p.1 #1 · Advice on Telephoto Options While Waiting for RF 300-600/800 F/X(?)/Looking to buy
I just sold my RF 100-400 and am looking for a good telephoto setup to bridge the gap until the rumored RF 300-600/800 lenses come out.
I shoot wildlife and landscape/nightscapes with an EOS R6mii and want something reasonably sharp that can cover 400mm+. I also have the RF 1.4x and 2x extenders — I felt the RF 100-400 was too soft and slow at the long end, both bare and with the extenders.
Here are the options I’m currently considering:
Tamron/Sigma EF 150-600 (adapted)
Canon EF 100-400 II + 1.4x extender
Canon EF/RF 70-200 f/2.8 IS paired with a lighter and cheaper older 300 F/2.8 IS or 400 Canon EF 400mm F/4 DO IS II USM (I like the 400+ super telephotos but most are too heavy to travel with)
For those of you who have used these combinations adapted to RF bodies, what would you recommend for:
✅ Sharpness
✅ AF performance
✅ Weight and handling (I'd like to handhold it for short periods)
And if you have a lens that fits the bill that you’re looking to sell, please feel free to reach out via PM — I’d also be interested!
p.1 #2 · Advice on Telephoto Options While Waiting for RF 300-600/800 F/X(?)/Looking to buy
I suggest first getting an R5 or R5 II for the substantially better reach than the lower res R6 III.
Then get the 100-500, and later get a longer lens if necessary. I often pair the 100-500 with a 500/4 or 600/4. I use the 1.4x TCs on the primes, but not normally on the 100-500. If a 300-600 or similar magically appears, the 100-500 will still be useful as a smaller, one-lens solution with wider range.
p.1 #3 · Advice on Telephoto Options While Waiting for RF 300-600/800 F/X(?)/Looking to buy
Thanks for the input, but I’m not looking to upgrade my camera body right now — the EOS R6 suits my needs perfectly. My question is specifically about lens options to bridge the gap until the rumored RF 300-600/800 lenses arrive.
Also, I find the RF 100-500 too slow for its current price point, so I’m focusing on alternatives like adapted Tamron/Sigma 150-600, EF 100-400 II + 1.4x, or 70-200 + 300 f/2.8. I’m interested in real-world feedback on sharpness, AF performance, and handling on the R6.
Would appreciate input from folks who have actual experience with these lens combos on RF bodies.
p.1 #4 · Advice on Telephoto Options While Waiting for RF 300-600/800 F/X(?)/Looking to buy
EB-1 gave you the best real world advice you; 100-500 + R5 is an incredible option. 200-800 is another option. 100-300 + 2x is a serious upgrade;
Canon prices are going up next week, used market will follow.
enriquehoja wrote:
Thanks for the input, but I’m not looking to upgrade my camera body right now — the EOS R6 suits my needs perfectly. My question is specifically about lens options to bridge the gap until the rumored RF 300-600/800 lenses arrive.
Also, I find the RF 100-500 too slow for its current price point, so I’m focusing on alternatives like adapted Tamron/Sigma 150-600, EF 100-400 II + 1.4x, or 70-200 + 300 f/2.8. I’m interested in real-world feedback on sharpness, AF performance, and handling on the R6.
Would appreciate input from folks who have actual experience with these lens combos on RF bodies....Show more →
p.1 #5 · Advice on Telephoto Options While Waiting for RF 300-600/800 F/X(?)/Looking to buy
I also agree the RF 100-500mm is the best option.
It is basically the EF 100-400 II +1.4x extender built in. (The RF 100500mm is at f/5.6 to around 375mm), but it is slightly smaller, lighter, sharper, and autofocuses faster than the EF 100-400mm.
I owned the Sigma 150-600mm too, and while it is surprisingly a very sharp lens, especially for the price, it was lacking very badly with autofocus. Both speed and accuracy on a R6 and an R5 body.
