I recently bought the 100-500 and thought I'd share some side by sides for folks considering the same upgrade. These are heavily cropped to highlight sharpness differences. In all cases the lighting conditions and shutter speed were the same, I shot at maximum zoom of both lenses, aperture wide open. I cropped to get the same final field of view, so the image from the 500 will have more pixels. Photos taken on the R7 body.

My overall take:
- Both are extremely sharp lenses. I think both can resolve to pretty much a single pixel on the sensor.
- As you'd expect, the larger aperture on the 500 reduces noise, but I think the difference is really only noticeable if you are really pixel peeping or conditions are pretty dim.
- The 500 is double the weight, and in my opinion quite noticeable. I often hike for miles with my camera (birding).

Maybe I'm crazy, but I'm actually considering returning the 500. The 100-400 is such a light, convenient lens, and the difference between the two so marginal (in my opinion) it's not clear it's worth it. Anyone care to talk me out of it?

Hi Everyone. Do we still have Canon shooters who shoot weddings with Cameras like 5D/6D? I have 5D M3 and 6D M1. I'm taking up my first wedding as a lead photographer with one second shooter (Nikon-planning on fixing it in post) I've worked as a second shooter in weddings before. Any advises would you give? I can see so many people shooting with R3/Rseries. I'm just curious. Thanks in advance.

I just received this 16-35 F4 IS lens from a seller, and the IS motor is obnoxiously loud. This isn't proper, is it? The IS is functional, upon testing.

Help!! What are the best autofocus settings for weddings?

I recently got a R6 Mark II after hearing high praises for the autofocus, but I was massively let down at a wedding I shot recently. Even with people detection and eye detection it'd focus on everything else but the people in the frame.

I am entirely sure that it's an user error on my end. I tried back button focusing as well but had no luck. My firmware is up to date. Attached images show the current settings.

I am using the original Canon ef-rf adapter for my Canon 24-70 2.8L ii.

Thanks in advance.

I am beginner photographer, I have been taking photos for 3 years. Throughout my 3 years of experience i have shot with DLSRs. I am currently using the Canon rebel t100 and the t7 (both of these cameras are borrowed, i dont own any cameras)

I am stuck deciding whether the canon r8 or canon r6 mark ii is for me. They are both identical, but ik that the canon r6 mark ii is more professional with the dual slot. Thats the only reason why leaning a bit to the canon r6 mark ii, but i am not sure if it is necessary for the moment.

My plan for my business is to do outdoor portraits, weddings, and a bit of real estate.

My budget is $2,600

What do you guys think is the best camera for my scenario and a better investment?

I have a Canon 90D with an 18-135mm EFS lens. I am confident shooting in natural light, but want to step up my game especially indoors.

My main complaints with my current start setup are:

1. poor performance in low light. I photograph theatre performances and have trouble when the lights are lower.
2. I also want to be able to take flash photos in dark rooms (like…club style?)

I am in the market for a new lens and potentially a mounted flash.

I have committed to shoot two weddings this fall so I’d like to get purchase new gear and test it out before those events. The weddings are for people close to me who love my photography as it is, but for my personal taste I want to improve.

Edited to add: I’m in Canada. Budget is currently $1000. But could myself in “debt” a bit by spending more and using the wedding $ toward the new piece.

Hoping for mainly positive feedback please.

When I use an HDMI monitor for my R6/R5 obviously it’s not touch-screen and I need to use the flip screen to tap to focus, menus, etc. Why don’t they make a touch screen monitor? Or would this work 3rd party?

Hi, I’m about to buy a used Canon camera online and just want to make sure I’m going in the right direction. I’m a journalism student looking for a nice modern digital camera with a budget of $900 or so. I want something with strong capabilities (high shutter speed, high ISO and low light ability, etc). I don’t want anything egregiously HD that takes the life out of photos. I’d like to buy everything in one go (body, lens or two, strap, battery, charger, etc) so I’ve mainly been looking on B+H and Ebay. I’m also still somewhat a beginner and am still learning to how to work a camera but want something to learn and grow with. I’ve recently worked with a Canon R7 and a Canon Rebel EOS Xs. Definitely had a better time with the R7.

