5 ай бұрын
Пікірлер
@sewerynw9931 9 күн бұрын
Fast question for Canon R8 RF100-400 or EF100-400 Mark 1? Footbal and 1-2 times in year airshow.
@Postosuchus 9 күн бұрын
Personally I'd go RF 100-400 for much better AF speed and less focus hunting. It's much easier to handhold too which would be a big boon for the airshow.
@lukasvandewiel860 14 күн бұрын
Pity though that the RF 100-500 4.5-7.1 is now selling for 3349 euro, of the equivalent of about 3650 US$. It is a great little machine, but not sure of they are *that* great. They are even becoming gradually more expensive with time. No fun anymore.
@Postosuchus 14 күн бұрын
Ouch! I’d heard Canon prices in Europe had a bad markup but that’s horrendous! That lens was overpriced at $2600, let alone $1000 more. It really is a near-flawless lens though, the more I use it the more I appreciate its IQ/weight. The worsened stabilization and teleconverter flaw are inexcusable for the price though.
@ChayoSaldarriaga 15 күн бұрын
This digital zoom only work for video? Can i used digital zoom in Photography too?
@Postosuchus 14 күн бұрын
There’s a separate magnify feature (a default button on many R series bodies but might need to be custom assigned to one on entry level cameras) which allows you to see up to 10x for your photos in realtime, but it will not auto-crop when you take the picture, and it will un-magnify if you start servo autofocus (works with single shot though). It’s still a pretty helpful feature to confirm focus though.
@OlteniaRecording 20 күн бұрын
Very useful information, and well documented. Can't an extender be used with the "RF 100-400mm f/5.6-8 IS USM" model? Can only crop mode be used on a Cano R as a way of expansion?
@Postosuchus 20 күн бұрын
Glad it was useful! I understand the RF 100-400 can indeed be used with extenders, and doesn’t suffer from the extension flaw of the 100-500, but between the degraded image quality and further darkened maximum aperture I personally wouldn’t want to use that combo on APS-C! As for “crop mode” on the EOS R as long as you’re fine with 12mp or less resolution photos don’t see why you can’t do that! I understand you’ll be giving up all the light and noise advantages of full frame when you do that, though.
@OlteniaRecording 20 күн бұрын
@@Postosuchus Thanks for the reply! Yes.., I understand, without compromise you cannot have "advantages".., if you want a bigger zoom you compromise the quality of the image. All the best and good light!
@cjoe6908 22 күн бұрын
Thanks for this well balanced review. I was struggling between the used copy of EF100-400 II and RF100-500, and I already have the RF100-400 which I enjoy using for birds around my living quarters. The problem with the RF100-400 is that when it rains, I don't dare to bring it out as it lacks the water sealing, and that the other two has a small advantage of letting in a little more light, besides a lot better built wiith weather protection. With your review, I am more inclined to get the EF100-400 II
@Postosuchus 22 күн бұрын
Glad to hear this was helpful! I really wished there had been a 4-way comparison like this back when I first got my R7, could have saved a lot of money, but at least the experience is helping others going forward.
@cjoe6908 21 күн бұрын
@@Postosuchus It was helpful. You probably have saved me $1000, the difference of price in the used market.
@prathambarik8321 26 күн бұрын
Laptop???
@selkiemaine 29 күн бұрын
Truly excellent work. Thank you. I have the RF 100-400 f/5.6-8 - a local vendor had a sale going, and I got a used one for $400 US. 'nuff said. I also find the size/weight shockingly good. The one time I've had an issue was shooting an osprey at the limit of the lens's range wide open on an R7. There was enough "glow" that I didn't care for any of the shots. Later testing showed me that stopping down from f/8 to f/11 gave me razor clarity - and in bright sunlight, that was OK. That issue was not apparent at all with the less dense sensor on the EOS-R I used to use the lens with. At that price, I have less than nothing to complain about! At some point, I might go for one of the more expensive options, but whenever I think I'm going to pull the trigger on that, I keep coming back to that light weight and small size. So far, I'm still using it.
@usamamuzaffar8909 Ай бұрын
In the last experiment comparing optical zoom to digital zoom, it would be fun to adjust the iso to keep the same exposure level on both cameras and see how similar they are. I bet they are very close. it looks like canon is cropping the sensor to achieve the zoom which is good because it means up until about 4x zoom, it's still optical zoom in a way. Also, there goes the only advantage of having an APS-C camera against a full frame camera. Well done canon!
@Postosuchus Ай бұрын
Maybe I’ll upload a short with that ISO test you mentioned! But having used the digital zoom mode semi regularly since this vid the limitations really are annoying, and it’s not at all a replacement for a good zoom. I was using it last week in an indoor aquarium with my RF 24mm f/1.8 for instance and the digital zoom footage was not able to hold up at all to the 4K60 crop, was just too noisy and low-res.
