Canon RF 100-500mm equivalent with internal zoom coming?

[Levina]

Canon Rumors reports a possible Canon RF 100-500mm f/4.5-7.1L IS USM equivalent with internal zoom is coming.

CR writes:

There are now more hints that it will be some kind of an internal zoom RF 100-500mm f/4.5-7.1L IS USM that will be faster than f/7.1.
A lot of shooters prefer internal zoom lenses, and a zoom range similar to 100-500 would do extremely well.

Read the full article here.

 

[RichardB]

If true it will be a lot more expensive.

 

[Levina]

Yes, definitely. And it will be heavier. And sell like crazy.

 

[Jeff WX1USN]

I don't mind an external zoom lens but a major problem with my RF 100-500, at least to me, is the restriction to 300-500 with extenders. It pairs with the 1.4x extremely well but the limited zoom range to me is a design flaw. I ended up getting the 200-800 to get the full range. I use the 100-500 with my R7 and R6ii, with the R7 it has the full range but the high ISO on the R7 leaves something to be desired.
If they get a new 100-500 that allows for extenders from 100-500 I would be tempted, if not.. forget it.

 

[Levina]

I don't mind an external zoom lens but a major problem with my RF 100-500, at least to me, is the restriction to 300-500 with extenders. It pairs with the 1.4x extremely well but the limited zoom range to me is a design flaw. I ended up getting the 200-800 to get the full range. I use the 100-500 with my R7 and R6ii, with the R7 it has the full range but the high ISO on the R7 leaves something to be desired.
If they get a new 100-500 that allows for extenders from 100-500 I would be tempted, if not.. forget it.

Yeah, I know this restriction has been a real problem for you from the start. I agree it is a design flaw. But an internal zoom would solve that though, wouldn't it? I mean, no moving parts, so nothing to obstruct an extender. Or so it seems to me.

Are you still shooting with the R7, Jeff? The rather bad high ISO performance of the sensor made me return it. I am sooo hoping for an R7 mark II that is a true successor of the 7DII.

 

[Jan1977]

The 'flaw' with the extender is indeed a minus for this lens. Most of the time I could work around it as I was using the far end of the focal range anyhow. When the RF200-800 came out, I bought into it as a more suitable lens when walking through nature and see what birds or other subjects show up to be photographed. The wide range of focal length makes one realize a bit more how inconvenient that extender limitation is with the RF 100-500.
That being said, I still love the RF 100-500 and the compact size it has with the quality and range you get from it. It is easy enough to trow into the bag. I do sports, rugby especially, and was mostly using a Sigma 120-300 for its f2.8 on one camera and a second body with a 70-200 or 24-70. Two lensesI almost always take with me to the pitch. The 100-500 could be trown into the bag, in case 'my' team was having a poor match and most of the action was deep into the other half of the pitch. The extra 200 mm than helped to get some better shots of the team.
Recently I bought an old EF 400 IS USM L f2.8 which is almost 5,5 kg. That in combination with a 70-200 is now my main setup for rugby, so the 100-500 gets less use. I loaned it to a starting rugby photographer so she could try it. She shoots with a single camera (R6 ii) and for her the 100-500 range is very useful and she really liked using that lens.

If Canon came out with an internal zoom RF 100-500 I don't think I would change from the current lens. The compactness is just a big plus for me. (As for the RF 70-200). If you take some care for your gear, I do not see the external zoom being a real problem. The extender compatibility may be better for the newer version, but since I have the 200-800, it is less of importance to me. Even though the RF 200-800 is not to big and heavy for what you get, it is still a big lens that does not fit a simple sling bag that one would take during a ride on the bike. The smallish RF 100-500 would.

 

[Jeff WX1USN]

I still have and use the R7 but you have to have the right light and try to keep the ISO below 3200 mostly I try to keep it 2000 or less, at 2000 or 1600 it is not that bad but I find I use my R6ii much more and up to 25000.
The R7 and the 200-800 make a great combination with the right light.

 

[Levina]

I still have and use the R7 but you have to have the right light and try to keep the ISO below 3200 mostly I try to keep it 2000 or less, at 2000 or 1600 it is not that bad but I find I use my R6ii much more and up to 25000.
The R7 and the 200-800 make a great combination with the right light.

And that's the problem: the R7 needing good light. I don't have that a lot of the time, living where I do, and so my R62 and the R6 before that just perform so much better at higher ISO. I tried the R7 again about 6 months after the first try and again returned it. I really do hope for a R7II that is worthy of the 7 in the name.