So I finally picked up an R7 last week for my trip to the Everglades in October and now I'm paralyzed by lens choices. I really want to get into birding but I'm on a bit of a budget after dropping the cash for the body so I've narrowed it down to two main contenders.
First is the RF 100-400mm because it's so small and cheap, like only $600ish right now. My logic was that since the R7 is a crop sensor I'm getting that extra reach anyway but then I saw some people saying it sucks in low light because of the f/8 aperture at the long end and the Everglades can get pretty gloomy under the canopy. The other one I'm looking at is the RF 200-800mm but that's like $1900 and might be way too heavy to lug around for four hours. Then there's the RF 800mm f/11 which is a prime but that just seems so dark?
I'm torn between the 100-400 for the portability or just saving up for the 200-800 even if it delays my purchase by a few months. Is the 100-400 actually sharp enough for small birds or am I gonna regret not having more reach? Just trying to figure out if I should go for the budget option now or wait...
Ive been using the R7 for a while and the way it integrates with native mirrorless glass is just super satisfying. The autofocus communication speed is top tier and i have no complaints about how the subject tracking handles birds in flight. If youre looking for that perfect balance of reach and weight, you should really just look at the Canon RF zooms.
- The image stabilization is much more reliable when its native
- Weight distribution matters for four hour hikes in the heat
- Modern coatings keep contrast high in those gloomy canopy spots Just stick with something from the official Canon telephoto lineup. You dont necessarily need the most expensive gear to get sharp shots because the R7 sensor does a lot of the heavy lifting. Personally i think going with any native RF zoom is the smartest move for the Everglades... those optics are specifically designed for the shorter flange distance anyway.