@luismanuelmendoza789 Ай бұрын
Can you compare them with the sigma ef 150-600???
@Postosuchus Ай бұрын
I don’t have that lens to test, sorry. I understand the Contemporary version has focus pulsing issues on Canon’s numbered R series (except maybe R100) so that alone would be a big factor.
@TaiLayMienTay Ай бұрын
Hay quá anh ỏi👍👏🇻🇳🔔🇻🇳🔔
@wellingtoncrescent2480 Ай бұрын
For birding, I love my R7 with RF 100-500 zoom. While I can't speak to the Canon EF lenses, I experienced "focus pulsing" with the EF 100-400 Vi DC from Tamron and the 150-600C from Sigma, and others have described similar with some older Canon lenses, perhaps because the AF has trouble keeping up? In any case, I am thrillred with my setup for birds and wildlife: the dual focus motors are fast and accurate, the OIS works well with the R7 IBIS, the minimum focus distance (MFD) is less than 1m at all focus lengths, and the image quality is simply spectacular. In my experience, the 1.4x TC doesn't compromise AF, image quality, or MFD, and the weather resistance is a comfort. If you can manage the price, I am sure you will be pleased,
@andyp7787 Ай бұрын
Excellent work. My take, if you have a R7 or similar and are on a budget, get the RF100-400. If you have loads of dough, get the RF 100-500. The end. And thank you for doing this!
@Postosuchus Ай бұрын
Good take! Though I admit the EF 100-400 mark I fared way better than I thought it could for a film-era lens. Glad I held off on selling my old lenses long enough to do a comparison like this.
@lastdance2099 Ай бұрын
I drove by it today, I think the ship's name is Gary I. Gordon. Very cool video with a great view of a ship passing under the Key Bridge that is now gone.
@Postosuchus Ай бұрын
Thanks, corrected the title. Never could’ve guessed that bridge would’ve been gone in under 2 months. Wish I would’ve taken more footage of the freighter traffic crossing under but it was extremely cold and blustery that day.
@mvp_kryptonite Ай бұрын
Great review and all fair points. The one you undersold was the weight of the RF100-400. It deserved a section too. I went for the 100-400 II L as the mounting options were great with extenders and mounts not to mention the deals one gets on the used market. £800 for a mint if you are patient otherwise it’s £1k.
@capturingnaturewithsandip Ай бұрын
Nice and beautiful video.Thanks for sharing & big like
@vollyidola Ай бұрын
Beautiful Eagle 🥰
@AIOfilms Ай бұрын
What’s the point of testing lenses made for full frame cameras on an APS-C sensor, specially when want to find out image quality differences?
@Postosuchus Ай бұрын
Those 4 lenses are/were popular with wildlife photographers (400mm is a great birding length on APS-C and there are no R/EF-S lenses approaching that focal length to my knowledge), and those pixel-dense crop sensors like the m6ii/90D/R7 really challenge the central IQ. I also don’t own any Full Frame cameras so can’t test what I don’t have.
@AIOfilms Ай бұрын
@@Postosuchus Thanks for the reply. Good work.
@RogerZoul Ай бұрын
Very nice review. I’m sure you did this, but I wish you had mentioned that you updated all firmware on both bodies and lenses before testing. I recall that the RF 1-5 had firmware updates that specifically addressed IS behaviors.
@Postosuchus Ай бұрын
Thanks! And yeah I did forget to mention all lenses and bodies were fully updated. My 100-500 was a new copy and came already updated to the latest firmware… to my disappointment when I checked!
@rj66600 Ай бұрын
I’m on a serious budget right now and have a m50 and a r50. Use the r50 mostly. With the 100-400 RF. The price jump is holding me back to the 500. But the lack of tripod collar is probably slightly messing with my tracking mount for Astro photos. Really useful video. Thanks again such a detailed analysis.
@Postosuchus Ай бұрын
Glad it was helpful! I’d read the EF 100-400 mark 1 was good for astro use, as was the EF 400 f/5.6 prime for potentially less.
@fernandodelgiovo Ай бұрын
Congratulation! I look for this kind comparation so much! Do you have any news about of use 300mmf4IS in mirroless cameras? I have my, most of time with 1,4sigma extender. I”d consider chance my 7D for R7, but keep my okd lens.
@Postosuchus Ай бұрын
I don’t have any experience with that lens sorry, but being an official Canon lens from 1997 (?) it probably works as well as 1998’s 100-400 mark 1 I would imagine.
@fernandodelgiovo Ай бұрын
@@Postosuchus thank you!!
