i just subbed to your channel. got a new R7 days ago with the 100-400 to see how far this combo will get me and to learn more. i feel already that the time will come sooner rather later to grab a 200-800! and here we are. just refreshed my youtube feed and see your upload. GET OUT OF MY MIND PHIL! 🤣🤪literally just looking for videos about this lens but i already see i gonna love it. the small disadvantages are totally fine for me. if i want more i need to buy the L lens! if i want spend less this is what we get. and its plenty in my eyes. let me watch this video now😋
Thanks for the sub! I'd recommend the 100-500 over this lens on the ultra-high pixel density R7. On the ultra-low pixel density R6 Mark II, the 200-800 might be the best choice.
@@PhilThach fair point. but i am living as expat in china. wildlife here is insane scared. i need the reach from the crop sensor of the R7. even thinking about 1.4x with that. today i was sneaking around full ninja mode. making no noise. i saw birds. i hear them. i am getting closer than 50 meter and they all shut up/disappear. really hard to get any photos with the 100-400 i have right now and i am sure 100mm more wont get me anywhere. i see videos from the aussie guys here in youtube where they lay at the side of a nice little pond, birds like walking rainbows casually chilling 5 meters away in the water as if they are posing! there is no way i get anything similar here. not location wise or such colorful relaxed birds. i walk around in a huge park for 3 hours today. snuck up from behind a tree where i hear birds. i was pretty much invisible to then due to the angle. i got like 5 silent shots after they all disappeared one by one. so i think 800mm is the absolute minimum. (1100mm on the R7) before i had a bridge nikon with 2000mm lens to see if this kind of photography interests me and even that was often barely enough. so much to my thought process. i really dont mind about some small disadvantages in sharpness or handling because i am just a hobbyist😋. yes sure we all want the fanciest L lenses but you know how it is. i want something decent without paying the price of a new car.
Thanks for sharing this video, I've had the Canon R6 II for quite a while and just purchased the RF 200-800 a few days ago. I must admit it really exceded my expectations, It has very quick AF for birds in flight and and great sharpness, maybe slightly less than the 100-500 but there's not a lot in it.
Phil, something to consider. Before giving up on the R7 and the 200-800 combo, perhaps try some test shots on a tripod. That 800 on the R7 effectively becomes a 1280mm lens. The shutter speeds you are using that work with the R5 or R6 II at 800mm may be too slow for hand holding a 1280mm lens. If the tripod results are better, raising the shutter speed may be the answer. It would be good to hear the results if you try a tripod… These days 98% of the birds I photograph are with a tripod. Keep up the entertaining videos!
Thank you! While I agree with what you’re saying. I think the actual problem with the 200-800 is resolving power. In other words, it’s not sharp enough to project a sharp image onto a sensor with the incredibly high pixel density of the R7. The R7 has the highest pixel density of any canon camera. It’s very unforgiving.
I understand the pixel density issue, that's why I was hoping you would do the tripod test to help decide where the softness is coming from for sure. Currently I shoot with the R7 and the 100-500 and the 400 2.8 with and without the 1.4 convertor. I have the 200-800 ordered but wondered if it would be good enough on the R7. Your opinion is always appreciated.@@PhilThach
Thanks for the video Phil. I found the lens to be sharp enough given the reach. The atmosphere can wreck images as well especially at 800mm. It's really tough to tell why images aren't sharp at times but one thing is for sure that 100-500 is noticeably sharper than this but I'll take the extra reach over sharpness. If I want the sharpest shots with the gear that I have I will go with the a7cR and the Sony 200-600 not the same reach but stunning results.
@@bladerealm124 I don't have the 100-500 personally so I can't do a direct comparison but my friend has the 100-500 and we have compared and the 100-500 is sharper for sure. I use the 200-800 with the R5 and it's a great combo for reach but lately I find myself going for Sony with that 200-600 lens. It's sharper and the shooting experience is so much better. As far as images from the a7cR and the 200-600 I haven't seen a better combo. I will say the a7cR isn't the greatest body shooting experience so it's a trade off. I prefer the full sized Sony full frame bodies but I couldn't justify the price difference between what I paid for the a7cR (bought used) and the price of the a7rv. The AF in the a7cR is second to none as far as my testing goes.
