Canon R5 and Canon 600mm f/4 IS II; performance with 1.4x and 2.0x teleconverters 

Thanks for the comment.

same boat and set up (just using the 600mm mkii) and your right, the r5 was my first mirrorless set up, and it just makes everything so much easier. I love it

Thanks so much. Appreciate your comment. Have a great day.

@@whistlingwingsphotography No thank you sir - you channel is a treasure.

Thanks so much for the comment. They are always appreciated.

I agree. The 1D cameras as super quick with AF due to the voltage. I do miss that sometimes, but for the most part the R5 does what I need it to do AF-wise and other-wise. Thanks for your comment.

I hope for lighter as well

Thanks, Harry. Maybe see you down here in November.

Thanks so much.

Have fun with that new lens.

@@whistlingwingsphotography Would your harness work with the 600 4.0 iii ? I already have a carbon fibre monopod and a Sidekick what else would I need from your kit?

@@billbeverly2864 Yes, it was with the 600 f/4 in mind that I made the harness system. If you have a monopod and a head then this combo is what you need: www.whistlingwingsphotography.com/speed-shooter-harness/harness-system/main-harnesschest-stability-strap-combo You can also get shoulder pads and pouches that I sell separately from harness. Cheers, Ron

Thanks so much for the comment.

Thank you so much for your comment.

The image size in pixel x pixel dimensions will be the same for both lenses and is not affected by your choice of RAW or cRAW. RAW versus cRAW only changes the file size of your images in megabytes, not the dimensions of your images in megapixels. What will change the dimension of your images would be if you are shooing in a cropped aspect ratio. I would make sure your "Cropping/aspect ratio" is set to FULL in the Shoot1 menu.

Hey, sorry for the delay in getting back to you. It can be hand held without too much difficulty depending on the person and their physical abilities. I love to hand hold as it provides maximum ability to photography active subjects. For camo clothing I like Drake Waterfowl: www.drakewaterfowl.com/ They have very good quality, but you do pay for it. Take care and thanks so much for the comment.

Would also like to see a 1DX III vs the R5. I did just purchase the R5 to use on my 500mm f/4 mkii lens because I like to handhold whenever possible.

@@ScottPrincePhotography i have the R6 now for several months. I love it for flying birds. I did notice for the dog sports I shoot, it missed a lot if you fully rely on animal eye detection only. You would want to set up dual back button focus for when animal eye fails you. You can look it up on RU-vid how people set it up. I love the pro bodies myself, but the R6 has got me flying birds I would have a lot harder time with in the past. For dogs grabbing frisbees, when they spin around it loses eye detection sometimes. It’s possible I could adjust the AF to have it hunt less. I need to look into it. But for birds it’s great so far

I shot the Sony a9II and a7RIV with the 600 f/4 and they are no doubt awesome combos. For me the image quality with the 1.4x TC was excellent, but with the 2xTC I was not pleased many times. It may have been my copy of the 2.0x TC but I was not in the position to experiment at the time. Overall, the a7RIV just did not have the fps and tracking performance that the R5 now provides me with and I like the 45mp of the R5 more than the 61mp of the a7RIV. I find the R5 to be a much more forgiving camera to shoot than the a7RIV with its 61mp. Lastly, the a9II just does not have enough resolution for what I do most; birds. And, the a7RIV's AF system was not as good for me as the R5's. Right now, for me, the R5 with the 100-500 and my 600 f/4 and TC's will let me do just about all that I ever need to do with wildlife photography and do it really well. thanks so much for the comment.

Whistling Wings Photography thank you I appreciate the honesty and detailed explanation. Carry on sharing the good work.

You will here that is you have IS turned ON. IS is always working with the R5 if it is turned on.

I got it. Thank you Ron. I wish you have a nice day and stay safe.

Thank you for the comment. It is always appreciated

yes, the focus preset works with my R5 and 600mm f/4 IS II. Overall, I have found my Mk. II works better on my R3 and R5 than on my past DSLRs. Cheers.

