Best of Canon 2023: #1 RF 200-800 F6.3-9 IS USM

[Canon Rumors Guy]

This was another unanimous selection between Craig and myself, and I think even though there’s a limited amount of actual field testing so far with this lens, it is going to be easily one of the best super telephoto zooms that Canon has made in terms of raw sales. What lens did we choose? The

See full article...

 

[john1970]

Interesting Choice. While others may disagree Canon released some amazing lenses in 2023 including the RF 24-105 mm f2.8, RF 100-300 mm f2.8, RF 10-20 mm f4, and the RF 200-800 mm. With 2024 being an Olympic year I also expect a lot of announcements from Canon and others (e.g. Sony, Nikon, etc.).

 

[Toamelicious]

Absolutely agree. I have been eyeing the Tamron and sigma EF mount telezooms for years now and always got discouraged by their reportedly bad autofocus performance on RF.
I pre-ordered the 200-800 two days after it got announced. I can't wait to get it and go nuts with reach

 

[Exploreshootshare]

This lens has been a dream of mine and stated several times that I'll add this lens to my collection. At the moment, the price in Germany is too high imo, therefore I'll be patient and wait some time until there reasonable discounts and/ or cash back. For the time being I'll use the RF 100-500mm and if if needed I'll use an extender.

 

[Exploreshootshare]

Chosing the "top products" I would have considered going with two lines: pro level and consumer level. While I agree the RF 200-800mm is an excellent choice and Canon will sell a lot of copies and do believe the RF 100-300mm F2.8 and RF 24-105mm F2.8 are very meaningful additions for the pro level photographers and even though Canon won´t sell the same numbers the margin is likely to be far more attractive. I kind of doesn´t make sense to me to have all lenses and cameras "compete" against each other. Therefore, my choices would have been:

pro level:
1. RF 100-300mm F2.8
2. RF 24-105mm F2.8 Z
3. RF 10-20mm F4 STM

consumer:
1. RF 200-800mm
2. Canon R8
3. RF-S 10-18mm

Worst product:
RF-s 18-45mm F4.5-6.3

I have only tested the R8, the RF 10-18mm and the RF-s 18-45mm so far. So a lot of it is just based on reading up and how it fits the line-up.

My personal top additions (although they were both not released in 2023)
1. RF 85mm F2
2. RF 100-400mm F5.6-8

 

[Stig Nygaard]

100% agree in this choice.
Not because it is the best lens optically that Canon has released in 2023 (it is not). But because it is something new, unique and extremely interesting, and all reactions so far sounds (and looks) like it also optically performs very well for a consumer lens. And great AF-performance too. So also my choice for #1 Canon product of 2023.

But where in the World is Graig?!?

 

[Software2]

Eeeeh.... The 100-500 with a 1.4x TC fills such a similar role for such a large chunk of the people who might be interested in the 200-800 that I can't see this as the #1 lens of the year, especially when there's such innovative lenses as the 24-105 f2.8 that don't even make it into your top 3 list. The 200-800 is a marvel, especially at that price point, don't get me wrong. It's just... what it enables you to do that other gear cannot is limited.

 

[Sporgon]

Will this lens fit on an R100 ?

 

[docsmith]

I like the idea of divisions....

But, at least to my eye, the rankings would be 1) 24-105 f/2.8....2) 100-300 f/2.8; 3) likely the 10-20.

Even on the consumer level, the R50 looks to be amazing, then the R8, I'd probably rank the 200-800....but just above the EFS 10-18.

I say this with a RF 200-800 sitting behind me (arrived Friday). I am still forming my impressions, but the RF 24-105 f/2.8 wowed me instantly. The 200-800, I am debating. It is a good capable lens, but does it fit in my kit? How often will I want to take it out? I am not even 100% sure the numbers you talk about are there. The RF 100-400 is a very capable lens to pair with a general zoom. You really have to want the 200-800. I expect the 200-800 to displace a number of 100-400s and 100-500s among birders, but pair those with a 1.4tc, and you are talking about something more portable, more flexible, better at their native range, etc. So, popular yes, but I do not expect it to displace all the 100-500s even among birders.

 

[Richard CR]

Eeeeh.... The 100-500 with a 1.4x TC fills such a similar role for such a large chunk of the people who might be interested in the 200-800 that I can't see this as the #1 lens of the year, especially when there's such innovative lenses as the 24-105 f2.8 that don't even make it into your top 3 list. The 200-800 is a marvel, especially at that price point, don't get me wrong. It's just... what it enables you to do that other gear cannot is limited.

a combination of price, and usability. this is a lens that Canon hasn't had and needed for ages. How many people have wanted Canon to do a Super tele zoom going to at least 600mm?

also that combination you mention is around $3100 versus $1900. At times the best, isn't the most technologically superior or the most breathtaking, but one that ticks the boxes between price, performance, usability, size or weight.

 

[Exploreshootshare]

I like the idea of divisions....

But, at least to my eye, the rankings would be 1) 24-105 f/2.8....2) 100-300 f/2.8; 3) likely the 10-20.

Even on the consumer level, the R50 looks to be amazing, then the R8, I'd probably rank the 200-800....but just above the EFS 10-18.

