Canon 200-800mm - Great Value ULTRA Telephoto Zoom

Small, light and decent price - is it worth the F9 trade off?

WEBSITES

GEAR we usually film with... (Amazon + BH)

PRIVACY and DISCLOSURE:
* Matt Granger is a participant in the B&H Photo Video affiliate program that provides an advertising commission if you purchase through our links.
* If you purchase something from our affiliate links will get a small commission with no extra cost to you.

[gavanmitchell]

I think ISO is a compromise like anything else in photography. I do agree that its preferable to shoot lower ISO if you can, but i think dismissing programs like DxO pure raw these days is a bit of a mistake. Will an image shot at 12, 800 ISO look like one shot at 100 ISO? No. But it becomes a massively improved image. I certainly dont blink anymore when it comes to shooting at higher ISOs.

Jan made a good video recently comparing DxO Pure Raw 4 against some of the competition. It produces some incredible results.

[redauwg]

Thank you for the honest video Mat. I wonder how the Sony and Nikon zooms compare all at 600mm and all at the same aperture in image Quality and AF speed?

[geoffreyconnor]

I got my 200-800 a few weeks back and can say for certain it's a really sharp lens. The point about high ISO is noted - but this has always been the case. Modern software from the likes of Topaz, DxO etc does make one heck of a difference these days and mustn't be dismissed.

[kennethgnielsen]

Canon knocks it out of the park, again! Obviously a home run for birders and wildlife shooters with other areas where it excels as well. Well done Canon!

[NiklasMalmqvist]

How does it compare to the Nikon Nikkor Z 180-600mm f/5.6-6.3 ???

[gimaru]

It would be interesting to see how this compares to the Leica $35000 bird photography setup.😅

[andrear]

Apart from iso and aperture considerations, my impression is that this is a lens quite sensitive to sensors. Food on R6, ok on R5, so so on R7.

[Lonan]

If you are a black and white shooter parhaps it is easier to use a high iso range.

[scriptosaurusrex]

Looks like an interesting optic. I don't shoot canon, so it's moot anyway, but I don't think it would be for me. Unlike the 24-70/2 they make (which is cool!), I don't watch this thinking 'oh my system needs it!'
This is the next step from the original sigma bigma 50-500 though. A big sacrifice in light gathering compared to standards at the time, in exchange for reach, all in the hope the iso performance will off set.
I bet in the long run, this lens will be very popular with twitchers and other people who are birders first and photographers second. Quality isn't as important as proof you saw that one unique, rare migrant :)

[gewglesux]

Thanks Matt!!
Another reason to get canon gear(from a nikon/leica shooter) i'm impressed.

[FriendlyBear]

Seems like this lens would be better for Landscapes and maybe... maybe portraits. From all the results I have seen from many youtubers I am not really impressed. I liked what you said "mid tear results" and yeah, thats what I'd say it's about a 6 out of 10. Not bad at all but not the best either.

[kennethlui]

Different tools for different applications.

[rickcrutchlow]

To be honest I think my 200-800 is superb on my R5.

[d.k.]

It should be black plastic as it is NOT AN L SERIES LENS!!!