p.1 #1 · How do I cope with and successfully manage a variable lens @ 500 mm @ f7.1?
What action steps or strategies can I undertake to compensate for or to successfully mitigate the following situation?
I am primarily a bird photographer with occasional excursions into other subject matter. I’m highly accustomed to having a lens with fixed f stop which has been the case for over 10 years So, historically, no matter how far the barrel is extended outwards (or not) and whether the focal length is 100 mm, 500 mm or anywhere in-between, I can rely on a certain amount of light.
Now, having just become a Canon user, and not knowing any better (as I didn’t even think to ask the question because it wasn’t a consideration previously and nobody volunteered this information), I discovered that a significant amount of light is lost with the Canon RF-100 lens @ 500 mm when fully extended as directly compared to when @ 100 mm. F4.5 deteriorates to f7.1!! This state of affairs is somewhat limiting and crippling.
For quality reasons bird photographers require all of the light possible that is obtainable especially in lower light shooting conditions. This state of affairs may be a deal breaker in regards to keeping this lens. Why? Because the vast majority of the time, I am @ 500 mm and wish I had more reach! Being @ f7.1 all the time is not exactly ideal.
Being a senior and not having a steady hand, my known options are to either crank up the ISO or reduce shutter speed in order to compensate, neither of which are exactly desirable. Please, if there are other viable options don’t hesitate to educate me.
Maybe another fairly light, modestly priced and compact lens would be more suitable however I don’t know what that would be, if it exists at all. I don’t want to mess with converters/extenders and the like.
To what reasonable height could I set my R5 Mk II’s ISO to without noticeable grain and noise showing?
On the flip side, to what extent can the shutter speed be lowered without my hand held shakiness becoming obvious? How good is Canons IBIS feature?
Only use a tripod very rarely as it big, heavy and cumbersome to lug around.
In summary, what can be done to salvage this recent purchase?
Really eager to hear from fellow owner of the same set-up!
This lens is of course expensive and that being the case, it needs to work for me... not hinder my options as well as putting limitations on and restricting results.
p.1 #2 · How do I cope with and successfully manage a variable lens @ 500 mm @ f7.1?
I shoot M with auto ISO and let the camera bump the ISO to offset the aperture loss when zooming. How low you can drop the shutter speed will depend on the situation, your technique, and steadiness. Perched birds can be captured at fairly slow shutter speeds and this lens has excellent IS. You can always start at a "safe" shutter speed and dial it down while shooting, hoping for a cleaner shot before it flies away. Any faster lens is going to be bigger and heavier. It doesn't sound like you want to carry a 500/4 or 600/4. I don't worry about noise too much. I'd rather have a noisier shot at the right focal length than a cleaner on I have to crop severely.
p.1 #3 · How do I cope with and successfully manage a variable lens @ 500 mm @ f7.1?
I find for bird photography and long lenses, 400, 600 and 800mm, a high shutter speed gives me sharper images, 1/2000th usually. IS helps if I need to go lower due to fading light. All lenses are compromises between f stop, size, weight and focal length. The canon 100-500mm is pitched at a happy point. If more light is wanted then the size and weight are going to start to cause handling problems. Moderm mirrorless cameras are good at higher ISOs, I don't hesitate to shoot at 6,000 if necessary. I set my camera up so that shutter speed and f stop are set manually, and ISO is set on auto.
p.1 #4 · How do I cope with and successfully manage a variable lens @ 500 mm @ f7.1?
I don't shoot birds, but honestly I think you are over thinking this! Do yourself a favor, and search around on this forum or elsewhere and you will many, many bird photos shot with this combination. What setup were you using before getting the R5 Mark II and the 100-500mm? How was that working for you?
I could be wrong, but unless you get a prime L telephoto lens (which will be bigger and heavier), you're really not going to find too many zooms that are faster (maybe less than a stop). The body and lens image stabilization work great together, and the modern sensors handle higher ISO extremely well, so I would not worry too much about the f/7.1 lens. Not to mention, the resolution and auto focus capabilities of these cameras and with the sharpness of this lens and the advances in software noise reduction all work in your favor to get great results.
All that being said...I think you should just go and try it and see how it works for you. I think it will work out just fine, and if not...you should have no problem selling it on the B&S forum. Good luck!
p.1 #5 · How do I cope with and successfully manage a variable lens @ 500 mm @ f7.1?
The best current compensation for the necessity of high ISOs with because of relatively slow lenses is to shoot in RAW and run the files through AI noise reduction software, such as what is incorporated in the current versions of Adobe's software, as well as from other companies. This approach benefits from having as much detail/information in a given image for the software to use as a basis for noise reduction and image reconstruction. Meaning, the better the sharpness of the image, the larger the bird is in the image, the better the noise reduction software can 'fix' the image.
