Want better autofocus results from your Canon R5, R3, or R7 - Think Differently 

Ha! That is great. Thanks for sharing and watching.

Great point, and thanks for adding that to the discussion. Much appreciated.

Glad you enjoyed it. Thank you for watching and commenting.

Hey, thanks for watching and taking the time to comment.

Thank you for watching and commenting.

My pleasure! Thanks for watching and taking the time to comment.

You bet!

Great to hear! Thanks so much for watching and commenting.

Great to hear! Thanks so much for watching and commenting.

Barrett, thanks so much for adding your experiences with the R7. It is extremely valuable to have others like you chime in. Cheers, Ron

Hey, thanks so much Richard for adding your experiences to the mix. I am glad you found the video interesting.

Glad it was helpful! Thanks so much for watching and commenting. It is much appreciated.

My pleasure. I hope you had a wonderful time on your trip. Sounds amazing.

Thanks so much for adding your experiences to the discussion. Always great to hear how others are doing things. Thanks for watching too!

Nick, thanks for adding to the discussion . Always good to hear other people's take. Thanks for watching. Ron

Allen, thanks so much. That would be a good video topic. At this time I am using the "Auto" setting a lot and finding it does a great job sensing what I am doing and adjusting. I have never be a fan of "Auto" setting on cameras, but this may turn out to be an exception for me.

Thanks so much for watching and commenting.

Hey, thanks so much for adding your findings to the discussion. Your finding is interesting in that it actually hunts more and not just takes longer to cycle with set to "FULL." I will have to see if that is the case with my setup. Cheers, Ron

Awesome, thanks for watching and taking the time to comment.

Welcome

To me, it really depends on if you need the best AF and IS/IBIS performance available and that outweighs your need for a faster aperture. If you need the performance then the RF 100-500 is the way to go for me. Thanks so much for watching and adding your input to the discussion.

Hey, thanks for watching and taking the time to comment. I have found the 1.4x TC on the 100-500 does slow AF response down just a bit, so I think what you are sensing is correct. Shooting with a bright enough exposure seems to mitigate this a bit, but I have not tested that idea fully.

@@whistlingwingsphotography On my next birding shoot I will try shooting as bright as possible and see how it goes. Thanks

That is very interesting, but I have to disagree. I shoot some very difficult subjects in small, fast-flying birds and I shot my EF 600 f/4 II and 100-400 II for quite a while on both the R5 and R3. They performed as well as they did on my DSLRs such as the 1Dx II. Then, I was able to shoot a 100-500 and RF 600 f/4 for several days shooting flying sea ducks. I had my EF 600 and the RF 600 sitting side by side and switched between them for 3 days of shooting where I shot thousands of images with each. There is no question that the RF lens did much better on AF speed and accuracy both naked and with both TCs. To me the difference was obvious, or I definitely would not have spent all that money to upgrade. I have several clients that have upgraded and they have told me their experience has been very similar. I agree that the optical formula of the newest EF glass and the RF glass, in say the 600 f/4s, is the same. No need to change something that is world-class. However, something is improved in the RF glass for communications between the camera body and the lens with the RF lenses with respect to AF performance. If you can rent a RF 600 f/4 and the RF TCs and shoot them on the same demanding subject side by side. I would bet money you will see very different performance levels. Thanks for the comment. Always good to hear others thoughts on topics.

Interesting, Ron, thanks for the clarification on how you arrived at your conclusion. This gentleman, aside from being a long-time Canon employee, is a wildlife & nature photographer, shoots an R5 & R3, and has held onto his own, personal EF500 II & EF 100-400 II for use with an adapter, because in his experience -- and Canon's testing, according to him -- there's no difference in AF speed. In the case of your EF 100-400 vs RF 100-500 comparison, did you check your EXIF data? I wonder if some of your "better AF quality" images were captured in the 400-500 focal length range and mis-attributed to "faster AF" instead of laying 100 more mm worth of pixels on target. With regards to the two 600's, did you shoot them both naked? I wouldn't be surprised to see the newer RF TC's out perform the older EF TC III's, as they've always been the weak link in the EF chain, in my experience. As for renting and testing side-by-side, I would have to do that and see for myself a VERY significant difference to even consider fire-sale-ing my wonderful and expensive (!) EF glass.

Hey, thanks so much for all the nice comments on my channel. Regarding the harness system, I offer an ultralight version that is in no way bulky and would suit your use case very well I think. I am 5'6" and the harness is very adjustable along with the monopod, so it should fit you just fine given it fits me and can still be adjusted even smaller. If you have any other questions just let me know. Sincerely, Ron

I have nothing against the R6 at all. I just don't have one and never shot one, so I can't really say much about that body. Looking forward to shooting with you and Jim again. Ron

Thank you for watching and for the kind comments about my videos. With respect to turning stabilization on or off depending on shutter speed. Here is how I look at it. Stabilization does more than just stabilize your images it also stabilizes what you see when you are looking through the viewfinder and this is an advantage regardless of what shutter speed you are shooting. So, most recently, I have been shooting with mode 2 "ON" all the time regardless of shutter speed and getting great results. Now, this is using the Canon 100-500 and Canon RF 600 f/4, so RF lenses, so please take that into account. Cheers, Ron

@@whistlingwingsphotography thanks so much for the reply. We also use both the RF 100-500 and the RF 600 on an R5 and R6.

I found the 100-500 to be a pretty big improvement over my 100-400 II for AF, but especially for IS/IBIS performance. It also is smaller and lighter if that is important to you. I would say rent a 100-500 if you can and see if you think it is worth the price. I always like to shoot a body or lens before purchasing to really see how I like it.

Eye AF always uses the full frame. Instead, use area AF with subject tracking and eye detection.

IS and IBIS work together, so they are both configured using the IS mode switch on the lens. Any non-IS lens you can use the camera's menu to turn IBIS on or off, but that is the only independent control of IBIS, and again, only with non-IS lenses.

Kind of. You don't want to be on Mode 1 for anything moving around. If anything, set Mode 2 and leave it. Use Mode 1 for totally static subjects.

That is part of the issue. Overall, it is about getting to understand what a system is capable, its strengths and weaknesses, and working within those parameters. It just takes time and tinkering with whatever system you are shooting.

I would not hesitate to get an R3. It is my favorite camera to shoot. The AF is a step above every other camera I have used. Cheers, ron

WalMart camo tape

Hey, thanks Vince. These issues do seem to be pervasive, but once folks get the right way of thinking about how AF systems work these days, they seem to improve their results. Take care my friend.

That is so true. Thanks for commenting.

Hey, thanks for the comment. So, should I assume you are speaking for everyone in the world, because everyone is just like you and finds what was presented here to be a no brainer. I suggest you don't loose sight of the fact that there are many people out there that can benefit from explanations such as those presented here. Just because you don't see the value does not mean everyone is just like you. So, right back at you. Get real!

Sorry you're having a bad day. Lots of us struggle when starting out, and helping us through the frustrations can make lifelong enthusiasts, which I generally see as a good thing.