@@whistlingwingsphotography Many Thanks

Sorry for the late reply. The 600 and 800 f/11 lenses are amazing with regards to image quality and performance, but they are limiting with regards to DOF and dealing with low light. If you don't need to smooth out very close backgrounds using f/4 aperture or shoot in very low light often, then the f/11 lenses may suit your needs. For me, nothing can replace an f/4 aperture when you need it. Cheers. Ron

yes SONY does hv the same combo and he sort of talked abt it but.....

Interesting comment about the 600 III. I was under the impression that they were optically very close and a mate has one and thinks he's wasted his money as he's not seen any iq improvement over his 600II,

@@stevemurnan1702 What body is he using? It'll probably be more obvious on say a 5DSR where lens quality is more noticeable. I've seen a few people luckily testing the iii before changing from the ii (then sending the iii back), and some who were unlucky and sold the ii to buy the iii, only to find worse IQ. The IQ loss seems to be worse with extenders vs the mark ii so I'm not sure if there's a physical reason for that. The optical formulas are very different between the two, element placing etc. There's a lens comparison tool on the-digital-picture which shows tests of them, and also shows a re-test on the mark iii (a 2nd copy I think?) but both were worse than the mark ii test for sharpness/contrast.

@@stevemurnan1702 weight reduction must be nice from the mark iii, but no amount of weight reduction will make me want to sacrifice IQ haha. The Sony has best of both there.

@@timwhite1111 I've not tried the Sony and the Canon III weight reduction isn't as big a deal for me. Not enough to shell out that sort of money for very similar IQ at any rate. I'll wait for the RF 600mm. I'll take a look the Sony lens tests as I'd be interested to know how it stacks up against the Canon II & III.

I am glad you are finding the Sony 600mm f/4 with the 2xTC to your liking. I did not like some of the results I got with that combo on either the a9II or a7rIV. I did not shoot the combo extensively, so it may have been my copy of the TC. Anyway, it is always nice to have options. Thanks so much for the comment.

I am using the focus limiter, as having it set to "Full" makes the cycling, when it happens, somewhat of a frustration. If I need "full" is use it, but most of the time I am not shooting that close. But, even with the limiter set to 16m-infinitiy the slow focus cycling can be an issue if you miss initial lock-on on a moving subject. To me, it is what it is, and overall I am happy with the performance of my 600 with TCs attached. I just really concentrate to make sure I don't miss AF lock-on very often and employ pre-focusing to my best advantage to keep the distance the lens has to cycle to a minimum. I generally do not use MF to pre-focus but just use AF to focus at a distance I believe will be close to where I expect to initially pick up my subject. Thanks so much for the comment.

Using the crop mode takes away a lot of resolution from the image to get the subject larger in the frame. Whereas, the TC get the subject larger without loosing resolution. The trade off for me always turns out better using the TC as the 1.4x TC I have paired with my copy of the 600 results in images with little to no observable loss in image quality.

@@whistlingwingsphotography Thanks for the reply, A TC usually degrades the contrasts and sharpnes a bit. It is doing an "optical" crop by projecting only the center portion of the lens on the sensor so both TC and crop mode will affect the image quality in their own ways (but the TC takes away 1 or 2 stops of light) I am not saying one is better than the other but since the R5 sensor has a high megapixel count, I guess the crop mode would still produce a decent amount of megapixel. This is why I was curious to know if you had the chance to compare both techniques. I use the EF 500mm f4 II, and did compare a 5D mk 3 + 1,4x III TC vs a 7D mk 2 without TC, both camera have the same megapixel count and the field of view were similar with these config (Full frame with 1.4x tc vs 1.6 crop sensor). When zooming into the photo, I found the crop sensor to give sharper image than the full frame with TC. But honestly, I think a "non photographer person" would not notice the difference. For my part, I almost alway use a TC on the super telephoto, and will use any combination of crop or full frame with it, both with 1.4 or 2x TC. All depends on the reach I need. The quality of these F4 super telephoto is great, the final image quality will still ends up being very good with any combinations.👍🏻☺👍🏻 📷🔭🦉

@@ME2K23 Yep, I agree. Overall image quality is great these days with and without TCs given the lens quality and sensors we now have. It really is split hairs when you start comparing images produced. Thanks so much for the comment.

Yep, the EF version III adapters attached to the lens and then the EF to RF adapter on the camera body; attaching the TC to the adapter. Thanks for the compliment on the intro. Cheers.