Other Preferences:

Strong video capability

Flip/Adjustable view screen

Currently, I’ve been looking at a couple different Canon R50s, T8is, and T7is in my budget. I don’t know if it’s necessary for me to get a mirrorless but I do like the EVF. Any advice? Thank you.

I’m wondering what lens yall would suggest for travel photography with the family.

Right now I’m mostly switching primes throughout the day but kind of wish I had it all(including a 70mm)

I own the 16mm 2.8, 35mm 1.8 and the 50mm 1.4.

Trying to see if I should ge the 24-70 or wait till maybe a 28-70 2.0 launches ? very confused 🤔

Has anyone encountered a situation where the disc drive won't open? If so, could you please tell me how to open it? It's stuck (it won't open with the button anymore).

I finally pulled the trigger after weeks of debating. 😅

I bought a Canon M50 Mark II with the 15-45mm kit lens, plus the EF-M 22mm f/2 because everyone seems to rave about it.

My goal is bright, natural-looking photos with great colors. I’m coming from using my iPhone, so this is my first interchangeable-lens camera.

How did I do? Any tips, settings, or advice for getting the most out of the M50 and the 22mm?

I have the beautiful opportunity to buy this Canon R10 for 500 USD, it has the kit lens and the charger I know for the price it would be a great deal. There are a few questions that I have for some of you guys, would this be a great camera for taking pictures of vehicles? I also currently have an M3 would this be a big difference? Would the price be worth picking up?

The seller says that she never ended up using it, she has a receipt of buying it from best buy in 2024, the condition seems great to me apart from a bite of the eyepiece rubber missing, very small though.

I’m an amateur photographer, probably closer to the “beginner” end of the scale than the “experienced” end. So as an amateur, budget is always a consideration when investing in gear. Which makes what I’m sharing here a little weird… contra… odd in light of budget considerations.

I keep both a Canon EF 70 - 200L 2.8 and a Canon EF 70-200L 4 in my bag (neither of which are the IS versions, as my Canon R6 Mk II has IBIS). Why both when the 2.8 version should suffice by itself? A few reasons:

1. I do like to walk around my neighborhood and shoot what I see. The f/4 version is significantly lighter and thus a bit easier for my 70-year-old body to wrangle. Ditto for shooting outdoor sports and for when I travel.
2. I do use 1.4x and 2x extenders. Perhaps my copies of each lens are unique, but the f/4 seems to render sharper images with the extenders once I get away from the focal range and aperture endpoints of either lens. YMMV and I could be all wet here, but that’s what I see.
3. This one is a bit silly, but it’s still real - the f4 was the first lens I purchased (other than a kit lens set). We’ve taken a few good pics together and I’m emotionally attached. To be honest, I’m not sure I could part with it.

So what I’m wondering is whether any of y’all have a similar situation with lenses that “overlap” in your bag? And, if so, what are your reasons for doing so? Or am I riding the crazy train here all by myself? Comments welcome.

Hello Redditors of Photography! As the title suggest Im torn between the two cameras, with EOS R7 with RF s18-150mm being a thousand pesos (20 dollar rounded) pricier as compared with EOS R8 with RF 24-50mm IS STM. I'm a beginner wanting to start this hobby, I went to the shop to feel both cameras and researched a bit about mirrorless camera, exposure triangle and other stuff. I've narrowed my choices from fuji x100vi, xt50, ricoh gr and sony a6700 for my starting kit.

I would like to hear your thoughts between the two, is it a good combo or should I buy just the body and buy separate lens? I've saved up 110k php( 1,780 usd) for this specific hobby. Thanks in advance. Cheers.

I’m new to photography and recently bought a Canon R100. I’ve really been enjoying it and am looking to pick up a new lens for taking photos of family and friends sitting around the dinner table.

I’d like the photos to have a wider field of view, similar to the image on the left, so more of the background is visible.

Is the AI-generated comparison pretty accurate? Also, is there a better lens than the Sigma that ChatGPT recommended? My budget is under $400.

Any advice or recommendations would be greatly appreciated!

