with a RF 50mm 1.8 STM on my RP and with the 800mm F11 in backpack or vice versa. A compact tripod, RF 50mm 1.8, RF 800mm and a spare battery weight still just 2kg!! And fits easily in a even smaller backpack! I really though a lot about the sigma 150-600mm... only because i use a EF RF filter adapter and my main lens (if i dont use RF) are 28-135mm IS USM and a macro lens, which the 150-600 would fit very nice to. But i also just dont like the "airpump" design. It even annoys me that much on the RF 800 F11 that i often just keep it long. Damn, even in my Backpack for up to 17" notebooks the RF 800 with EOS RP (!!!) fits easily but with extended RF 800! The less im pumping air by moving it, the less dust (or worse) i collect inside.

If i could afford and justify for a hobby, i would take the RF 100-500L, for wildlife with 2x or 1,4x converter. Tested it for some minutes and i was blown away. At first i tested the RF 800 F11 which i bought... then the seller allowed me to test the replacement for his 800 lens... the 100-500L + 2x TC, and WOW! The AF is really good at the RF 800, but the 100-500 is LIGHTNING FAST and barely misses even on my RP. Image Quality is miles ahead without TC (extremely sharp for a zoom lens!) and with 2x TC at least as good as the RF 800. But considering this combination cost nearly 6x as much as the RF 800 F11... well no question, especially the weight and size of the 100-500+2x is already not really "handheld" optimal anymore for more than 2 minutes, the RF 800 (+RP) gives me just endless smiles when im hiking in the green searching for a good chance and enjoying the nature.

Thanks for sharing your experience, Cheers, Duade

Thanks Paul, I may have to pick up that lens and give it a go, Cheers, Duade

Thanks Liang, I suspect you are right and some lenses are more impacted by this then others. When I do the test with the RF100-500 or RF100-400 I cannot see the pulsing to the naked eye but the RF800 f11 does appear to suffer from the sharp soft sharp phenomenon I am experiencing. So it is likely the closer you get the worse it is and perhaps the type of AF motor or speed between the lens and the camera has an influence. Also of interest is the R7 appears to be worse than the R5/R6 in the inconsistent focus which may be related to a slower AF system in the R7 which exacerbates the issue? Thanks for your comment, an interesting topic for sure, Cheers, Duade

@@Duade Hey Daude, I did some follow-up tests, and here are my finds. I have set my R6 and RF 50 1.8 completely still, towards a stationary target, then engage continuous AF. Then there is some chance that the pulsing would occur, even though nothing is moving. I have not yet figured out what factors could cause the pulsing, seems to be related to the distance. If I hand hold the R6, then there is always pulsing, no matter how hard I tried to be steady. However, then I repeated the test with my Nikon D500 DSLR and Nikon AFS 85 1.8 lens, and I found no pulsing behavior when both camera and target are stationary. There is even no pulsing when I hand hold the camera and try to be still (no large movement). Have you tested any high-end Canon EF prime lenses adapted to RF mount?

@@liangzhao9378 Thanks Liang, it has to be down to the Servo mode on the mirorrless cameras and how the tracking works, like you mentioned those constant messages between camera and lens no doubt get confused at times causing the pulsing. Thanks again, Cheers, DUade

Thanks Juan, yes, that is annoying for sure, good luck with your kit, Cheers, Duade

Thanks, I appreciate it, yes, the sunrise was fantastic, I have long admired your work, Cheers, Duade

@@Duade thanks so much, I appreciate that. Congrats on your content -- great info well presented and great vibe to your videos. I just discovered your channel and am enjoying it 🙂

Thanks Phil, yes there are a few lenses available, my next video has a few options, Cheers, Duade

Congrats Nick, it is a wonderful camera and one of Canons biggest successes, it should perform very well in your lovely UK weather ;-) Cheers, Duade

Thanks, yes, I think you are right, for its price you will get lots of keepers and you will likely end up with more shots on the R7 then on the 90D say. Cheers, Duade

@@Duade thanks very much - i think you helped me understand why shooting with my new R7 and EF adaptor using a Canon EF 50 mm lens was very frustrated - now I understand the PULSING issue! . thanks1 Hanani

Thanks Ruairi, I still took lots of nice shots, its just important to know the shortcomings. Cheers, Duade

Thanks Simon, the R7 and Sigma is still a good combo and will take sharp shots, you just need to take bursts of shots in increase the keepers. It is a shame and I wish it did not have the issues. Cheers, Duade

Thanks, it is my pleasure ,Cheers, Duade

Thanks for sharing, that is interesting the Sigma is having issues on your R6. It does appear the third party lenses do struggle a bit more than Canon lenses on mirrorless. Cheers, Duade

Thanks, not too far away I am sure, Cheers, Duade

Thanks mate, yes it was fun but it struggled at times. Cheers, Duade

Thanks William, it still works well but is just something to be aware of, Cheers, Duade

Thanks Simon, I really appreciate hearing from people who are using this combo long term. I think you are right in that the benefits outweigh the AF issues and like you say you still get lots of nice shots as I did in the video. Thanks again and I will mention this in a future video for lenses to consider. Cheers, Duade

Thanks Danielle, I agree, fingers crossed for an RF version. Cheers, Duade

Thanks for sharing Bruce, I appreciate it, the pulsing can be annoying, Cheers, Duade

Thanks for sharing your experience, that is great to hear, Cheers, Duade

Great point, it was a wonderful morning to be alive that is for sure. Cheers, Duade

Thanks Robin, I think it is just how this lens works unfortunately. I do hope they update it but I wouldn't hold my breath. Cheers, Duade

It’s 2.9usd 3.1 with taxes insane prices from canon. Try Sony a7iii with the 200-600 g lens way cheaper

Ron, you will still get lots of good shots, just take lots of bursts and you should get plenty of keepers, Cheers, Duade

Greetings from Australia, Cheers, Duade

We are supposed to be -5c tomorrow which is very cold. Cheers, Duade

@@Duade but no snow?