I think with this lens, you just need the better focusing and low light performance of the R5 or R6MKII to balance the sharpness deficit vs the 100-500. So, the 100-500 just seems to work better on the R7. I've never bothered to put the R7 on my 200-800. I always stick with the R5 and am quite happy with the results!
Thanks for sharing Phil. I am on the verge of giving up on the R7 with RF 100-500. Still getting too many soft images. One last thing to try before sending it in. Reset to factory and test it immediately after rest to see what I get. I am worried accidently taking advice on settings from various you tubers may have caused a conflict in the camera I am not aware of. Hence reset to factory and start over. If this doesnt work, sending it back. I also am deciding between the R3 and the R6II. Then either the 200-800 or something I always wanted and need is a wide fast zoom like the RF 28-70f2 for post game team shots and basketball games. Take care Phil. Stay safe.
Thank you! I think a factory reset is a great idea. Hopefully that helps. Here’s a piece of advice for you. If you’re struggling to get sharp images with a 100-500 do not under any circumstances buy a 200-800. Your images will only get less sharp by switching from a 100-500 to a 200-800 unless there is something drastically wrong with your 100-500.
Hey Phil. Thanks for this. I just cashed in both my R5 and R7 for an R6 MkII. Still waiting for the RF 200-800 to arrive. Can't wait to get out and put it to work.
Thanks Phil. Some mixed results there as you say, when it's good it's excellent. I think you could be spoiled though with the other great telephotos you have. My main reservation would be that in the UK it's currently £500 more expensive than the Nikon 180-600 Z which you rate as sharper. The Sony 200-600 is even cheaper still. The 800 F11 from Canon is less than half the price too and you could argue that is a better buy if this one can't give consistently sharp results.
As always Phil Thank you for doing the shows that you do . Phil I'm beginning to get the idea that the 200 - 800 is not the best lens for doing birds in flight , that's why I've canceled trying to get one I hate to stay with my 150 - 600 Tamron , So I feel this is my only choice Please tell me if I'm right or wrong .
It's different gear, but I couldn't get really sharp pics with the A6700 and the 70 200 f2.8 GM2 over 170 mm. So I made some tests and found that I need to use 1/8000 s to get the best results at 200 mm. At 1/4000 s, some shots are off. You are using longer shutter speed with higher focal length, you may be reaching the limits of stabilisation.
There are some great shots in here, Phil. The R6 II opens up a whole new world of performance. The 200-800 has reminded me why I disliked the R7 to begin with, the autofocus just isn't there man. With the reduced aperture letting in even less light than the 100-500 and 100-400, it can really struggle to find sharp focus consistently. I begin to consider the lens as the culprit, but am quickly reminded how well it performs when it's mounted on the R3 and R6 Mark II. I fear the R7 can only muster so much and it can be a great camera, but it really does have sharpness issues from the shutter shock and AF inconsistency. Basically, the AF issues I had with the R7 and 100-500 are even worse with the 200-800. I've gotten some very cool shots with the combo, but I certainly find the camera struggles heavily using this lens. I keep the combo downstairs to quickly take in the backyard when the Ospreys, Red-Shouldered Hawks, and various other birds are out. That combo is sadly about to change, I'm just much happier using the R6II behind it.
I have a video coming out Saturday morning where I attempt to explain why I think the R6 mark two works better with this lens than the R7 and it’s the auto focus system.
The R7 is really just the first generation of what Canon had to quickly put out to have a more complete mirrorless lineup to compete with Sony. I strongly suspect the next generation mostly if not altogether will solve most of the current issues. Duade Paton so happen to put out a similar video on the same day. I think the stated if he only has to pick one lens, it would be the 200 800, simply because many times one can't beat the Reach. When is the last time you have seen a Summer Tanager, I think for me it was a couple of years ago, same for the Indigo Bunting. I am a few hundred miles south of you so we should basically should be seeing mostly the same birds. The bees are out in force, and I just over the last couple of days noticed a few butterflies. A R7ii with a stacked sensor and a new generation DIGIC X, will likely solve most folks current issues.