This is a difficult question. It really depends on if you will ever need the 2.8 speed the 400 will give you. If not, I would go with the 500 f/4.

@@whistlingwingsphotography thanks for the quick response and sage advice

@@prmatthiae My pleasure. You really can't go wrong with either of those lenses.

hey, thanks for the comment. I def think IBIS helps some. It is so hard to determine how much as I always found the IS on the lens to be very good in and of itself. On the R5 I am using mode 3 a lot for BIF. I have shot static birds at as slow as 1/5th of a second with IS mode 1 using the electronic shutter on a tripod. I never could do that before given shutter shake would cause blurring. Now with all these aids to sharp shots working together, you can shoot really slow. Just amazing to me!

@@whistlingwingsphotography I switched from no IS to mode 3 on my 600mm II on my last shoot and noticed a difference immediately. My keeper rate improved big time for BIF shots. Mode 1 for stationary birds is epic.

I should be able to put together a video on my setting for birds using this system in the near future. Thanks for your comment.

www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/838921-REG/LensCoat_LC6002M4_LensCoat_for_the_Canon.html/?ap=y&ap=y&smp=y&smp=y&lsft=BI%3A514&gclid=CjwKCAiAl4WABhAJEiwATUnEF-F2AUMT7SKurKZNQv7bBrzDZaomEDHPBLnYdLUAuQlVEPOxrSMhUhoCkt8QAvD_BwE

When using Zone AF the Canon system is very good, but maybe a bit less capable than the Sony. However, Canon is far superior when using Animal Eye Detect with Tracking. And that AF method is about all I use now.

Adapter, then EF TC and then 600.

@@whistlingwingsphotography Thank you. I am wondering if it would make a difference if it was an RF telex tender instead

It will not work nearly as well with the first generation 600 f/4 as it will not give you full fps in mechanical and the IS/IBIS is not a strong.

Yes, in my opinion the Mk III works better with the newer lenses.

@@whistlingwingsphotography Hm, I recently sold my EF 600 f4 MK2 for a EF 500 MK2 due to size, have no regrets in resulting images however there's a £200 price difference between the 1.4X II and 1.4X III, heard some people saying there's barely any IQ difference apart from slight distortion however they also said they felt the AF was slower on the MK2 lenses, not sure how true that is.

On Mk II Lenses the Mk III TCs are faster. They are made to work with the MkII lenses.

@@whistlingwingsphotography Ah good to know. :)

@@whistlingwingsphotography I'm glad you realised the RF 100-500 doesn't come close to the primes lol

Thanks so much for your comment. Stay safe and hopefully we all can get out and do more of what we love in the near future.

I understand. I really hope Canon continues to bring out lighter lens options in the 600mm range. You will like the 100-500 I am pretty sure of that. Great IQ and AF performance. Thanks so much for the comment.

I'm also considering to buy RF 100-500mm 🙂. It would be very interesting to see how RF 100-500mm performs at its largest effective diameter of the lens (~74,9mm) at ~472mm f/6,3. For normal use the 500mm f/7,1 (~70,4mm effective lens diameter) is probably better but with 1,4x TC it's getting quite slow (~f/9,9 700mm). So for that the largest effective diameter could be good resulting ~660mm f/8,8. But only if it's very sharp at this setting to begin with - otherwise stopping down is needed making this whole idea futile.

It works as it should, so no technical reason not to use it. For me, however, I don't like to crop in camera as I want the full 45mp and as many of those awesome pixels on my subject as possible, so I much rather use more focal length in actual lens to get my subject the size in the frame I am looking for and do any minimal cropping in post. This way I maximize the number of pixels and thus resolution on my subjects.

@@whistlingwingsphotography understood, thank you

Yes, Case 2 with Tracking Sensitivity set all the way to the left to Locked On setting. That is how I have it set and it works great for my style of shooting. Thanks so much for the comment.

@@whistlingwingsphotography Brilliant thanks for that....i'll give it a go tomorrow :)

I have not noticed that. I will pay more attention the next time I shoot video to see if I can find a set up that causes EVF jitter. Thanks for your comment.

