ktsa5239 wrote:
I've had my Rf400 f2.8 for about 6 months now and so far I'm blown away with the performance of the x2 making it a 800 f5.6. In fact, the x2 is almost always on my 400 90% of the times. I do regret not going for the 800 but the 400 and extenders was all I could afford at the time. Personally I love the short MFD because the birds I shoot are always small so even if it lands close to me, I can still get these really cool close up portraits of them.
I signed up for an account to post pictures but I just realised I cant post pictures unless I pay a fee so oh well........Show more →
Interesting. One problem I have with the EF 400 and the EF 2x is the auto focus really hunts around a lot instead of snapping focus on the birds. Has this improved with the RF 400 and the RF 2x combination?
Also some folks just post a link to uploaded photos from a cloud account or other website.
ktsa5239 wrote:
I've had my Rf400 f2.8 for about 6 months now and so far I'm blown away with the performance of the x2 making it a 800 f5.6. In fact, the x2 is almost always on my 400 90% of the times. I do regret not going for the 800 but the 400 and extenders was all I could afford at the time. Personally I love the short MFD because the birds I shoot are always small so even if it lands close to me, I can still get these really cool close up portraits of them.
I signed up for an account to post pictures but I just realised I cant post pictures unless I pay a fee so oh well........Show more →
As the previous post mentioned, you can just insert links from an external hosting site such as Flickr. Even though I'm a paying member here, I still prefer using links to my Flickr images.
Dilemma wrote:
I see the MFD argument made but I don't really understand it. The minimum focus distance on the EF is about 20 feet. The RF version is about 8-1/2 feet.
My question is this; what are you shooting with an 800 that would dictate needing a MFD this close? If I'm shooting the 800 chances are good I need that reach. If I didn't, I'd use a different lens.
I'm not trying to be argumentative Rob I'm just trying to understand. I can't recall a single time I've wished for a better MFD while shooting the 800.
I'm not Rob, nor do I own the RF 800, but I do own the Nikon 800PF, which has a 16' MFD. For shooting small birds, 16' doesn't sound like much, but I regularly miss shots because a subject comes in under that MFD, so much so that I bought a 100-400 (3' MFD) for those more friendly species. The 8.5' of the RF 800 would be a great improvement, obviating the need for a support lens.
The challenge one faces at these short MFDs is DOF though, so you have to really be mindful of stopping down at such ranges, otherwise you can end up with shots that don't look all that great because most everything is OOF.
netexpress wrote:
Interesting. One problem I have with the EF 400 and the EF 2x is the auto focus really hunts around a lot instead of snapping focus on the birds. Has this improved with the RF 400 and the RF 2x combination?
Also some folks just post a link to uploaded photos from a cloud account or other website.
Yes things have changed, The RF 2x is amazing on the RF 400mm. AF is very snappy. Best I have used. I have used the RF 400mm since the release and a lot at 800mm. This is a very good combo. As said above I would not hesitate to sell the 800mm and keep the 400mm. It is that good. Even the RF 100-300 with the 2x is amazing. Canon is doing some sort of voodoo with the f2.8 and 2x combos. This is with using the R3 also. If someone does not need to get past 800mm much then the 400mm would be my choice. Giving you 400/560/800. If always at 800mm then go for the 800mm. Both are great and recommend either one.
My experience echos Rob’s. I didn’t find the AF to be any slower with the 2x. I really want to upgrade to the 800 as I shoot with the 2x all the time but I simply can’t afford the extra 7-8k aud 😔
netexpress wrote:
That's very helpful! I'm also used to the 1 series and looking at the photos of the R3 - it looks more like "home" to me. I was hoping to hold out for the R 1 series but it doesn't look like they'll have that out until 2024.
Thank you to everyone on this thread. I'm a new dad to a Canon R3 this morning based on the advice given here on this thread. The R3 definitely feels like home. The ergonomics are fantastic - the menu system so easy to use. Playing around with all the new features like eye controlled auto-focus! You can't beat this experience!
I'm going to take my time learning the new body and eventually upgrade to an RF super-telephoto - likely the RF 800. Suggestions on where to buy the RF 800 welcome. Feel free to PM.
netexpress wrote:
Thank you to everyone on this thread. I'm a new dad to a Canon R3 this morning based on the advice given here on this thread. The R3 definitely feels like home. The ergonomics are fantastic - the menu system so easy to use. Playing around with all the new features like eye controlled auto-focus! You can't beat this experience!
I'm going to take my time learning the new body and eventually upgrade to an RF super-telephoto - likely the RF 800. Suggestions on where to buy the RF 800 welcome. Feel free to PM.
big country wrote:
Next up, the elephant in the room - Minimum focusing distance. As a wildlife/bird photographer, this is the most important thing, especially for birds that get close! I had super rare (to the united states) fan tailed warbler land 10 feet in front me of, I could not have gotten this photo with 600 or 1200 because of MFD, same with the Anna's hummingbird pic posted below. I would've have to move, and that risks making the bird fly away. I have met one person in the field with the 1200mm. Their sentiments are, they probably should've gotten the 800mm. I had the EF 600mm f/4 IS II, and was going to keep it for ten more years, but I was tired of these small birds landing in front of me and not being able to get the shot due to MFD.
As an EF 800/5.6 owner, I wouldn't have ever thought I would want to sell it in favor for a 400mm, but that is exactly what I am wanting to do now. I just don't think there is much of a market for my lens now, but perhaps I'll list it and see what happens. If the RF 400/2.8 with RF 2x is as good as you all say (and I've seen some convincing pictures with the combo) then I could see myself being happy with one for a very long time.
****The way smugmug resizes these takes out some of the sharpness...if i post actual size that shows sharpness then the images are huge on the forum, i'll start resizing even smaller...******