I’m not sure if I like the 200 to 800 enough to say I would pick it over the 100 to 500 if I could only have one lens. And I agree, I think the Mark two of the R7 will cure most of its problems but I’m not sure if I think it will make it a good camera to use with the 200-800. See my video that comes out Saturday morning for more details. Here in Tennessee I see summer tanager almost every spring.
Thanks and congratuation for this great videoI. Personnally, I own and use the same gears of R6 mkii and Rf 200-800mm since three months now but I must tell that I struggle a lot to make the AF finding and locking on the subects especially with birds in flight. It is easier with a bird on a clean blue sky but almost impossible when background is a forest. AF fly everywhere. After a while I understood that it was a lot easier when the zoom is not at full 800mm, best is between 400 and 500mm but that being said, it is still hard to find and follow the subject, harder than with my previous RF 100-500mm. Regarding the sharpness, so far is my opinion that it could be as sharp as my previous RF 100-500mm L or my old EF 100-400mm L but it must be in the best lighting conditions. The R6 mkii is very efficient in managing ISO but the colors get more and more blurry. I still try to find the best camera AF setting to work with, so far I am a bit desappointed.
I have a video coming out Saturday morning where I attempt to explain why I think they R6 mark two works better with this lens than the R7 and it’s not the auto focus system.
Thanks for the video and photo review. I got my hands on the lens and paired it up with my R6. So far so good, but bringing down to Florida next weekend (I’m up in Toronto, Canada) where I can hopefully put it to good use.
Great shots! I really liked the Ring-billed Gulls. Have you thought of setting up a sharpness target and comparing the lens/camera combos? I did this with my 70-200mm and 2x extender comparing it to the 200-500mm.
Thank you, Stephen! I have thought of doing a test chart sort of thing, but that’s not really my thing, I really should do it but I’m more of a go out and take pictures of birds and see what I can do sort of a RU-vidr lol 😂
Great video, as usual, Phil! The whole question for me is, "Is it sharp enough for what you do?" Have you seen Christopher Frost's review? I always trust Frost's reviews and his review of the 200-800 convinced me to stick with my 100-500. The 200-800 is clearly a very goodt lens at a pretty good price . . . but not as sharp as the 100-500 except in very limited circumstances. Still, given RU-vid's dumbing down of images, the lens is plenty sharp for RU-vid and most social media.
Great video. Thanks for sharing. Most of the shots in the video look soft to my eyes. I am not sure if the youtube video or the lens is soft. I get very sharp shots with R8 and 800 mm F/11. R8's sensor is amazing even in low light. I am wondering how this lens would perform on R8 or R6 MKII.
I like the lens on the R6 Mark II. The unforgiving R7 is where I rarely have good results. I've learned after shooting some test charts that I get my best results at f/10, not wide open at f/9. I have many videos showing this lens with the R6 Mark II. Look in my Wildlife and Pets playlist. I have rented my lens to a fellow photographer right now. When I get it back, I'm going to send it in to Canon and see if my softness problems are the norm or if they can be fixed.
The r8 and r6mkii have the exact same sensor. You’re just missing ibis, bigger battery, mechanical shutter, and some buttons on the bigger body with the r8. Low light will be identical
I love your videos, especially the bird images. I use the RF 100-500 on my R7, and I find the reach quite sufficient for birds and wildlife. I recently had the chance to test the RF 200-800 belonginging to a friend; I agree, the L-lens makes sharper images, especially if I avoid shutter shock with the EFC or electronic shutters. In the cold of Canadian winter, the heat haze is also worse with the longer telephoto. All told, I think I will stick with my current set-up. But I am curious whether you also find the heat haze to be worse with the longer lens? Thanks for sharing.
So far, I haven’t been bothered too much by heat haze with this lens, but I’m sure it will be a problem at some point. Thank you for your nice comment!
I think Duade Paton also has had issues with the inconsistency of the R7 and multiple lenses, including the 200-800. I have the R5 and R6, so I'm not too concerned, haha.
Indeed, I have had inconsistencies with my focusing on the R7 with multiple lenses, but I don’t think that is the problem here. I’m going to make a video about it that should come out within the next week or three.
