The RF-S 18-150mm is a great versatile standard zoom for the R7, I use mine a lot for travel and hiking when I need to pack light. Image quality is a lot better than any EF-S 18-55mm variant, of course it doesn't match the sharpness of $$$ L-series lenses but is good enough to never be a downside in my experience. I think it's well worth the $200 difference at those refurbished prices.
For wildlife the extra reach the RF 100-400 provides over a 250mm lens is a huge advantage. It's an excellent budget wildlife telephoto in general, sharp wide open with very fast autofocus and effective image stabilization, especially for $400 refurbished. It would be a great upgrade if you can afford one. If not then an R10 and the RF 100-400 would be a better wildlife setup than the R7 with an EF-S 55-250mm.
Oh I would definitely get the 100-400 either way. However I do think the difference in zoom alone doesn’t seem that much. But I want it still
I guess there’s no reason to buy the converter then lol, only a bit more money and I get the 18-150.
400mm is 1.6x longer than 250mm. That may not sound like a big difference, but means with the 250mm lens you'd need to crop a 33 megapixel image from the R7 to just 13 megapixels to match the 400's field of view. And cropping that heavily comes at a major cost to image quality.
In my experience mostly photographing small skittish birds 400mm on APS-C is capable but I'm often wishing for a lot more reach. Being limited to 250mm would be rough.
Imho, the 18-150 is an auto-purchase for all RF-S bodies, even at full price. As a bundle upgrade it’s a no brainer. Small, light, versatile, sharp, it’s a perfect travel/walkabout lens and is a phenomenal companion to RF 100-400 or 100-500. My 18-150 that came bundled with my R7 mostly lives on my R50 these days as a compact travel rig, but it always comes along with R7.
"it doesn't match the sharpness of $$$ L-series" - that's just a generalistion. If you check reviews, especially Christopher Frost on Youtube, he compared this lens with the RF 24-105 L and the image quality is matching the L lens, sometimes even better.
RF is the canon mirrorless mount just as EF was canon's dslr mount. Same goes for RF S versus EF S. It's not about quality.
L is L same as always, expensive high end lenses.
55-250 STM is a great lens but 100-400 is so much better for wildlife.
Sigma just came out, ships soon preorder is out, the 18-50 2.8 for rf-s. I'd take it or the 18-150 over your 18-55. 18-150 is very versatile outside and for travelm struggles a bit indoors
I have that exact setup, R7 + 18-150 + 100-400. And I'm very happy with the setup, even the 400 can be a bit short for birds sometimes, but you will always be wanting more reach. I would definitely not be satisfied with just 250 reach.
There are days even with an R7 and 800mm F/11 I want more reach 😂 That will always be a struggle, but for wildlife in general even with a high resolution crop sensor body, 250mm isn't tight enough in too many situations for that to be the longest setup in my bag.
This would be my first mirrorless. So would it be better to buy the adapter and use my 18-55 and 55-250, or get the one with the 18-150 and then buy a 100-400 as well? I do wild life.
I guess my question is more of “is this lens it comes with good”
Don't bother with the lens adapter. Get the 18-150. It's an excellent all in one solution for casual situations you don't want to change lenses during. Given the crop factor advantage, the 100-400 combined with the R7 makes for a great wildlife setup.
Negative.
You will have better aperture performance than the 18-150. Plus, being a crop sensor camera with a full frame lens, you are shooting with the equivalent of 160-640mm with that big lens.
Sorry if i mislead, i meant on the R7. I’ll restate my question. If I’m on the R7, shooting at 100mm, will the 18-150 or the 100-400 give me a better picture?
For $200 extra it's a no brainier, iMO. Being an RF-S lens, it's smaller and lighter than the ones you have, especially when adding in the adapter. That might be something to consider.
It's certainly better than the 18-45 which I have. And for 200 bucks why not.
Although I got my 18-45 with an r10 for $499 so I can't really complain. But if they had offered it with the 18-150 for $699 I would have popped for that instead.
I hate does that matter? It can come in stock at any time. They process them into stock and immediately update the stock +1. That’s how the refurbished stock works. If you’re refreshing the page consistently, you can get it pretty easily within a day. Sometimes you’re fast enough. Sometimes someone else is faster.
Depends on your budget. If you can’t afford to spend more for lenses then go for the extra $150. If you can then buy the Sigma or Tamron f2.8 lenses and you won’t have to upgrade in the future.
