At 600mm, the 200-800mm opens to f/8 so it is only 2/3rds of a stop slower than the Sigma 150-600mm which is f/6.3.
Upvote
0
Summary of my RF 200-800mm testing
- Thread starter AlanF
- Start date
Maybe you should not be shoving your lens up a cows rear end. Did you wipe it afterwards? Maybe that's the problem.
Upvote
0
Do you use a particular method? I only know how to transfer jpg to the phone. Is there a way to get raw (I saw someone suggested an app that coulddo it, but I was not successful)?I do all my image editing on my phone
Upvote
0
In Canon Camera Connect you have a setting that decides between on-the-fly
jpeg conversion and raw transfers.
And there’s always the option to attach a cardreader to your phone
Upvote
0
You can transfer raws via the Canon app, and you can edit them on a phone. However I have tried it each way - SOOC jpeg, raw, and tweaked raw conversion to jpeg (or HEIF?) on the camera and for me under most circumstances the original jpeg was enough. I always shoot raw+jpeg so if I ever do get a computer again I have the best quality files to return to. I can't get such good results as people processing from raw with good quality software, but for my purposes - sharing mostly downsized images online - it is sufficient. It would not suit many people on this forum, but no alternative costs so little
Upvote
0
Thanks, I will try the methods!In Canon Camera Connect you have a setting that decides between on-the-fly
jpeg conversion and raw transfers.
And there’s always the option to attach a cardreader to your phone
Is that a new feature for Canon Camera Connect? I had tried in the past but failed to find the way to do it.
The card reader is something I should have thought of... maybe my brain is rotting...
Upvote
0
The setting is not located in the main app settings, but in the settings you can access in the “Images on camera” view.
It has been there for a few years now, but it’s hard to discover.
Upvote
0
If you don't want to adjust the various parameters / preform some processing then print them or sell the files, i agree, straight out of the camera is easiest and great quality. Really we are very lucky. It's become so easy to enjoy.You can transfer raws via the Canon app, and you can edit them on a phone. However I have tried it each way - SOOC jpeg, raw, and tweaked raw conversion to jpeg (or HEIF?) on the camera and for me under most circumstances the original jpeg was enough. I always shoot raw+jpeg so if I ever do get a computer again I have the best quality files to return to. I can't get such good results as people processing from raw with good quality software, but for my purposes - sharing mostly downsized images online - it is sufficient. It would not suit many people on this forum, but no alternative costs so little
Upvote
0
I was able to do it from there. Lightroom is not really better than the default photogallery editing feature that came in my phone. I tried ON1 but it breaks when I attempt to use the lens distortion correction :/
I'll have to try more tomorrow, but anyway, my thanks to you and @scyrene
Upvote
0
Today I made an extensive testing of my RF 800/11, RF 100-500 and RF 200-800 lenses side by side.
I moved the tripod between the different setups so that I got exactly the same coverage of my test chart during the whole session.
My results come to no surprise to you that have followed AlanF's all tests. However the more of us coming to closely the similar result when testing our own lenses the more it seems like a fact.
So,
RF 800/11
Sorry to say but both the other lenses provide a clearly sharper picture at their respective long end (500 & 800 mm) at full aperture.
Also already half way out to the corner the 800/11 is significantly more unsharp compared to the other two lenses.
But what can you expect at that bargain price?!
RF 100-500 compared to RF 200-800
I find the 100-500 mm less sharp at the center at 500/7.1 than the 200-800 at 600/8.
The 100-500 + 1.4xTC at 700 mm is rather ok in the center already at f10 and slightly sharper at f11.
The 100-500 + 2.0xTC at 1000 mm is clearly more unsharp at the center compared to what you get with the 1.4xTC at 700mm.
RF 200-800 + TC's
The 200-800 + 2.0xTC: I tested the combination at 1200, 1344, 1415, 1485 and 1600 mm.
My conclusion is that if possible don't pass 1350 mm if you want the sharpest pictures.
I also tested the 200-800 + 1.4xTC at 1120mm. You get f13 and it is almost as sharp as the 200-800 + 2.0xTC at 1200 mm, but that one at f16.
Conclusion
Probably I will sell the 800/11.
I will keep the other two lenses. The RF 100-500 is the perfect travel lens, light and compact!
The 200-800.... I love the possibility to always have 800mm at hand (for all those small sized or distant birds), and the possibility to get all the way up to at least 1350mm when needed.
I moved the tripod between the different setups so that I got exactly the same coverage of my test chart during the whole session.
My results come to no surprise to you that have followed AlanF's all tests. However the more of us coming to closely the similar result when testing our own lenses the more it seems like a fact.
So,
RF 800/11
Sorry to say but both the other lenses provide a clearly sharper picture at their respective long end (500 & 800 mm) at full aperture.
Also already half way out to the corner the 800/11 is significantly more unsharp compared to the other two lenses.
But what can you expect at that bargain price?!
RF 100-500 compared to RF 200-800
I find the 100-500 mm less sharp at the center at 500/7.1 than the 200-800 at 600/8.
The 100-500 + 1.4xTC at 700 mm is rather ok in the center already at f10 and slightly sharper at f11.
The 100-500 + 2.0xTC at 1000 mm is clearly more unsharp at the center compared to what you get with the 1.4xTC at 700mm.
RF 200-800 + TC's
The 200-800 + 2.0xTC: I tested the combination at 1200, 1344, 1415, 1485 and 1600 mm.
My conclusion is that if possible don't pass 1350 mm if you want the sharpest pictures.
I also tested the 200-800 + 1.4xTC at 1120mm. You get f13 and it is almost as sharp as the 200-800 + 2.0xTC at 1200 mm, but that one at f16.
Conclusion
Probably I will sell the 800/11.
I will keep the other two lenses. The RF 100-500 is the perfect travel lens, light and compact!
The 200-800.... I love the possibility to always have 800mm at hand (for all those small sized or distant birds), and the possibility to get all the way up to at least 1350mm when needed.
Upvote
0
