Home · Register · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username  

  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  New Feature: SMS Notification alert
  New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist
  

FM Forums | Canon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1
       2       3       end
  

Bryan/TDP tested the RF800/5.6

  
 
docusync
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #1 · p.1 #1 · Bryan/TDP tested the RF800/5.6


Pretty interesting results: https://bit.ly/3O8VcoQ
To me the test chart looks identical to the RF400/2.8 + RF 2x (or the RF400+2x is teeny-tiny sharper). The RF800 doesn't have any CA though. It's likely because Canon used some UD glass in the "dedicated" TC group.



Jun 21, 2022 at 09:36 AM
juststeve
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #2 · p.1 #2 · Bryan/TDP tested the RF800/5.6


That test chart of the RF800/5.6 L convinced me to treat my 500/4 L ii and 2x iii with even more love and respect. Actually, I was convinced before that chart came out.

I had to keep well back from a loon nest this spring and used the 500 ii and 2x iii on the R5 and was extremely pleased with the results. If there were no problem with atmospherics, the photos were perfect, the lens extender combo delivering all the quality the R5 sensor could handle. And the combo was not all that difficult to carry over some difficult terrain and through some dense forest and deadfall and brush.



Jun 21, 2022 at 10:18 AM
Imagemaster
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #3 · p.1 #3 · Bryan/TDP tested the RF800/5.6


xxx

Edited on Jun 22, 2022 at 12:23 PM · View previous versions



Jun 21, 2022 at 11:54 AM
Uarctos
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #4 · p.1 #4 · Bryan/TDP tested the RF800/5.6


It's a 400mm f2.8 with a welded 2.0TC, with no real life differences from a standard 400mm f2.8 with a standard 2.0TC. I think the sales are abysmal.


Jun 21, 2022 at 01:30 PM
docusync
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #5 · p.1 #5 · Bryan/TDP tested the RF800/5.6


Yeah it looks underwhelming especially considering the price tag I know Canon marketing folks say the point is these new lenses allow to add another TC, but my eyes start bleeding looking at the charts

Im looking forward to seeing Bryans 1200/8 tests. The 600/4 III aka RF600 is not as flawless optically as the 400/2.8 III, so theoretically results will be slightly worse.



Jun 21, 2022 at 03:04 PM
armd
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #6 · p.1 #6 · Bryan/TDP tested the RF800/5.6


I cant stand my 2x on the 500 f/4 is ii and it (and just about any long lens) looks better than the 800. Cant wait for the R7 with a 500 or 600 and say bye bye to the tcs.


Jun 21, 2022 at 05:35 PM
RobAmy
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #7 · p.1 #7 · Bryan/TDP tested the RF800/5.6


Not much love for the lens from the above post, I am actually enjoying the lens myself . The extenders work really well on the 800mm also.


Jun 21, 2022 at 07:53 PM
tkbslc
Online
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #8 · p.1 #8 · Bryan/TDP tested the RF800/5.6


Given the pricing on the competition from Nikon, this is not great news for Canon.


Jun 21, 2022 at 10:43 PM
Uarctos
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #9 · p.1 #9 · Bryan/TDP tested the RF800/5.6




docusync wrote:
Yeah it looks underwhelming especially considering the price tag I know Canon marketing folks say the point is these new lenses allow to add another TC, but my eyes start bleeding looking at the charts

Im looking forward to seeing Bryans 1200/8 tests. The 600/4 III aka RF600 is not as flawless optically as the 400/2.8 III, so theoretically results will be slightly worse.

It will be the same story, because the 1200mm is built on the same 600mm lens, just like the 800mm vs 400mm.The 600mm is spectacular with the 2.0TC, but is 50% longer than the 400mm, so it's a very different lens. There are already tests against the "new" 1200mm.



Jun 22, 2022 at 01:30 AM
Imagemaster
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #10 · p.1 #10 · Bryan/TDP tested the RF800/5.6


Uarctos wrote:
It's a 400mm f2.8 with a welded 2.0TC, with no real life differences from a standard 400mm f2.8 with a standard 2.0TC. I think the sales are abysmal.


---------------------------------------------

It is not a 400mm f2.8 with a welded 2xTC.

Edited on Jun 22, 2022 at 12:25 PM · View previous versions



Jun 22, 2022 at 01:49 AM
 


Search in Used Dept. 