@@Andrei8pa3 Up in the mountains it snows but we are around 200m above sea level, so snow does not get down this low here. Cheers, Duade

You can still get good shots, you will just have some AF issues from time to time. Cheers, Duade

Thanks David, yes, the eye tracking is fantastic, lets hope Sigma figure out the RF mount and give us a lens to go with the R7. Cheers, Duade

Thanks Lau, it still works well and for its price I think it still makes a good combo. Just being aware of the limitations is a good thing so people can take more photos to increase the keepers. Cheers, Duade

Totally agree, fingers crossed, Cheers, Duade

It is my pleasure, Cheers, Duade

@@Duade Do you think the 150-600 Sports (S) will do good with the Eye Tracker when compared to he 150-600 C

@@sajudevassy2900 I have not tested the Sport version so cannot be sure, I have had mixed responses from other subscribers, you will still get lots of nice shots with this kit. You will just get some soft shots in the burst. Cheers, Duade

Thanks Gary, working on it now, Cheers, Duade

Good luck David, the tripod and gimbal should give you a nice solid base. Cheers, Duade

Thanks Trevor, do you notice any difference with the more recent 60-600? Cheers, Duade

@@Duade Well, I was shooting with the R5 and R6 and didn't notice the pulsing you were referring to with either lens, however I was shooting at some distance and that brought me to confirm with you something that I had wondered. You didn't SEEM to get significant pulsing at distance, but certainly it had an impact closer to your minimum focusing distance. Is that your experience?

@@trevor9934 Yes, that is my experience and maybe that why the motorbikes were much better, not sure why that might be. Cheers, Duade

@@Duade Great, thanks for the confirmation! cheers: Trevor

Sorry I made you wait so long, was supposed to be last night but had some technical hiccups. Cheers, Duade

Hi mate, the R7 AF is not quite on par with the R5/R6 but the same settings should help. Good idea renting it just to get a feel for the differences. Have fun, Cheers, Duade

@@Duade Thank you 🙂 After I rent the R7 and try it, I'll post my results here 👍

Thanks Ludo, yes that is the dilemma at present in terms of lenses. The EF100-400 + 1.4 is also a worthy consideration but again nowhere near as affordable as the Sigma. I think many people will use the Sigma and be very happy, you still take plenty of sharp shots as I did, you just need to shoot in bursts to increase the odds of a keeper. Cheers, Duade

@@Duade Thank you Duade ! all the best from France

Thanks Roger, yes, the benefits of the lens still outweigh the negatives and for the price you will still get plenty of great shots. The RF100-400 is a wonderful small lens. Cheers, Duade

Thanks John, I have not tested the Sport but I suspect it has similar issues, it is a shame the Sigma lenses have this issue. Lets hope they figure out the RF system soon. Cheers, Duade

Thanks, yes, a great lens for sure, Cheers, Duade

Thanks, yes he did well with that, Cheers, Duade

Thanks Rafal, yes, that is what makes it so tough for me to recommend. You can get nice shots but just have to make peace with the soft shots. For its price it is still great value. Cheers, Duade

Thanks mate, it was a great morning that is for sure, Cheers, Duade

Thanks Lau, yes, that was the only thing missing, it was wonderful to see. Cheers, Duade

Thanks, unfortunately I don't have access to the Tamron lens at this stage, Cheers, Duade

Thanks, great thoughts and I agree, for its price it is hard to beat. Cheers, Duade

Thanks Marcus, Cheers, Duade

Thanks Tracie, plenty of water in there at the moment, Cheers, Duade

It is my pleasure, Cheers, Duade

Thanks, yes, I don't have the 600f11 but do have the 800f11 to test. Cheers, Duade

Thanks Laurent, it is a little loud isn't it, Cheers, Duade

Sounds good Buck, plenty of different options, Cheers, Duade

Thanks Jeff, great comment and I agree. The RF100-400 works well with the 1.4 but it is getting very slow at f11. The IQ from the Sigma at 600 6.3 will likely be better I would assume, just not as good AF and IS and heavier. I agree it would be great to get an RF version. Cheers, Duade

I don't have the Sigma but I read some comments saying the Tamron G2's pulsing is worse wherease the Sigma's is more subtle and some even say the original G1 is more stable. On my G2 using the R6, the pulsing is at its worse for smaller birds at a close distance. Duade didn't have much of an issue in his older video with the 150-600 on the R6, though I think that might be due to photographing larger birds at a farther distance. I find gulls, eagles and sometimes ducks to be more reliable for the AF than a thrush or chickadee. Setting One Shot may help but it seems to me the accuracy is not very good still, as if the AF can't lock in time for the pulsing to stop. Strangely, pulsing is greatly reduced when filming video, but I suspect this is using a different AF algorithm than the photo modes as it is considerably slower focusing between wide distances. I've been using the 800mm f11 and never really looked back. The focus acquisition can be slower but usually tracks quite well. It does occasionally seem to pulse but at least 70-80% of shots are sharp. I am curious how the Tamron 100-400 works with the R series.

@@fylphotography9269 Thanks for your thoughts and feedback, yes the video AF is not as bad. I also had it worse the closer I got. I have been testing the 800 f11 and have had some issues with focus consistency also. I have more testing to do that is for sure. Cheers, Duade