@David_Quinn_Photography Ай бұрын
8:20 Thank you for shortening the names for the sake of your voice and our sanity and it looks like I am buying the Mark 1 its sharp enough for my use and that price is do able.
@Postosuchus Ай бұрын
Thank you, I was surprised by how well the mark 1 did in these tests and In hindsight could have saved a lot of money just sticking with it instead of buying the whole chain. I took it for one last birding hike recently though and going back to it after experiencing its descendants is rough to say the least.
@another-anonymous-username Ай бұрын
This single test is interesting, but not sufficient. What if a filter substantially cuts wind noise, but also does so to all sound waves? I'd suggest some kind of a repeatable test that would help get a better idea of signal to noise ratio, such as playing a recording somewhere near while blowing air at the microphone.
@Postosuchus Ай бұрын
The voiceover was done with the muff on, but in hindsight adding a direct speaking comparison of all three states would have been helpful. Perhaps I’ll upload a short of such when it finally rips off and needs replacing
@anandanayak7373 Ай бұрын
Superb Bro! Well explained, completely with putting too much of time and effort to produce such a good information to viewers. Good Job bro keep the good work.
@brendohf Ай бұрын
Great video! Thank you
@bricenoh Ай бұрын
Thanks very well done scientific review. If I had to nitpick, I would onlybadd to include the distance to subjects on the video, I think you mentioned in audio. I find distance is very important, as many lenses will do fine at 5m, but less so at 10m or 20m (reality when shooting birds, not always close). Lastly, for your flare test, I imagine they were done without hood, since the audio says the hood can fix this (though nice if written on video), which is nice since I am lazy to carry/put hood though I think often improves quality. Regardless, thanks again for very thourough comparison!. For my next wish, I would like to learn more about the 800mm f11 less as this could be the "long hike" lens compromise (If one owned the 100-500, the 600 would be less of an advantage)
@Postosuchus Ай бұрын
Thank you! These tests (aside from the "real world" and flaring which WAS done without a hood) were indeed done between 5-7 meters and in hindsight i would've also done a second round of long distance image quality tests outside on an overcast day for even lighting, but at the time I was worried about heat/atmospheric distortion interference. Regarding the primes, I don't own them as the insanely long minimum focus distance is incompatible with my style of birding, but I'd be happy to do the tests if someone were to supply the lenses for me! You listening, Canon?
@gerhardbotha7336 2 ай бұрын
I have the R7 and used my trusty EF 400mm F5.6 L. Mostly for birds. It works great except that you dont get the full 30 FPS. I then got a used EF 100-400 L ii. Very impressed, even with 1.4x iii. I got both for $1000. I will sell both for the RF 100-500 soon I think. But in no hurry
@Postosuchus Ай бұрын
Thanks for sharing! I didn’t think to test the shots per second at the time but just did now, and both the R7’s high speed continuous + and focus bracketing actually work on the ef 100-400 mark 1, despite being a design from 1998 and not being listed as compatible with those features in the R7’s manual! I guess your 400mm was a bit too much older?
@fernandodelgiovo Ай бұрын
How works the camera stabilization? I learn the 400mm is the sharpeness of old lens, but no IS. Could the mirroless body “fixes” the lack stabilization of the lens?
@Postosuchus Ай бұрын
@@fernandodelgiovo my understanding is the Camera body’s stabilization “IBIS” is less effective the longer the focal length, so I wouldn’t expect it to help much or at all with a 400mm prime. It could possibly even make it worse (I have an ancient ef Tokina 300mm that the R7’s IBIS makes even shakier).
@fernandodelgiovo Ай бұрын
@@Postosuchus good to know!! Thanks again!!
@mvp_kryptonite Ай бұрын
I have the same setup and have no difference in FPS. Also I have the Canon 0.71x for the 100-400 ii L and it’s great for when I want to tone down the focal length a tad on the R7
@molybdnum 2 ай бұрын
Much appreciate the group test here, very useful and particularly thorough. Do you have any experience with the Sigma 100-400 f/5.6-6.3?
@Postosuchus 2 ай бұрын
I haven't used that lens, but considering the Sigma 150-600 Contemporary's well-documented focus pulsing issues on the numbered Canon R series bodies, I'd be wary of that lens suffering from it as well.
@jakecook716 2 ай бұрын
Awesome detailed review. Surprised to learn that the IS on the ef100-400 ii out performs the rf100-500. I use the ef100-400 ii with my Canon r3, and one of my complaints is the IS often is a second or two too slow to settle. I'm torn about upgrading to the 100-500, the f7.1 aperture doesn't have me excited. Based on other reviews I was under the impression the IS on the rf100-500 was rock solid.