In one of your earlier posts you stated that size and weight was a primary motivator for considering the R5II and 100-500. Unfortunately the reality of physics dictates that if you want more light gathering power at 500mm, it will require a larger front element and a corresponding increasing the size and weight of the lens.
Considering that you came from Nikon, in the previous thread some of the suggestions were to consider the Z8 and one of Nikon's PF prime lenses, such as adapting the F mount 500/5.6, which is very small and 2/3 stop faster than the 100-500, or the 600/6.3 which has more reach while still being fairly reasonable in size. These lenses are likely better birding options if that is all you do and are nearly always reach limited. Otherwise, the 100-500 is a much more flexible lens for when you are not reach limited.
As was pointed out previously, the 100-500 is currently the best *compromise* option with respect to size, weight, versatility and optical performance (sharpness).
I agree with a previous post and suggest you just go out and use it. There will likely be a fairly steep learning curve and the best way to figure out what works for you is through firsthand experience.
p.1 #6 · How do I cope with and successfully manage a variable lens @ 500 mm @ f7.1?
The good thing is that the 100-500 has one of the best IS systems around, I think in that regard it's the best lens in my drawer and I have most of them. Similarly, the R5m2 is pretty darn good at high ISO. Many a member on this board is a birder and many of them shoot with the 100-500 with great success. I have used it at 1/60s and very high ISO on owls, it should be just fine on reasonably well lit tweeties.
Your post is a different variant of yesterday's post about the variable aperture. You mention portability being key, and you also mention that in the past for many years you could shoot a different lens at 100-500 at a constant f5.6. I am seriously curious to hear what lens that was. A constant aperture zoom 5.6@500 would have a pretty big front element, thus undermining your portability statement (not that I am aware of any 100-500/5.6 lens from any system). This leads me to believe that you're mis-remembering something and now the problem is bigger because of your skewed perception. When I did a search for "across all camera systems, past and present, can you find any telephoto lens with at least 500mm focal length with f5.6 or faster aperture at 500mm?" and the search came up with a bunch of lenses that are decidedly bigger than the Canon 100-500.
ISO 6400 or 12800 is not a real problem with good NR, which is now readily available in just about every decent piece of software, so even if your old gear was faster and better, you will find that the advancements in IS and ISO processing more than make up for it. And if not, sell it and go back (and do better research before a new big purchase next time.)
p.1 #7 · How do I cope with and successfully manage a variable lens @ 500 mm @ f7.1?
GreenHaven wrote:
...not knowing any better (as I didn’t even think to ask the question because it wasn’t a consideration previously and nobody volunteered this information), I discovered that a significant amount of light is lost with the Canon RF-100 lens @ 500 mm when fully extended..
f/4.5 to f/7.1 is only 1 stop, and I often lose 1½ stops by using a polariser with water birds and think nothing of it. And, oh yes, I can use the 77mm circular polariser I already owned for use with my landscape lenses.
You can remove the tripod ring to reduce the weight a bit, although doing so may make the lens less convenient to carry.
You can mitigate the behaviour with exposure changing in manual mode when zooming from 100mm f/4.5 to 500mm by turning on auto ISO.
Raw converters these days can remove a lot more noise than you might expect. DxO and Adobe have special enhanced noise reduction you can apply, and Capture One has it in beta. I’ve been happy so far with Capture One’s traditional noise reduction, perhaps because I grew up with grainy photos in Life magazine.
To what reasonable height could I set my R5 Mk II’s ISO to without noticeable grain and noise showing?
On the flip side, to what extent can the shutter speed be lowered without my hand held shakiness becoming obvious? How good is Canons IBIS feature?
You should be able to answer both these questions for yourself by experimenting with your new camera and lens. The answers will probably be higher ISO and slower shutter speeds than you thought possible. I find the limit on the shutter speed is how still the bird is.
p.1 #8 · How do I cope with and successfully manage a variable lens @ 500 mm @ f7.1?
You don't even need to use Auto ISO on Canon cameras to solve this issue.
Canon has a setting that will adjust either the ISO or the SS when the aperture changes. Either when zooming a variable aperture lens or when swapping on/off TCs.
This is a great feature for full manual shooters like myself (and you). As you don't have to use Auto-ISO.
I always set it to ISO as I want my SS to stay where I set it. 4.5 to 7.1 is 1 1/3 stop so I'm okay dealing with that change in ISO.
One alternative option is to zoom the lens to 100mm and set your aperture to f/7.1. Then it will stay at f/7.1 at every focal length. This is probably not what you want as you may want to take advantage of the brighter f-stops when you do zoom out.
The setting on the R5II is "Same exposure for new aperture"....set to ON and choose ISO.