P.S. The rumored 300-600/800mm lens can come in 6 months from now, 6 years, or never. It is just a rumor.
p.1 #6 · Advice on Telephoto Options While Waiting for RF 300-600/800 F/X(?)/Looking to buy
Of the ones you list I'd go with either the 300 f/2.8 IS II or 400DOII with the EF III TCs. I owned both of those lenses and both were excellent. Although I never ran them on Canon MILCs, only DSLRs. I did run the 400DOII adapted to Sony A9 which worked well.
But as others have said, the RF100-500 probably makes the most sense as it has the native RF AF speeds.
I wouldn't base any decision on a rumour of the 300-XXX lens. There are 100s of strongly rumoured Canon lenses over the years that never get produced. Buy the best option for you now. Not to tide you over for something that may never arrive.
p.1 #7 · Advice on Telephoto Options While Waiting for RF 300-600/800 F/X(?)/Looking to buy
Why a 100-500 would be too slow compared to a 100-400 II + tc? i use the 100-400 ii regularly but if i did’t have a 500 f4 ii i would’t hesitate to upgrade to the 100-500 especially on a low mp body like the r6
p.1 #8 · Advice on Telephoto Options While Waiting for RF 300-600/800 F/X(?)/Looking to buy
I have five 100-400s including two of the EF IS II. The IQ with the 1.4x was not ideal on the 5D IV (even when it was in focus). Any slight gain in magnification of 560mm at f/8 over 500mm at f/7.1 is negated by the TC loses. I was not happy with the Sigma 150-600C at 30MP and ergonomics/speed were not impressive. I'm using a Sonoy 200-600 and a7rV for times when I need a single lens for reach and the 200-600 range makes sense over a prime 500 or 600.
As arbitrage noted, there is nothing official yet for the 300-600 so it is vorpaware for now. I'm still waiting for the 600/4 DO nearly 25 years after the first mention. Maybe I should have it on the headstone.
p.1 #10 · Advice on Telephoto Options While Waiting for RF 300-600/800 F/X(?)/Looking to buy
I'm another for the RF 100-500, although I find the restricted zoom back with a TC a bit perplexing.
The adapted EF 100-400ll rivals the IQ of the RF100-500, and is generally quite sharp with an EF 1.4lll TC, but with that your only gaining 60mm over the RF100-500 bare lens.
p.1 #12 · Advice on Telephoto Options While Waiting for RF 300-600/800 F/X(?)/Looking to buy
enriquehoja wrote:
Also, I find the RF 100-500 too slow for its current price point, so I’m focusing on alternatives like adapted Tamron/Sigma 150-600, EF 100-400 II + 1.4x, or 70-200 + 300 f/2.8. I’m interested in real-world feedback on sharpness, AF performance, and handling on the R6.
Hard to understand why you would sacrifice sharpness, AF performance, and handling because of the perceived "speed" of the superior RF 100-500L...?
p.1 #13 · Advice on Telephoto Options While Waiting for RF 300-600/800 F/X(?)/Looking to buy
Sy Sez wrote:
I'm another for the RF 100-500, although I find the restricted zoom back with a TC a bit perplexing.
The adapted EF 100-400ll rivals the IQ of the RF100-500, and is generally quite sharp with an EF 1.4lll TC, but with that your only gaining 60mm over the RF100-500 bare lens.
And you lose 40% off the wide end, not to mention the inconvenience of having the TC and adapter on the lens that increase weight and closed length. If one already has the 100-400 II maybe it makes more sense.
The 100-500 has a rear element that needs to protrude to reach the wider focal length. I suspect that the 300mm point was a compromise.
EBH
Jun 19, 2025 at 01:07 PM
AmbientMike Offline • • • • • • [X]
p.1 #14 · Advice on Telephoto Options While Waiting for RF 300-600/800 F/X(?)/Looking to buy
I think people have a hard time wrapping their head around f/11, as opposed to it being a problem. I've only handled the 800/11 (R5,) seemed well made though, and I'm often around f/8 on aps and ff high iso beats aps by over a stop. 800/11 should get rid if a bg at least as well as 200 at 2.8, and better if you keep the subject the same size on both
If you have a good copy of the rf 100-400, you might have to spend to get a sharper lens, although 100-500 might get you there.
p.1 #16 · Advice on Telephoto Options While Waiting for RF 300-600/800 F/X(?)/Looking to buy
Thanks again for all the replies — helpful perspectives even if we’re coming at this from different angles.
