So I finally pulled the trigger on the R7 and now I'm stuck on glass. I'm mainly doing birding at a nature preserve near my place in Florida and need way more reach. I'm torn between the RF 100-400mm which is super light and cheap, or just saving up way more for the 200-800mm but that thing looks huge. I also looked at the 600mm f11 prime but the fixed aperture kinda scares me for evening shots. My budget is ideally under 1k but i might be able to go higher if the quality jump is massive. Is the 100-400 long enough for small birds on a crop sensor or will i just be cropping everything anyway?
Honestly, I found the Canon RF 100-400mm f/5.6-8 IS USM pretty disappointing for birding. You think 400mm is enough because of the crop factor, but it just isnt. I had issues with sharpness when cropping heavily, and small birds are always further away than you think. Its not as good as expected if you want real detail. Unfortunately, your options under 1k are limited:
- Canon RF 600mm f/11 IS STM is okay but that aperture is a massive headache in the evening.
- Canon RF 800mm f/11 IS STM gives you better reach but it feels like a toy sometimes. If you can stretch the budget, the Canon RF 200-800mm f/6.3-9 IS USM is the only thing that actually works for serious birding. Trying to save money on glass usually just leads to buying twice... trust me.
Jumping in here... are you shooting in wide open marshes or mostly under heavy tree cover? Florida light varies a lot and that really dictates if these slower lenses will even work for you. If you stay under 1k, the Canon RF 100-400mm f/5.6-8 IS USM is super portable but you're gonna feel the lack of reach for small birds. Its a solid lens for the price, just short. On the other hand, something like the Canon RF 800mm f/11 IS STM gives you massive reach for the price. The trade-off is the f/11 aperture which is definitely rough for those evening shots you mentioned. The Canon RF 200-800mm f/6.3-9 IS USM is the best of both worlds but way over budget and heavy. If you're handheld, that weight matters. Are you mostly shooting birds in flight or stationary stuff on branches?
^ This. Also, im gonna have to disagree with the idea that the budget lenses are really enough for birding. Honestly, the Canon RF 100-400mm f/5.6-8 IS USM was not as good as expected for me. I had issues with the focus speed on small birds, and the R7 sensor really shows every flaw in cheaper glass. It is disappointing but you are gonna want more reach almost immediately. Quick tip: save up for the Canon RF 200-800mm f/6.3-9 IS USM. The weather sealing is vital for Florida humidity and it is just a much more reliable long-term investment for your kit.
Re: "^ This. Also, im gonna have to disagree..." - man, I am literally in the same boat as you right now. I spent all night looking at the R7 sensor specs and that 32.5MP crop is no joke... it's so demanding on optics. I'm honestly terrified of buying a lens and then seeing every tiny bit of chromatic aberration because the pixels are so small. I've been doing a lot of reading and a few things make me nervous:
- Be careful with anything that has a slow maximum aperture because diffraction might kick in sooner than you think on this high-density body.
- I would suggest looking into the weather sealing specs too because Florida humidity is basically a lens killer if you're out in the preserves.
- Make sure to check how different brands handle the specific autofocus tracking on the R-series bodies before you commit. tbh I think you should just stick with any of the pro-grade glass from Canon. You really can't go wrong with their native stuff compared to adapting other brands, even if it costs a kidney. I'm probably gonna do that too because I'm scared the budget glass won't keep up with the sensor... we can be broke together lol.
+1