@Postosuchus 2 ай бұрын
I could have a lesser copy of the 100-500, or perhaps the stabilizer isn't calibrated properly for APS-C bodies? Could also be weight distribution or the way I handhold lenses, there's a lot a factors but after 4.5 months with the 100-500 now the IS is still worse than the 100-400 II for me; even on a tripod that mark II would soften camera panning movements in a way the 100-500 doesn't. All the lenses here had the latest firmware possible I neglected to mention. I was a bit worried about the darker aperture at first too but the loss of 1/3 of a stop along their shared focal ranges really made hardly any difference, in fact the 100-500 seems to focus hunt less in the same scenes despite the lost light. It's much better than the 100-400 ii with a 1.4x converter too.
@ChannelCreator 2 ай бұрын
Great info, well-organized! Thank you!
@carlosmoya1245 2 ай бұрын
No venia incluido un cortaunñas en la mochila?
@cgchameleon7567 3 ай бұрын
Thank you very much mate for saving me 150$.
@NatureInspiredSnipsnSnaps 4 ай бұрын
beautiful thanks for sharing.
@korkutdemirbas 4 ай бұрын
Just the video I need. Thanks. I can't see a difference between ef 100-400mm II and rf 100-500mm at 400mm. What is your opinion? Is there a difference in video outputs?
@Postosuchus 4 ай бұрын
The EF 100-400 ii is more stable and "trembles" less than the 100-500mm, at least on the R7; I was quite disappointed with the stabilization of the 100-500 the first time I tried it. It is MUCH quieter though and it seems to auto detect when it's on a tripod and shutoff, which is awesome. I couldn't stand the gurgling of the 100-400 ii showing up in my videos. IQ-wise the RF 100-500 is noticeably sharper with more vibrant colors though.
@Justinhoou 4 ай бұрын
Nice video. Wish you can post more video on EF 100-400mm II vs RF 100-500mmL.
@Postosuchus 4 ай бұрын
Thank you. I am actually in the process of making a wider, more in-depth video comparing all aspects of these 4 lenses plus the ef 1.4x on the RF mount before I sell off the EF’s.
@andyvan5692 5 ай бұрын
good video, but a WARNING, most manfrotto and other tripod columns use a screw jam locking feature, you need to raise the column FIRST to see if a locking screw is present (manfrotto 190/ 058 & 075 studio tripods), the aforementioned models use a ratchet tooth design on the ball or gear head base, the screw jams the head here, to stop it turning off during use!!- you need to losten the screw/s until 1-2mm show below the flange on the column, then the tapered pencil tip is retracted safely, so you can then exchange heads, without damaging the head, or screw.
@user-fl3jq2oe4q 5 ай бұрын
Lovely footage
@vanguardworldcom 6 ай бұрын
Thanks!
@user-fl3jq2oe4q 6 ай бұрын
I liked you tested the various apertures in outdoors and indoors settings :)
@user-fl3jq2oe4q 7 ай бұрын
Cute little barn swallow!
@user-fl3jq2oe4q 7 ай бұрын
Great footage :)
@user-fl3jq2oe4q 7 ай бұрын
Beautiful tall birds!!
@user-fl3jq2oe4q 7 ай бұрын
Beautiful birds!
@AdventurersAmbience 8 ай бұрын
Hi again! I noticed that you are using R7 too! If I can have an advice for you - I hope that you have stock 18-150 mm lens. It's only f3.5, but can be still very powerful. When you shoot small objects like an insect don't open the aparture to full f3.5 and close it to like f6.3 or more. Your image will be more sharper, you will get less chromatic abberation and it will be easier to focus properly. Compensate the darker image with higher ISO (Don't be affraid of the noise. It's better than burry image) PS: The image is always sharpest in the middle of aperature range, but it's not necessary to be guided with it. Sometimes it's better to open, because of a stronger bokeh. For example for a portraits. ;) Have a good one!
@mmarruffo 9 ай бұрын
Is that normal? I just bought a used EF 400mm II 2.8 and have the same sound when I turn ON the IS
@Postosuchus 9 ай бұрын
It is normal for the 100-400 ii; looks like the EF 400 ii was released around a similar time, so Canon's stabilization tech at the time was apparently just noisy.
@mmarruffo 9 ай бұрын
@@Postosuchus thanks for the answer!
@WildwatchNature 9 ай бұрын
Wow! Beautiful content
@capturingnaturewithsandip 9 ай бұрын
Nice and beautiful video. Thanks for sharing so wownderful film. Big Like and Best wishes.
@bunkowmoviebirds476 9 ай бұрын
Cute recording😍
@capturingnaturewithsandip 10 ай бұрын
Nice and beautiful video. Thanks for sharing so wonderful video & Big Like
@WildwatchNature 10 ай бұрын
Cute little bird and the chipmunks
@wangsonglaketv58 11 ай бұрын
내 아내 넘 보지마....