Photonadave
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #11 · p.1 #11 · Bryan/TDP tested the RF800/5.6


Here's the RF800/5.6 compared to the RF600/4 + RF1.4:
https://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=1597&Camera=1508&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=0&LensComp=1556&CameraComp=1508&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=1&APIComp=1

You may have to cut & paste the link directly into your browser to get the RF600 with the RF1.4 to show.

(I see that @docusync@ was able to use the shortened link posted in OP to work correctly via the Bitly URL Shortener, at least at my end.)

If 840mm f/5.6 is what you need once in a while and would enjoy the versatility of dropping down to 600mm f/4 then this looks to be a good way to go.



Jun 22, 2022 at 04:28 AM
jedibrain
Online
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #12 · p.1 #12 · Bryan/TDP tested the RF800/5.6


Just back from Alaska, and found a few ship to shore landscape and wildlife opportunities where the 800mm (I have the F/11) was a little short. The shots came out good, just not as tight as I'd like. 1200 here i come! Except...not! I could take probably 3 family cruises for the cost of that lens. But still, depending on where you are or what you're doing there could be a need for these longer lenses vs the 400 and 600. The pricing is insane, but its either a business expense or a wealthy person's toy (much like the 400 and 600). Probably not aimed at the enthusiast bird photographer (who are already wealthy people).

-Brian




Jun 22, 2022 at 08:25 AM
Z250SA
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #13 · p.1 #13 · Bryan/TDP tested the RF800/5.6


IIRC, with no guarantee, one of the few issues with Bryans test results is that the tests are shot at minimum focus distance or at least close to. Few lenses are at their strongest at MFD, the long teles perhaps least of all.

He has been the one who _finally_ convinced me to get several lenses. I should, or actually Canon should, pay him a few monetary effects for his thorough work.

But my experiences have not correlated with his in a few cases, especially regarding his test charts. I have found the lenses to be better that his charts appear to indicate. Perhaps because I dont shoot test charts (brick walls if Im forced to), perhaps because I usually do not shoot at MFD. But Im capable of precision work and a ferocious pixel peeper if I feel an urgent need. My RF 100-400 is my latest experience of low corr. His must have been a lemon or otherwise a murky one.



Jun 22, 2022 at 10:00 AM
Z250SA
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #14 · p.1 #14 · Bryan/TDP tested the RF800/5.6


RobAmy wrote:
Not much love for the lens from the above post, I am actually enjoying the lens myself . The extenders work really well on the 800mm also.


No one wants to hear that! You should look at test charts and obey the general and massive consensus: it is an abomination, nothing else! (100% irony)

If I had the courage to release the money from my survival stash, I would get... the 1200!



Jun 22, 2022 at 10:12 AM
tkbslc
Online
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #15 · p.1 #15 · Bryan/TDP tested the RF800/5.6


Imagemaster wrote:
---------------------------------------------

Where do you come up with such stupid claims like those?

If the 800PF f11 was a it would cost over $12,000, weigh over 6.5lbs, and have an f5.6. It would not be $900, weigh 2.77lbs., and be f11.



Before you act too condescending, you may want to make sure you know what is being discussed or you might embarrass yourself.

We are talking about the RF 800mm f5.6, which is $17000, weighs 6.9lbs and does in fact have an aperture of f5.6. Nobody is talking about the cheapo 800mm f11.




Jun 22, 2022 at 10:14 AM
tkbslc
Online
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #16 · p.1 #16 · Bryan/TDP tested the RF800/5.6


RobAmy wrote:
Not much love for the lens from the above post, I am actually enjoying the lens myself . The extenders work really well on the 800mm also.


I don't think anyone would question it is still a great lens and will not let you down. Most of the discussion seems to be around value vs the alternatives like a 600 + 1.4x or 400mm + 2x (Or switching to Nikon for 800mm 6.3) .

But if it is working for you, and you can stomach the price, then you shouldn't care what we say!




Jun 22, 2022 at 10:17 AM
bman212121
Online

Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #17 · p.1 #17 · Bryan/TDP tested the RF800/5.6


armd wrote:
I cant stand my 2x on the 500 f/4 is ii and it (and just about any long lens) looks better than the 800. Cant wait for the R7 with a 500 or 600 and say bye bye to the tcs.