As far as what ISO and what SS you are comfortable with you will have to experiment with SS you can handhold and get a reasonable keeper rate and process some higher ISO files to see what you are comfortable with.
p.1 #9 · How do I cope with and successfully manage a variable lens @ 500 mm @ f7.1?
GreenHaven wrote:
What action steps or strategies can I undertake to compensate for or to successfully mitigate the following situation?
I am primarily a bird photographer with occasional excursions into other subject matter. I’m highly accustomed to having a lens with fixed f stop which has been the case for over 10 years So, historically, no matter how far the barrel is extended outwards (or not) and whether the focal length is 100 mm, 500 mm or anywhere in-between, I can rely on a certain amount of light.
Now, having just become a Canon user, and not knowing any better (as I didn’t even think to ask the question because it wasn’t a consideration previously and nobody volunteered this information), I discovered that a significant amount of light is lost with the Canon RF-100 lens @ 500 mm when fully extended as directly compared to when @ 100 mm. F4.5 deteriorates to f7.1!! This state of affairs is somewhat limiting and crippling.
For quality reasons bird photographers require all of the light possible that is obtainable especially in lower light shooting conditions. This state of affairs may be a deal breaker in regards to keeping this lens. Why? Because the vast majority of the time, I am @ 500 mm and wish I had more reach! Being @ f7.1 all the time is not exactly ideal.
Being a senior and not having a steady hand, my known options are to either crank up the ISO or reduce shutter speed in order to compensate, neither of which are exactly desirable. Please, if there are other viable options don’t hesitate to educate me.
Maybe another fairly light, modestly priced and compact lens would be more suitable however I don’t know what that would be, if it exists at all. I don’t want to mess with converters/extenders and the like.
To what reasonable height could I set my R5 Mk II’s ISO to without noticeable grain and noise showing?
On the flip side, to what extent can the shutter speed be lowered without my hand held shakiness becoming obvious? How good is Canons IBIS feature?
Only use a tripod very rarely as it big, heavy and cumbersome to lug around.
In summary, what can be done to salvage this recent purchase?
Really eager to hear from fellow owner of the same set-up!
This lens is of course expensive and that being the case, it needs to work for me... not hinder my options as well as putting limitations on and restricting results.
What birding lenses were you using for your Nikon cameras?
You mention being able to zoom and keep a fixed, fast aperture. The only lenses I can think of that do that are the Nikon 200-400/4 and 180-400/4TC lenses. But both are heavy beasts.
As you point out, bird photographers are always chasing long focal lengths, fast glass and lightweight gear.
Unfortunately no product really exists to satisfy all three of those at once. You basically have to choose 2 out of 3 and make some compromise with the third.
You mention that 500mm is barely enough and f/7.1 is too slow. But your main concern on your other posts was weight savings.
I think that for Canon RF you would have to be looking at something like the RF100-300 f/2.8 and then use TCs and max out at 600 f/5.6. Still not lightweight by any means but certainly a lot lighter than a 400/2.8 or 600/4.
You can adapt a Canon EF 100-400II but that needs at TC and then is at f/8 at 560mm so even slower but a bit longer. It is also variable aperture. Adapting a Canon EF 200-400/4TC is the same problem the Nikon options would be.
Back in Nikon land are probably the best options in the adapted 500PF (f/5.6) or the Z 600 PF (f/6.3). If you can handle a bit heavier then the 800 f/6.3 PF provides the best length and light gathering being only a 1/3 stop slower than getting to 800mm at f/5.6 with a 400/2.8 or 600/4 and TCs. But again these are all close to being f/7.1 anyways.
But I think before any of that you should really try the 100-500 and experiment with higher ISO. You can really push ISO on these new cameras if you use one of the modern NR programs like Lightroom's Denoise AI or Topaz Denoise or DXO PureRAW. I would easily be comfortable shooting the R5II at 6400 ISO and would be fine having to push up to 12,800 sometimes.
I have a friend that does all her shooting with the R5/R5II and the 100-500 lens and she does remarkably well with it. She also shoots it a lot at 700mm f/10!!
Have a look through her Flickr to see what is possible for ISO. https://www.flickr.com/photos/189006603@N06/
p.1 #11 · How do I cope with and successfully manage a variable lens @ 500 mm @ f7.1?
For action photography, I am most often a Manual + Auto ISO shooter. I set my shutter speed as needed to stop the action, and set my aperture to wide open with the lens zoomed all the way in. As the lens is zoomed out and the aperture changes, the ISO speed will adjust automatically to compensate. As you zoom back in, the aperture reverts to its wider value automatically. Basically, the lens stays wide open at all times regardless of focal length (if that's how you chose to set the aperture).