I struggle with consistently sharp photos, even within bursts. I wonder if there’s something going on with the focus motors-like they’re slightly out of sync with the camera’s autofocus system. If that’s the case, could be fixed with a firmware update….
I took a picture of an eagle’s nest yesterday and it wasn’t until I got home that I realized it was sitting in it since it was so far away. My subject detection actually worked on my Fuji. 😂 I’m hoping the property owner lets me get closer and I’ll bring a tripod
Hey Phil. Enjoy your vids as usual. I see too many really good photographers like you trying to say this lens is sharp. If it is sharp then it is sharp prima facia. The 100-500 is most always tack sharp even with 1.4 ext. I’ll wait for the mkii of the lens and hopefully they make it better. I’ll also wait for the R5 mkii. Take care. Your Vols play my Cocks in tonight in Cola.
I have some ideas on another video about this lens and its sharpness that I plan on working on soon and presenting within the next two or three weeks. I hope you will have a look at that video. I’m excited about the basketball game tonight. Two good teams. I will be tuning in for sure.
Hello Phill! Beautiful video! I wanted to ask you what would you do in my case. I am a beginer bird photographer in Greece and I want to improove my current gear (canon 10d, sigma 24-150). My budget is arround 200 euros (+ -150$). I have found in facebook marketplace a canon r10 with a short kit lens for 1050 euros and a canon r6 for 1200 euros. I dont know which one to buy because of the lens selection. I want at least 600mm. So if you read this please tell me which camera would you choose and with which lens would you combine the camera. I apologise for my english and the long text. Cheers Nick.
Could it be that the lens profile is not yet available for the processing software you are using ? I got a sample raw shot from this lens and I thought the same as you and when I turned off the lens profile in DXO Elite for the similar rf 100-500 plus 1.4 extender shot. Both images looked exactly the same as far as sharpness was concerned,
I recommend it for the low pixel density R6 mark II but maybe not for the ultra-high pixel density R7. The R7 is much less forgiving when it comes to lenses and their resolving power.
Handholding any lens over 500mm is challenging at best. The real test is to lock it down on a tripod and use a remote shutter release . Only then can you eliminate user error ( movement). Although we like to think that in-body and lens stabilizers will solve our shortcomings, they rarely do when it comes to extremely long lenses. Honestly, there is just no substitute for tripods and deliberate technique.
So it was the r7 with the focus issue? the R7 seems to be hit and miss a few of us have focus issues, others do not. seems you have one good copy and one with focus issues.. as the r6 worked good
It’s more complicated than that. I’m going to make a video about it that should come out in two or three weeks. The R7 does have a little flakiness to its auto focus system, but I don’t think that is the problem with getting sharp shots using this lens on that camera. I can get sharp shots with other lenses on the R7 with not too much problem. Stay tuned!
Great stuff Phil. I keep going back and forth with getting on a wait list for the 200 to 800 or saving money and getting the 800 f11. My main reason I guess is like anyone else. Eagles and ospreys to far away for the 100 to 400. I mainly shoot predator birds and some heron and ducks from time to time. And to be honest I mostly shoot in good light conditions. I do not do any editing as of right now but have plans on trying it out. I don't really care about the f11 on the rf 800 as I have seen what that lense is capable of. I shoot the r6mk2 if I have not already mentioned that. Any thoughts fir me? Greatly appreciated.
On the R6 Mark II I like the 200-800 over the 100-500 for small birds. I need to do an in-depth comparison with the 800 f/11 to get a more complete answer for you.
@PhilThach thanks so much Phil. I would greatly appreciate a review like that. I'm really having a hard time figuring out which path to take. Your videos are always so helpful. Have a great day 😀
Wow, Nikon buys high-end cinema camera company RED whom previously sued Nikon. I think this means Nikon likely didn't have all the patent rights they claimed. Wonder how this changes thing between Canon, Nikon, and Sony.
Phil, great video, I find if i crank my shutter speed up over 800th sec my shots are significantly sharper. Just a quick question ❓ are you shooting single shot or servo ? I find that servo delivers a better success rate if I shoot on low speed continuous FPS.
