Final summer season I purchased a really perfect telephoto lens to seize flora and fauna in Alaska. After greater than part a yr of the use of it as a lens for panorama pictures, was once it value it?

For many of my pictures occupation, I’ve shot with an excessively minimum equipment in several permutations: a digital camera, 16-35mm super-wide, and a 70-200mm telephoto. That’s been my bread and butter for goodbye that including anything nearly felt like I used to be going towards my minimalist roots. Then again, after I began growing YouTube movies complete time it required a 2d digital camera, any other tripod, and a drone. At that time I spotted I wasn’t a lot of a minimalist anymore and that my equipment may just merely be malleable in keeping with the duty; taking pictures from my automobile, going for a hike, or an concerned shuttle. 

After I drove to Alaska to reside there for a couple of months this previous summer season, I knew I couldn’t move there with out one thing to seize flora and fauna with. Renting a lens for kind of 3 months was once out of the query taking into account the cost. After I discovered if I may just get my fingers on a Canon RF 100-500mm that I may just merely resell it after the tour for a small loss, it changed into no query.

Spoiler: I nonetheless have the lens…

The Excellent

Maximum of my analysis of this lens is in regards to the tremendous telephoto features in panorama pictures. Particularly, the rest past 200mm so to now not overlap with a typical 70-200mm telephoto lens. That being mentioned, I will not write about this lens with out highlighting its versatility. Sure, it’s a superzoom however it does nonetheless quilt the extra usual 100-200mm vary as neatly. Which means that after I’m using round searching for compositions, which I do excess of the common particular person taking into account I live to tell the tale the street taking pictures. The RF 100-500mm has turn out to be my using lens over my Canon RF 70-200mm f/4 for this just because it offers me much more versatility. 

This versatility continues in nearly any scene with compositions at a distance. It doesn’t topic if I’m on a mountaintop in Alaska or the swamps of Florida, the variable achieve of the lens is spoiling. It manner each little scene within the distance is a possible composition. It may well additionally imply little main points round you turn out to be enlarged and dropped at lifestyles. 

Out of doors of versatility, the superzoom vary will provide you with the facility to seize scenes that merely don’t seem to be conceivable with out the achieve. The gallery above are a couple of pictures from the previous 6 months that I wouldn’t were in a position to seize with out this vary, each and every indexed with their focal distance. The photograph of the moon emerging over the peaks isn’t a picture you’ll take with out the compression of a superzoom. The briefly converting gentle at the cypress bushes as I sat in a kayak would were utterly long past by the point I rowed myself shut sufficient to each and every of the ones compositions.

Above is Denali at 100mm and 500mm. I feel the comparability speaks for itself in simply how a lot distance you’ll quilt with a unmarried lens. 

Finally, the stabilization of the Canon RF 100-500mm particularly is exact magic. Whilst it’s now not panorama pictures comparable, with the ability to movie video at 500mm hand-held for my YouTube content material and likewise get sharp pictures when there isn’t a lot gentle to paintings with such because the cypress bushes above, it can not move unmentioned. 

All of those come at a value regardless that, and I don’t simply imply worth.

The Dangerous

Infrequently too many choices motive determination fatigue and you find yourself suffering to shoot the rest just because you’ve too many choices. Whilst the flexibility of the lens is paramount, it comes at the price of permitting you to shoot the rest and the whole thing. 

With regards to landscapes I discovered that the tremendous zoom vary was once if truth be told an excessive amount of zoom. In lots of scenes previous 250mm you lose point of view and key compositional parts inside of your scene. To most sensible it off you get started having atmospheric demanding situations. Kind of round 300mm I spotted {that a} majority of the time, stuff you’re seeking to seize within the distance are up to now away that you simply get environment haze and a “mirage” impact inflicting your photographs to turn out to be blurry. It takes very particular stipulations anytime you’re photographing via a large number of distance not to run into this factor which successfully makes the superzoom vary unreliable. 

The extra obtrusive adverse issues listed here are measurement and weight. This may occasionally range relying on what lens you could be the use of particularly, however I’ve to confess that the RF100-500mm I’ve isn’t all that a lot other in each measurement and weight from my previous Canon EF 70-200 f/2.8 that I used for 10 years. That being mentioned whilst you evaluate it to the brand new Canon RF70-200mm f/4, it turns into a lot more of a speaking level. Maximum lenses on this vary regardless that, particularly the extra budget-friendly choices are better and heavier. 

The Unpleasant

Do I like to recommend this focal vary for panorama pictures? No, I don’t suggest it strictly for panorama pictures. Then again, everybody’s scenario is other. If you are interested in photographing flora and fauna and you’ll double-dip into each use circumstances then it turns into much more affordable. If you have already got each different lens you may be able to need and it’s the remaining vary you don’t have – opt for it. If you wish to have the variety since you’re inquisitive about compressed photographs just like the moon –  that’s a distinct segment the place superzooms are a need. 

However for those who’re like many of us and taking a look to get your first telephoto lens, I wouldn’t suggest seeking to quilt all of it with a really perfect zoom such because the RF100-500mm. Tamron simply launched a 50-400mm which turns out completely wonderful for versatility however I’d nonetheless suggest a smaller zoom vary first. It’ll be lighter weight, have a sharper symbol, and maximum of all you’ll nonetheless seize 90% of the pictures you would seize merely for the reason that superzoom vary does not get applied sufficient for Panorama Images. 

If I had been to summarize my enjoy in a single sentence it will be that while you move previous the 250mm mark you briefly lose price for your funding. That funding may well be the scale and weight you are managing or the real value of the lens.

Am I going to do away with my Canon RF 100-500mm? For sure now not because it supplies me with a plethora of advantages being each a photographer and videographer. Bring it to mind’s all the time about your individual private objectives and what you need from your pictures. I would love to understand your ideas at the superzoom vary. If it is advisable simplest have one lens for your equipment, what would it not be? What about two lenses? As all the time thank you for studying!