I pair this technique with exposure compensation, which I have mapped to the main dial on my camera while pressing the Set button. This allows me to use exposure compensation in manual, just as I would with aperture priority mode. The camera adjusts the ISO speed to apply the desired compensation amount.
There are different ways to approach this, but this is what I do regardless of whether I'm using a fixed or variable aperture lens. The only "trick" when using a variable aperture lens is to manually set the aperture at the zoom lens' shortest focal length.
I always shoot RAW, and with modern AI noise reduction techniques, ISO speeds up to 6400 and even beyond are easily achievable with good quality. So I don't worry about the ISO speed in most situations.
p.1 #12 · How do I cope with and successfully manage a variable lens @ 500 mm @ f7.1?
I'm just a little confused. You say you've always been used to having a very far reaching lens with a fixed (and lower than f/7.1) aperture...so the only logical conclusion is that you've used some of the huge lenses in the past. Just about anything from Canon, Nikon and Sony that is 500mm or longer, and has an aperture of f/6.3 or lower were/are substantially larger than the RF 100-500L f/4.5-7.1. There is no such thing as a free lunch when it comes to the laws of physics.
And then you throw in that you like to shoot at low light. I have the R5ii+100-500 combo and in anything shy of dusk (and night) I have had great results birding with that combo. As dusk settles, yes I have to crank the ISO because if you want to freeze motion and get sharp shots of birds, lowering shutter speed is not a realistic option. And then rely on post-processing (NR and sharpening).
If you want sharp shots of birds in low light and at a far distance, you're looking at spending five figures for a lens that weighs 2-3X what the 100-500 does and will basically require a monopod/tripod or some Popeye muscles.
I'm curious what lenses you were coming from that reached as far as the 100-500 but had much lower fixed aperture and were also 1) around the same size as the 100-500, and 2) around the same price (inflation adjusted...if you paid $3K for a lens in 1985 that would be a $9K lens today)
p.1 #13 · How do I cope with and successfully manage a variable lens @ 500 mm @ f7.1?
It's a limitation of the lens, and the trade off you make. I've come to accept overcast days in the morning / woods it's going to be shooting at a very low shutter speed and alot of photos and hoping for a few keepers. I definitely question myself if it's even worth going out on those days.
p.1 #14 · How do I cope with and successfully manage a variable lens @ 500 mm @ f7.1?
bszweda wrote:
It's a limitation of the lens, and the trade off you make. I've come to accept overcast days in the morning / woods it's going to be shooting at a very low shutter speed and alot of photos and hoping for a few keepers. I definitely question myself if it's even worth going out on those days.
As others have pointed out, just increase the iso as modern software like DxO are very good at noise suppression while retaining detail.
p.1 #16 · How do I cope with and successfully manage a variable lens @ 500 mm @ f7.1?
Toothwalker wrote:
GreenHaven is not misremembering but trolling.
I’m not sure what is going on. He has started four recent threads that have all had many well thought out replies and he has not responded once in any of the four threads. He hasn’t answered anyone’s questions they brought forward to help with answers. He hasn’t thanked a single person for their replies.
p.1 #18 · How do I cope with and successfully manage a variable lens @ 500 mm @ f7.1?
The only Canon lens coming close to his wishes would be a used, adapted EF 200-400mm f/4 L IS USM with built in 1.4x Extender. Weather he deems 8 pounds of weigh acceptable, or $3,500 - $5,000 affordable is doubtful.
He is unwilling to make any compromises, insists on seeking the impossible, and thinks that if He asks for the impossible enough times, someone will miraculously fulfil his delusion demands. eyes:
p.1 #19 · How do I cope with and successfully manage a variable lens @ 500 mm @ f7.1?
arbitrage wrote:
I’m not sure what is going on. He has started four recent threads that have all had many well thought out replies and he has not responded once in any of the four threads. He hasn’t answered anyone’s questions they brought forward to help with answers. He hasn’t thanked a single person for their replies.
A supposedly experienced photographer who asks these kinds of questions? With a new account? The signs are there.
p.1 #20 · How do I cope with and successfully manage a variable lens @ 500 mm @ f7.1?
arbitrage wrote:
I’m not sure what is going on. He has started four recent threads that have all had many well thought out replies and he has not responded once in any of the four threads. He hasn’t answered anyone’s questions they brought forward to help with answers. He hasn’t thanked a single person for their replies.
There are the same four posts, word-for-word identical, over on dpreview from a new acccount with the same screen name, also with no follow-ups from the OP in those threads.
It could just be cluelessness. If so: @GreenHaven, you can reply to this thread by using the REPLY button on any post in it, or specifically to the post you want to reply to. You can LIKE a post to thank the user who answered you, or selectively LIKE some posts to hint which way you want the discussion to go. A “thank you” post from a thread starter also lets everyone else know when you’ve stopped reading.
