Canon RF 100-300 f/2.8 IS USM

[Busted Knuckles]

Kayaker - your question was exactly mine. I tested the 1.4 and the 2.0 on the 100-300. I did some pixel peeping and was perhaps overly harsh. The 100-300 is nuts sharp on its own at 2.8. As I have the R5 using 1/2 the pixels (thinkng the old OM 1/2 frame) at 24 mp seemed like an adequate response to looking for 'reach' beyond the 300. Thought having said this, I am going to give the 2x another try in the coming weeks.

As far as real world - I haven't had much time to shoot with it. I saw the rumor on the 200-500. If it has the same IQ as the 100-300 that would be a real head scratcher for me.

My questin is more of a how do a put in a bag and take it on a plane - the 100-300 is pretty darn large and the tripod coller doesn't come off (though I did replace the foot w/ a arca model - why canon doesn't machine these is a bit of PITA)

[neuroanatomist]

My questin is more of a how do a put in a bag and take it on a plane - the 100-300 is pretty darn large and the tripod coller doesn't come off (though I did replace the foot w/ a arca model - why canon doesn't machine these is a bit of PITA)

Based on comparison of the 100-300/2.8 to the EF 300/2.8 II, it is likely that an RF 200-500/4 would end up being about the size of the RF 600/4. That will fit in a carryon case (without a camera attached).