Sony has this now, but Canon had this in 1988. When he says the reason he went with Canon "from the very beginning", he does not mean today. In addition, someone starting out today can buy the Sony kit for about the same $17K as new Canon gear, but the Canon shooter has the option of used gear for as little as $2000 or anything in between to get more features.

Here is my set up video. ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-6cbaoPeLbPI.html. Cheers. Ron

What a great move done by Canon. This opens great opportunities for all loving full frame but casually shooting long (low weight, low budget)

Yep. I agree. the 800 f/11 really is a great lens for the price point and it is so so light. Thanks so much for the comment.

Thanks so much for the comment, it is much appreciated.

You can find for setup info here: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-6cbaoPeLbPI.html If you have any questions after watching the vid just let me know. I can say this. The 100-400 will hunt a bit more than the 100-500 and 600 f/4 under certain shooting scenarios.

@@whistlingwingsphotography With both the 500 mkii and 100-400 mk ii, I find that (as you say) with the R5 it is often necessary to use the lens manual focus to bring the lens close to focus before the AF can take over. This seems to be the only downside compared to the dSLRs. The advantages are as you describe. Thanks for a nice video and super shots.

I would wait for the RF 600 if it indeed is coming relatively soon. I want planning on getting it when I comes out.

Get a used 600mm ii until the RF mount version comes out? Mark ii is better than the mark iii (heavier, but optically superior, especially with extenders).

Thanks for the comment. I hope you can get yourself an R5 sooner rather than later. I think you will like the results.

Hey, thanks so much for the comment. Yep, great minds think alike.

Whistling Wings Photography I’ll be interested to see some more of that combo in action, I’ve got the 1/4 converter atm must get the x2

All I can say is you will not be disappointed if you go with the R5. I do not have any experience with the R6, so no help there. Thanks so much for your comment.

Yep, both system are great. I have shot both. I personally have not had the success with the Sony 600 + 2x TC as I have had with the Canon system. Others like yourself seem to be having better luck then I have had. I can only state what I have experienced and for me the Canon system performs better. Maybe my Sony 2.0x TC is not up to snuff, but I don't have the resources to find out, so I have to go with what I am seeing with the equipment I have. Thanks so much for your comment.

@@whistlingwingsphotography thanks for your response. I'm happy the Canon works great for you. Thanks for sharing your experience and thoughts. I always appreciate that and it's good to hear how people feel about different systems and cameras. We can all learn from that . BTW you make awesome pictures. I hope to see more of your videos

For me 840mm was great with the Sony, 1200mm not so much. IQ was not as good as with my Canon gear and AF was not nearly as good with Animal eye detect and tracking as with the Canon R5 setup. It is really about 1200mm and not 840. The A7r4 is a great camera, but the AF and fps is not near what the Canon R5 can do in my experience when shooting 1200mm. So, the A7r4 crop solution is not a solution for me. Sony is a great system. There are things about it I love, especially the 200-600mm that Canon does not have a match for at this time. However, for me, when it comes to being able to shoot 1200mm doing what I do most, Canon R5 + 600 f/4 IS II + 2.0x TC provides me with the best results on a consistent basis. Notice, I say it provides me with the best results. I am not saying others can't do as well with the Sony. I just can't seem to, and it may just be I am not talented enough to adapt to what the Sony is doing to make the most of it.

@@whistlingwingsphotography When you are saying the Sony is not as good at 1200mm, are you using the native Sony FE 600mm f/4 or are you using an adapter with your Canon EF 600mm f/4? Well, if you are using the Canon with a Sony body, then of course it won't be as good. There are supposedly a lot of cameras coming out next year, personally I am waiting until then before I pull the trigger. There is the Canon R1, the Nikon Z9, the Sony A9X and may be even the A7R V.

I am talking about the Sony 600 f/4 and the Sony 2.0x TC. The IQ and AF just does not perform like my Canon 600mm f/4 IS II and 2.0x TC III. The Sony is a lot lighter than the Canon rig, but overall I get better results more often with the Canon. The Canon R1 looks to be bringing Quad pixel AF and a Global shutter to the game. If this is true, these two advancements could really set Canon on another level. I am not a Canon, or Sony, or Nikon, or any particular brand advocate. I just use what I feel gives me the best results for what I am doing. Best tool for the job. Right now the R5 is making me smile a lot when I look at my images after an outing.