To clarify, I’ve tested both the RF 100-400 and the RF 100-500. My conclusion wasn’t that they’re bad lenses, just that for my use case (low-light wildlife, nightscape, and landscape), they’re not the right fit.
f/7.1 at 500mm is too limiting for what I shoot.
The 100-500’s price-to-performance just doesn’t make sense for me right now, especially when paired with an R6.
I’m not locked into the EF 100-400 either — it has its own flaws with extenders. But I’m more interested in options like the EF 300/2.8 + TCs, which still outperform zooms optically and offer more flexibility in marginal light.
I understand the appeal of staying native and lightweight, and I respect the 100-500 for what it is — but I’m not chasing every Canon lens just because it’s new and RF. I'm focused on performance per dollar and image quality in real-world shooting, not specs on paper.
So again, I’m specifically looking for first-hand experience with adapted EF glass on RF bodies — especially high-end primes and TC combos. That’s the lane I’m in.
p.1 #17 · Advice on Telephoto Options While Waiting for RF 300-600/800 F/X(?)/Looking to buy
Also want to address the R5 suggestion — a few folks have brought it up.
I get the appeal of 45MP and deeper cropping, and yes, it makes sense for birders who live in daylight and crop hard. But I’ve already considered that route, and for my use — which includes low-light wildlife and astro — it doesn’t justify the jump in cost or file size.
The R6’s lower pixel density may mean less cropping room, but it’s better in high ISO and night conditions, which matters more to me than pulling a tighter crop on a perched bird at noon.
Unless Canon suddenly drops a reasonably fast native RF supertele, I’d rather put the extra $600–700 into better glass or a possible second body like an R7 if I want pixel density on a crop sensor — not just move sideways into a higher-res full frame for reach I don’t always need
p.1 #18 · Advice on Telephoto Options While Waiting for RF 300-600/800 F/X(?)/Looking to buy
@arbitrage — really appreciated your comment about the EF 300 f/2.8. Would love to hear more about how it handles on an RF body, especially with Canon TCs.
I’m seriously considering it as my main wildlife/tele setup right now, paired with a 70-200 for closer subjects and compressed landscapes. I shoot on an R6, so I’m particularly curious about AF performance, responsiveness, and sharpness with extenders in real-world use.
If you’ve run that combo or have anything to share about how it performs adapted, I’d really appreciate it.
p.1 #19 · Advice on Telephoto Options While Waiting for RF 300-600/800 F/X(?)/Looking to buy
i shoot with an R6m2 and a R3 using a adapted EF 300mm 2.8 L IS II with Canon's 1.4x III and 2x III extenders, as needed. I find the setup sharp, practical and fast focusing. The 300mm with 1.4x III is very sharp, the 2x III is a bit less sharp but certainly makes wonderful images. I am a full time photographer shooting mostly sports and some news and use this setup all the time. I also shoot wildlife for stock and fun with this setup. The earlier version 300/2.8 IS is also quite sharp but the II is a bit better. I've used both. I have also shot with a friends 400 f/4 DO II and it is also a great lens. I stayed with the 300/2.8 because I need it for some of the places I shoot. Check out my web site - http://www.duaneburleson.com - for many images shot with various lenses, the pictures are tagged with the equipment used.
p.1 #20 · Advice on Telephoto Options While Waiting for RF 300-600/800 F/X(?)/Looking to buy
My first thought is we have been waiting for this 200-600 5.6 (ish) zoom for years and still nothing but rumors. You may be looking at a longer term solution than you think. I hear you on the 100-500. Great lens but when compared to a "great white" it is not in the same league. I use a 300 2.8 for sports with and without a 1.4 with great results. The 2x is a slight AF, bokeh, and IQ reduction but still perfectly fine. I have a 600 for wildlife so the 300 combination is seldom used for that as my subjects are too distant. With all that said from what you have written I would suggest an EF 500f4 and 1.4.