Makes sense to me as well. As stated, I haven't tested any of the pro lenses or seen them in real life yet. I know of the advantages of the RF100-300mm and I believe it is a game changer for sports photography, especially in tight indoor venues. The 24-105mm is probably a game changer for wedding photographers and videographers but I can´t tell how big the value is. Therefore, I placed the 100-300mm above the 24-105mm. But honestly, two absolutely great lenses and pros are lucky to have the option of both.

For the R50: I chose the R8 because it has the FF sensor and AF of the Canon R6mkii in an insanely well priced body. (In Germany, until January 15th, you can get it for 1.099 €) and the upgrade from the RP is extraordinary imo..

 

[Richard CR]

But where in the World is Graig?!?

He's in Mongolia!

 

[neuroanatomist]

Will this lens fit on an R100 ?

I know you’re jesting, but if you try using extenders, the lens won’t work on the R100 because the extenders don’t. Nor does the 85/1.2L DS.

 

[Exploreshootshare]

The 200-800, I am debating. It is a good capable lens, but does it fit in my kit? How often will I want to take it out? I am not even 100% sure the numbers you talk about are there. The RF 100-400 is a very capable lens to pair with a general zoom. You really have to want the 200-800. I expect the 200-800 to displace a number of 100-400s and 100-500s among birders, but pair those with a 1.4tc, and you are talking about something more portable, more flexible, better at their native range, etc. So, popular yes, but I do not expect it to displace all the 100-500s even among birders.

Kind of the same thoughts here. The RF 200-800mm will be a complimentary lens for me which I won´t be using that often. At the moment, I don't go birding on a regular basis or do such photography in which the 200-800mm has it´s advantages and is the sole and only choices. But there will be occasions where I want to take the 200-800mm, e.g. when I go back to Kenia (probably in about 3-4 years) or have a vacation where I shoot a lot of wildlife. Therefore, the 100-500mm will stay my go-to lens, the 100-400mm is for hiking, the 70-200mm F4 for city travel and the 200-800mm will be for wild-life.

RF 100-500mm with an extender is ok, but being limited to starting at 420mm (or 600mm) really bothered me.

I chose to build up a collection of telezoom lenses because this part of photography will always be dominated by cameras and not SP. I will only have a lens in the mid-tele range between 24-100mm since I can take a lot of shots with my iPhone here. But since having four telezoom lenses comes with a hefty price tag, I decided to wait patiently for good deals. I could do with 100-500mm as my only lens and therefore see no need to pay full retail price to be amongst the first to have the lens.

 

[Maximilian]

Best of Canon 2023: #1 RF 200-800 F6.3-9 IS USM

For me, just: Nope!

Good lens, great that we can get such a lens from Canon.
Maybe top 5 or top 10 sure.
But for me, e.g. the R8 is to be set higher.
But as usual: YMMV

 

[neuroanatomist]

I like the idea of divisions....

But, at least to my eye, the rankings would be 1) 24-105 f/2.8....2) 100-300 f/2.8; 3) likely the 10-20.

That would be my rank order, as well.

The 24-105/2.8 finally resolves the conundrum of choosing between range and speed for a standard zoom, and is simply a brilliant lens.

The 100-300/2.8 is also stellar and pair perfectly with the 24-105/2.8 for event shooting. It also takes extenders very well.

I was not very interested in the 10-20/4 at launch. But thinking about the size/weight from the 11-24, I became more interested. I just packed the 11-24/4 for a trip, that clinched it for me – I’ll order the 10-20/4 in the near future.

 

[simonella_virus]

For me, just: Nope!

Good lens, great that we can get such a lens from Canon.
Maybe top 5 or top 10 sure.
But for me, e.g. the R8 is to be set higher.
But as usual: YMMV

I own an r8. And it’s quite possibly the best camera I’ve ever owned, pound for pound. The internet would have you believe that its smaller battery, no ibis and diminutive size is a deal-breaker. But in real life, it’s the best camera I’ve used.

And I’ve owned many cameras from Sony a1 to Nikon z9. I’m not saying that the r8 is objectively better in all dimensions. I’m saying that it’s at least as good for autofocus, most features but obviously not with MP.

But at the price that the r8 is, i absolutely love it. I can throw that 28mm pancake on it and throw it in my coat pocket. What a time to be alive!

 

[Mountain Dave]

I'd be willing to bet there was a collective "oh crap" from all of Canon's competitors when the 200-800 was announced. The 24-105 2.8 just added salt to the wound. I'm not sure either lens is for me, but I can recognize a category killing product when I see one!

 

[InchMetric]

Seems like owners like me of the RF100-500 have no big reason to sell and replace. The 500-800 can be achieved by cropping or a TC. The 100-200 can't be replaced and greatly extends the versatility for some single-lens shooting needs.

The lower price is probably comparable to the resale of a used 100-500 so no economic advantage.

Optical quality should be close enough not to be a factor.

 

[koenkooi]

Seems like owners like me of the RF100-500 have no big reason to sell and replace. The 500-800 can be achieved by cropping or a TC. The 100-200 can't be replaced and greatly extends the versatility for some single-lens shooting needs.

The lower price is probably comparable to the resale of a used 100-500 so no economic advantage.

Optical quality should be close enough not to be a factor.

Since the 200-800 doesn’t do close focussing, it wouldn’t replace my 100-500, but supplement it. The 100-500 for dragonflies and amphibian close-ups and the 200-800 for birds or shots with more environment.