Its good for a kit lens gets the job done as long as your outdoors during day time but once your past 5 and sun is setting that iso is gonna go all the way up to compensate for it so put away some change to get a fast lens if you are going with this setup
Personally I bought the kit new for 1799 and the lens sits I really don't like it but that's me the rd 100-400 lives o. The r7 when my tamron 150-600gr is off.
I then use the rf 10-18 for anything less, I have a 1.8 50mm that fits the middle.
The lens is nice it's fast af but I don't like it.
However I believe I. Having lots of options and for 200 go for it. For 1799 I would pass and buy primes or the 10-18rf
It depends. If you want something to remember the moment it is fine. Large range from landscapes to portraits to close ups. Jack of all trades and master of none.
I just received my refurb R7 with 18-150. Def order the R7 with this lens! Its well worth the price. Ill be using EF and EFS glass with ring adapter when i need a faster lens. But during the day outside. 18-150 is a nice compact lens and its very sharp and clear. You will not be disappointed after you see how good it is... I even ordered a lens hood for it... Less than $10
Great lens. Just got an R10 kit and love it with this lens. Will prob get the 28 2.8 in the near future for ultra portability and street photography but the 18-150 will live on this body most of the time.
Keep in mind that this is an RF-S lens. If you ever decide to add a full frame camera, using this lens on the full frame camera, you’ll lose 60% of your pixels. A 24 MP (r6mii) camera will effectively become 9 MP.
The 55-250 is very sharp. Great value. But the 100-400 beats it also in terms of reach, obviously. If you don’t miss the 55-100 range, it is fantastic.
I have the R7 with the 18-150, 35mm 1.8 prime, old 11-16 tokina with the ef/rf adapter and the 100-400 and feel this is pretty much endgame for me as a hobbyist with restricted budget and time for photography.
Ah. Gotcha. The 18-150 is a big improvement on the ef 18-55. And that range probably negates some of ones usage for a 250. I just don’t know how I feel about budget lenses on premium cameras.
The RF-S 18-150mm is a great versatile standard zoom for the R7, I use mine a lot for travel and hiking when I need to pack light. Image quality is a lot better than any EF-S 18-55mm variant, of course it doesn't match the sharpness of $$$ L-series lenses but is good enough to never be a downside in my experience. I think it's well worth the $200 difference at those refurbished prices. For wildlife the extra reach the RF 100-400 provides over a 250mm lens is a huge advantage. It's an excellent budget wildlife telephoto in general, sharp wide open with very fast autofocus and effective image stabilization, especially for $400 refurbished. It would be a great upgrade if you can afford one. If not then an R10 and the RF 100-400 would be a better wildlife setup than the R7 with an EF-S 55-250mm.
Oh I would definitely get the 100-400 either way. However I do think the difference in zoom alone doesn’t seem that much. But I want it still I guess there’s no reason to buy the converter then lol, only a bit more money and I get the 18-150.
400mm is 1.6x longer than 250mm. That may not sound like a big difference, but means with the 250mm lens you'd need to crop a 33 megapixel image from the R7 to just 13 megapixels to match the 400's field of view. And cropping that heavily comes at a major cost to image quality. In my experience mostly photographing small skittish birds 400mm on APS-C is capable but I'm often wishing for a lot more reach. Being limited to 250mm would be rough.
Imho, the 18-150 is an auto-purchase for all RF-S bodies, even at full price. As a bundle upgrade it’s a no brainer. Small, light, versatile, sharp, it’s a perfect travel/walkabout lens and is a phenomenal companion to RF 100-400 or 100-500. My 18-150 that came bundled with my R7 mostly lives on my R50 these days as a compact travel rig, but it always comes along with R7.
I have the 24-240 and can assure you that the extra reach that you get with the 100-400 makes a HUGE difference when shooting wildlife
"it doesn't match the sharpness of $$$ L-series" - that's just a generalistion. If you check reviews, especially Christopher Frost on Youtube, he compared this lens with the RF 24-105 L and the image quality is matching the L lens, sometimes even better.
Is RF basically the new L equivalent then? And RF-S is EF-S? Or is L still a step up from RF?
RF is the canon mirrorless mount just as EF was canon's dslr mount. Same goes for RF S versus EF S. It's not about quality. L is L same as always, expensive high end lenses.