Sample images now added to post. *I ran some tests in the evening after sunset and was pleased with the image results so far. There was no hard vignetting, even with double-stacked UV+CPL filters in daylight shots. Some mild sky banding at 15mm from the CPL filter. Was able to track faces easily (and possibly more reliably) than the R6 Mark 1 - and the Eye-Detection/Tracking worked well, even more than 40 minutes after sunset. *Images are handheld and shot in JPEG... Mostly due to laziness since I was only shooting to test the new settings.

6 years ago my Rebel T5 was stolen and I haven’t really been active in photography since. I happened to find a great deal on an R50 and I’m so excited. My next goal is to get a 100-400mm lens. I’m looking to get into some sports photography as I’m a newly retired rugby player.

It all started with my Digital Rebel back in 2004. I got a bunch of lenses with it and loved using it. It was a great camera for the time, with it's Digic (not 2, or 3... just 'Digic'!) processor. Loved it, and took many many good photos with it.

Then in 2012 my beloved Rebel started having issues with it's shutter button, so I took that as an excuse to upgrade to a 7d. At the time, it was an amazing camera. It had *dual* Digic 4 and could shoot at 8fps, which was quite impressive. I took many more good photos with it.

Now, in 2026, I was getting into birding, and was getting frustrated with the autofocus system in the 7d. It had a tendency to get distracted by little branches or leaves between me and my subject, which is expected based on how it works. I've had it a long time and figured it was time for a new camera. I wanted to get a full-frame sensor for a long time, and this seemed like my time. The R6mIII's autofocus system is leaps ahead of anything my DSLRs could do. That last picture of the little bird would have been quite difficult to get, what with those leaves right around it. Plus being able to pre-capture to get 40fps captures of moments that I could never get before was quite the selling point!

But there was only one "problem". For birding, my 100-400 f4.5-5.6 L was fine with the 7d, but too short on a full-frame sensor, so the solution was an RF 200-800. I would like if it had FTM, or distance limiter that my L lens had, but it's beautifully sharp and has the reach to get those small bird shots.

I still don't like editing, so I try to get everything in-camera so I don't have to. One day I'll try that more...

For now, I'm rapidly running out of hard drive space, as I don't like deleting photos, and 40 32 megapixel photos (JPG and raw) when holding the button for a half second tends to fill things up. I picked the wrong time to need more storage!

R6 mk 2 + RF 100-400. I really couldn't believe it was catching dragonflies zipping around and able to focus. It only missed focused on the black/white winged one, they're extremely erratic. I'm not going to post pictures of my kids but I captured some incredible shots of them playing on the water as well. Plenty of bokeh and separation when the background is sufficiently far away even at f9+

Hello everyone, I currently own a canon eos 2000d (yes I know), and I am looking to upgrade. This is for multiple reasons, including: wanting to get a better camera, my current camera having front-focusing issues (I did many tests to confirm, and you can't change it without an expensive repair), better burst rate for airshows and such, and better autofocus.

Now I have a dilemma: should I upgrade to the 90d, which is much more expensive: secondhand ~750 euros, or should I upgrade to the 850d, slightly less expensive at ~500 euros.

I also want to save up for a 150-600 in the future and also something else, so I could use the extra money. Is it worth saving up the extra 200, or would the 850d suffice?

I'm having a strange issue with my Canon camera. The first time I pop up the built-in flash after turning it on, it makes rapid shutter/clicking sounds and then displays Err 20. If I turn the camera off and back on while leaving the flash popped up, it works normally and I can take photos with no problem.

Has anyone experienced this before or know what might be causing it?

I cannot attach the video here so only an error pic is attached for reference

Hey guys!

I'm a hobbyist, with an aunt that is pro. She has told me that she s going to, free of charge, give me her 5ds which has an "unnoticeable" scratch on the sensor. I'm wondering if it's worth me selling my Nikon D7100, f mount 35 1.8, 18-250 f5.6 and 18-55 5.6 to buy lenses.

My main question is really if there is enough difference between the two to keep both. I mainly do a lot of photography for a youth organisation but also shoot animals, botanical, astro and am wanting to get into macro.

Tia!