im so frustrated trying to pick a wildlife lens for my R7. i mostly do birding at the local wetlands and my old 70-300 just isnt reaching far enough anymore. im totally torn between the rf 100-500mm L and that new rf 200-800mm. the 100-500 is super expensive and pushing my $2500 budget but i hear the 200-800 is backordered everywhere and its basically a telescope. i need this for a trip to the everglades in 3 weeks and i cant decide if i should just bite the bullet on the L series or wait for the 800.
- budget: max 2500
- use: birds and small mammals
- deadline: mid-july
which one is actually gonna give me better shots on the crop sensor without breaking my back carrying it??
That is a valid point. I am very satisfied with my results, but be careful because atmospheric distortion can really compromise clarity at longer focal lengths, honestly.
To add to the point above: atmospheric distortion is definitely a pain at long distances, but honestly the R7 sensor is so pixel-dense that you really need top-tier glass to get those sharp details on birds! I absolutely love my R7 setup and honestly think you should just grab the Canon RF 100-500mm f/4.5-7.1 L IS USM. People get obsessed with the 800mm reach, but i respectfully disagree that more reach is always better, especially for a hiking trip. Carrying the 200-800 in the Everglades heat is gonna be brutal because it weighs a ton! The 100-500 is way more manageable and the image quality is just amazing. Since the R7 has that 1.6x crop factor, your 500mm is already giving you an 800mm field of view anyway. The contrast and color on the L glass is just fantastic... it really makes those herons and egrets pop. Plus, you can actually find it in stock before your deadline which is a huge win! You wont regret the L series glass quality, it is basically addictive once you see the results.