@@whistlingwingsphotography Hmm, that's interesting. Yep, I am no fanboy neither, likewise I am just looking for something that can keep me happy for a good few years. I can understand there is a lot to like about the R5. But, if I were to go the Canon route, I would probably wait until the high res version of the R5 to come out. I am primarily a zoom shooter, so I am kind of allergic to TC which means I would rather shoot the camera in APS-C crop mode for max reach. But, speaking of zooms, that is a huge issue for me when it comes to Canon. I don't want to feel forced into buying the RF 100-500mm. I don't want another external zoom like my Sigma 150-600mm. The problem is external zooms have a very long and usually relatively stiff throw. Because by default so much of the lens is retracted when is not in use. That makes it really difficult to work the zoom ring when you are shooting BIF. The Sony FE 200-600mm however is an internal zoom, has 100mm more focal length and the zoom ring is only a 90 degrees throw from 200 to 600mm, not to mention it is smooth as butter too. That to me could be a deal breaker. I am thinking ahead as I speak now, if the A9X's sensor is over 50 MP, I might just go with Sony or if the A7R V has a faster frame rate with improved AF and tracking, that would work too.

@@Rascallucci I agree, the Sony 200-600mm is a sweet lens and I love the internal zoom and short throw. I with Canon would have gone that route. Now I have to wait for a much more expensive RF 600 f/4 that hopefully will weight a lot less than my current EF 600. It is just such a pain to lug that lens around the world with me. I want something more compact yet fast enough.

The 600 III is awesome and much lighter. It works wonderfully with the R5 and both converters. I am waiting for the RF 600 f/4 or I would get the mk. III EF verson.

Thank you very much for your answer, dear Ron! I was in a dilemma because of some reviews and user reports saying that ver. III is not as sharp as ver. II, especially with converters. I also think it is better to wait for RF version and then decide between the EF III version and RF iteration.

@@whistlingwingsphotography Ron I'm sure you just heard Canon just announced the new RF 600mm among other lenses.

@@ScottPrincePhotography I did hear. However, a bit disappointed as the 600 and 400 look to be the EF 600 and 400 Mk. III lens with the RF mount added. No other changes from the EF versions. I will stick with my EF and wait for a real RF version of these lenses that take advance of IBIS etc. Not sure how many years we will have to wait, but...

@@whistlingwingsphotography yeah I believe I will be holding onto my 500mm f4 mkii for quite a while. Take care

Good to know. Thanks for your comment as it adds to the knowledge base here.

@@whistlingwingsphotography as Tim White, I tested canon 300 vs sony 400 2.8 and sony is a better lens. I have both systems too

I agree. However, I was not impressed with the 600 gm + 2.0x TC on the a7R4. I had some less than good IQ and the AF was troublesome at times. Might have been my copy of the 2.0x TC, but did not have the capability to experiment at the time. Thanks so much for the comment.

Whistling Wings Photography Thats good to know. I don’t use use the the 2x tc on the sony much. Will have to check that out more. Amazing that EF glass works so well on the RF mount. Thanks for reviewing for us

Hmmmm....I perceive the Sony A7R4 as so so from performance of Autofocus, I am actually quite disappointed. The best results I get with my Sony 600mm 4.0 GM is in combination with a Sony A9 II. This combo also works greatly with a TC 2.0x.

@@Lapatinib I think that's because no translation is needed. All RF mount bodys understand the EF lens data natively. At the moment all third party "RF" lenses are said to use EF data connection and just have the RF mechanical mount.

Stefan1968ful I bet the A9ii is better, the a7r4 seems to be inconsistent amongst users with the 200-600 and even the 600 although less so

Yep, I am serious. Sorry, but I had the Sony A9II since it came out and the 600 f/4 and with the 2x TC the image quality was not as good as what I get with my Canon 600 f/4 + 2x TC. I shot them side by side and compared images and the Canon performed better. This is just me and my experience. I am sure other's eyes might see things differently and that is fine. Sony has a great system, so does Canon. Pick what you like. No wrong answer IMO.

Do Nikon have an R5 equivalent to stick on the end of the lens?