This is a common thought that I didn't really put the math to until recently. The part that you generally don't realize is just how much of a difference those TCs actually make to the image, so when you convert from MM to MP you're likely not doing the comparison correctly.

The main point is that when you think 2x, you think 200% more. But a TC increases 2x in both width and height, so it's enlarging the image by 400%. So the reason why it seems bad is because it's enlarging the image a lot more than you think, making it that much more difficult optically to do so.

However when we talk MP, you think 20MP -> 40MP equals 200%, which it does. But keep in mind that MP is already a width x height, so a 2x increase is only a 42% increase in each direction. A 1.4x TC is equal to switching from a 20MP camera to a 40MP camera, but a 2x TC is switching from a 20MP camera to an 80MP camera.

Point being that you're unlikely to be able to purchase any camera that would replicate the difference you're talking about. You'd have to be using a ~12MP camera and then getting something with around ~48MP in the same frame to provide the same magnification the 2x does. It's unlikely you're making that 4x megapixel jump between bodies, so you simply won't be able to get there from where you started without also increase the size of the lens.



Jun 22, 2022 at 10:43 AM
bman212121
Online

Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #18 · p.1 #18 · Bryan/TDP tested the RF800/5.6


RobAmy wrote:
Not much love for the lens from the above post, I am actually enjoying the lens myself . The extenders work really well on the 800mm also.


I think the big thing is that seeing the image charts can be a bit off putting if you're even thinking of getting a lens like this. I haven't seen images from the lens yet but I've been curiously watching to see if it's as bad as everyone has made it out to be. So far those charts aren't encouraging, but given the praise I've seen on here from other members for other lenses like the 400 f/4 DO II I'd gladly accept his chart is simply the worst case scenario.

Z250SA wrote:
IIRC, with no guarantee, one of the few issues with Bryans test results is that the tests are shot at minimum focus distance or at least close to. Few lenses are at their strongest at MFD, the long teles perhaps least of all.

He has been the one who _finally_ convinced me to get several lenses. I should, or actually Canon should, pay him a few monetary effects for his thorough work.

But my experiences have not correlated with his in a few cases, especially regarding his test charts. I have found the lenses to be better that his charts appear
...Show more

He as in you asked him or just looking at the site? Just curious because it does seem like he knows quite a few people and he talks to other people I would generally trust their opinion's on. I look at his site simply because others paint him in a positive light and it's quite hard to get actual trustworthy information around such niche products.

It does seem like sometimes the charts tend to be a more worst case scenario, but what I'd really be interested in is if you ever had an experience where his charts were better than what your experience was. I'd think that anyone who was digging for information before making the purchase would be happier that their lens is outperforming their expectations than the other way around. If you end up purchasing the lens despite a more poor showing on the test charts than you'd like it's still a better outcome than getting something you thought was going to be stellar and it doesn't quite live up to hype.



Jun 22, 2022 at 10:57 AM
Uarctos
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #19 · p.1 #19 · Bryan/TDP tested the RF800/5.6


2X is 100% more, 3X is 200% more. 800mm is 100% more than 400mm, and 1200mm is 200% more than the same 400mm.
Nobody is saying that the latest RF lenses are bad. They are way too expensive and less versatile.



Jun 22, 2022 at 11:01 AM
burningheart
Online
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #20 · p.1 #20 · Bryan/TDP tested the RF800/5.6


RobAmy wrote:
Not much love for the lens from the above post, I am actually enjoying the lens myself . The extenders work really well on the 800mm also.


That is good to hear the extenders are working well. I enjoyed the first day with mine at the zoo. Interestingly after shooting animals I ended up in the garden testing close focusing. It's not everyday one photographs flowers with an 800mm lens. Then again I never follow standard normal uses for any of my lenses. Years ago I used my previously owned FD 800mm to photograph a grasshopper.

My mentor used to ask the question of his students what is the best lens you have? His answer to his students was the one currently attached to your camera. That is one of his teachings that has never left me.

It was different feeling shooting that first day only handheld with no tripod or monopod.

I'm with you on the RF400 and RF800 big white combo enjoying both lenses.



Jun 22, 2022 at 11:30 AM
1
       2       3       end






FM Forums | Canon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1
       2       3       end
    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username      Reset password