The rf 70-200 is a high quality lens. But if it can’t do what you need it’s not worth the cost. A really good point. Yes, I think the extra focal length of the 100-400 would be significant for me. The more I think about it, the lesser the 70-200 makes sense. It would only add the focal length of 105-200 to my existing kit. The 70-200 f/4 lenses do not require this ring to be mounted on a tripod - the camera body tripod insert can be used. But, this setup is front heavy. A top-notch ball head can handle this load, but a lesser one will drop some amount after it is tightened. Care must also be taken to not tip the off-balance tripod forward. Some clients might even have the impression that a bigger lens is more professional. Renew non-IS version of EF 70-200 F2.8/L also costs less than 1/3 the price of the RF version. BTW EF versions also have the advantage of allowing teleconverters to be attached. I have Sony 70-200 F4. But, don't know how the Tamron 70-180 F2.8 perform. There is saying, the camera and lens are tools. It's how you use the tools. So, I rented the Sony 70-200 F4 for my hiking/surfing photography. I loved it and bought one. Yeah, it does have terrible min focus distance and it doesn't bother me. Cause I knew how to use my CANON RF 70-200 f4 REVIEW vs CANON RF 70-200 f2.8. FROPACK3 is HERE with 15 all-new custom Lightroom presets!!! Check it out I finally get to do a Canon RF 70-200mm f/2.8 review on both the Canon R and Canon R6. My opinion may surprise you since I haven't been a huge user of the EF RF 70-200 F4 EF 70-200 F4 EF 70-200 F2.8 Version II used EF 70-200 F2.8 Version III used (if I find a good deal) Would be using this lens primarily for sports, but also a good take-a-long for hiking. My encounters with low light have been limiting w the EFS 55-250 f4-5.6, which is why I listed the 2.8 versions. In comparing them, the color and contrast of the images from the 70-200 is a little better than the 100-500. Both are equally sharp, both focus very close, both are very fast focusing. For bokeh, the 70-200 is in a class of its own, especially at 200 f/2.8, but the 100-500 at 500 and 7.1 is surprisingly close. .

canon rf 70 200 f4 vs f2 8