Digital Lens Review: Canon EOS RF 100-500mm L IS f/4.5-7.1

This is a curious lens. It’s not the right lens for every purpose, however, I believe it is perfect for a few things. The main attributes that interest me are the 500mm reach, and the L-Series glass.

First, I would not use this for sports, with the possible exception of auto racing, and maybe rodeo. For sports like football and soccer I like to use a fixed prime lens. I would not use it for indoor, or macro photography, although it does have a very nice close focus distance of around 1 meter depending on the zoom. I’m not sure if I’d really use this lens for portraits, although it may work well for casual, outdoor shots of people. So, what does that leave us with? What is the sweet spot that I see for this lens? I see its main strength for handheld, outdoor photography. I think it would work well while hiking or walking when you need a long lens for wildlife or landscapes. It is large, but not too large to carry. Here’s a nice review by one of Canon’s Explorers of Light, Larry Chen: https://youtu.be/s8DTgInfQcg?si=rdRo4UyEENU2Oslu

I’d like to explain some of my reasoning before showing a few of my shots. First, I like this lens because of its high optical quality, even though it’s a fairly slow lens – and its speed is the primary reason I don’t like it for most sports. Also, I generally shoot sports with prime lenses (300mm f/2.8 and 400mm f/2.8), except for my 70-200 f/2.8, which I do use for basketball. If you try to use this for team sports (remember, I said that I think it may work well for motor sports or rodeo) I think you’ll be disappointed, mainly because I think it’s too slow. For macro, I think it’s too big – and isn’t really made for that. I would shoot macro with the EF/RF 100mm f/2.8, or the EF 300mm f/4 before I use this lens. Both of those lenses are much easier to handle for macro or near macro work. Finally, I don’t think this is a bad lens for portraits, especially at 100mm, but the speed will be the main hindrance – since it’s fastest speed (f/4.5) at 100mm isn’t (in my opinion) fast enough to produce a nice background. And, I think, it’s too large, bulky and heavy to work with easily for portraits. And you should keep in mind, if you’re a manual shooter (which I am for many sports), your exposure changes as you zoom – so it’s not ideal for shooting in manual mode. If you set your aperture to f/4.5, and zoom to 500mm, you will be underexposing. That’s one of the reasons I prefer my 300 or 400 f/2.8 (fixed aperture) for many of the sports I shoot. I use manual exposure, and if I set the aperture to f/2.8, it will stay at f/2.8 as I’m shooting. If you need zoom, a constant aperture, and you’re ok with max 300mm, the Canon RF 100-300mm f/2.8 IS USM would be a nice choice.

Now, what do I like about this lens? Well, even though it’s a large lens (not as large and heavy as my 300 or 400mm f/2.8 lenses) it’s not too large for me to carry – if I want the 500mm reach. From what I understand, this lens is not really 100% compatible with the RF extenders – so, I’m not intending to go that direction as using an extender would make the lens even slower. Also, as an L series lens, aside from being pricey, it’s a very sharp lens. I did try some macro-ish shots of bees in my flower garden – not a pleasurable experience – but I wanted to try it. Stabilization works well, and focus is very good as well. At first, I was a little disappointed that it didn’t have a lock for the zoom like the 70-200 (and other lenses) has, but then I noticed the zoom tension ring. I’ve heard other reviewers say they don’t understand the use of the ring, but I’ve used it like the lock on other lenses – so I just swivel it to tight and my zoom doesn’t move all the way out as I’m hiking with the lens hanging on me and move it to “loose” when I want to use the lens.

Here are a few images of the lens so you can get a feel for its size. The first image shows the 100-500 in the middle, with 70-200 on the left, and 300mm f/2.8 on the right, all at their most compact length. The 100-500mm lens is large, but not too large to pack in a camera bag, or carry and shoot handheld.

Now, here’s a few of my close-up/macro-ish shots. Again, not a macro lens, but it does allow fairly close focusing with stabilization.

Here’s a few shots I took at a steer roping practice. I liked using it for this, but images aren’t as sharp as I’d like. I’m going to take another batch and publish them in a different post. I’d like to try some different settings to see if I can get the images a bit sharper.

So, those are some of my thoughts about this lens, it’s use, and how it performs. I like the lens. It’s a bit large, but not too large to carry and shoot handheld. I would not use my 300mm f/2.8 handheld for very long as it’s too large and heavy. Carrying this lens, in my opinion, is possible when you need 500mm.

Alternatives to this lens might be Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 L IS II USM, or the Canon RF 100-400mm f/5.6-8 IS USM. Both of these lenses are very capable, but if you want a max 500mm they won’t do the trick. There are also a couple Sigma lenses for Canon EF mount that might do the trick. Sigma 100-400mm f/5-6.3 DG HSM OS, or Sigma 150-600mm f/5-6.3 DG HSM OS. I have used Sigma’s lenses and like their quality – although I’m not sure they are equal to Canon L-Series glass.

There’s also the option to rent one of these lenses before you buy one. That’s always a good option, one that I forget about, but it’s always helpful to try something out before buying.