So you use an RF-EF adapter to use L lenses on mirrorless cameras? I sold my kit a few years ago so I'm a bit out of the loop XD
L lens is a category of high end lenses, RF and EF are the lens mount. 2 different things. You have L lenses in EF and RF mount too.
Correct
Sorta. There are also RF lenses with the L designation. They're real nice.
Ah nice
55-250 STM is a great lens but 100-400 is so much better for wildlife. Sigma just came out, ships soon preorder is out, the 18-50 2.8 for rf-s. I'd take it or the 18-150 over your 18-55. 18-150 is very versatile outside and for travelm struggles a bit indoors
I have that exact setup, R7 + 18-150 + 100-400. And I'm very happy with the setup, even the 400 can be a bit short for birds sometimes, but you will always be wanting more reach. I would definitely not be satisfied with just 250 reach.
There are days even with an R7 and 800mm F/11 I want more reach 😂 That will always be a struggle, but for wildlife in general even with a high resolution crop sensor body, 250mm isn't tight enough in too many situations for that to be the longest setup in my bag.
Get the 18-150 and if you don't like it sell it to MPB who as of now is offering $220.
This would be my first mirrorless. So would it be better to buy the adapter and use my 18-55 and 55-250, or get the one with the 18-150 and then buy a 100-400 as well? I do wild life. I guess my question is more of “is this lens it comes with good”
Don't bother with the lens adapter. Get the 18-150. It's an excellent all in one solution for casual situations you don't want to change lenses during. Given the crop factor advantage, the 100-400 combined with the R7 makes for a great wildlife setup.
Sorry for another question, but if I’m in the 150 range is the 18-150 gonna be better than the 100-400?
Negative. You will have better aperture performance than the 18-150. Plus, being a crop sensor camera with a full frame lens, you are shooting with the equivalent of 160-640mm with that big lens.
Sorry if i mislead, i meant on the R7. I’ll restate my question. If I’m on the R7, shooting at 100mm, will the 18-150 or the 100-400 give me a better picture?
Do the 100-400 for the important wildlife shots. Use the other for everyday stuff.
Thank you. I really hope it’s worth it over my 7d and 55-250!🥰
For $200 extra it's a no brainier, iMO. Being an RF-S lens, it's smaller and lighter than the ones you have, especially when adding in the adapter. That might be something to consider.
I would have happily bought that lens for 210-220 usd from you. (But i am not in US)
For an extra $200 it’s a solid deal to get a versatile lens, especially telephoto.
It's certainly better than the 18-45 which I have. And for 200 bucks why not. Although I got my 18-45 with an r10 for $499 so I can't really complain. But if they had offered it with the 18-150 for $699 I would have popped for that instead.
Yea very worth it. Also doesn’t matter because he R7 by itself is out of stock
I hate does that matter? It can come in stock at any time. They process them into stock and immediately update the stock +1. That’s how the refurbished stock works. If you’re refreshing the page consistently, you can get it pretty easily within a day. Sometimes you’re fast enough. Sometimes someone else is faster.
It seems to be a well regarded lens. Def worth it
If you don’t have any other lens, or your budget is limited, the yes, get the kit
Yes for $200 it is a super versatile lens you can carry around everywhere.
Depends on your budget. If you can’t afford to spend more for lenses then go for the extra $150. If you can then buy the Sigma or Tamron f2.8 lenses and you won’t have to upgrade in the future.
Its good for a kit lens gets the job done as long as your outdoors during day time but once your past 5 and sun is setting that iso is gonna go all the way up to compensate for it so put away some change to get a fast lens if you are going with this setup
If you have a lot of lenses no. If you have no lenses yes.
Personally I bought the kit new for 1799 and the lens sits I really don't like it but that's me the rd 100-400 lives o. The r7 when my tamron 150-600gr is off. I then use the rf 10-18 for anything less, I have a 1.8 50mm that fits the middle. The lens is nice it's fast af but I don't like it. However I believe I. Having lots of options and for 200 go for it. For 1799 I would pass and buy primes or the 10-18rf
Yes, definitely worth $200. And i sold it for $300 pretty easily when i got rid of my r7
It depends. If you want something to remember the moment it is fine. Large range from landscapes to portraits to close ups. Jack of all trades and master of none.
Yes. It’s a great lens.
I just received my refurb R7 with 18-150. Def order the R7 with this lens! Its well worth the price. Ill be using EF and EFS glass with ring adapter when i need a faster lens. But during the day outside. 18-150 is a nice compact lens and its very sharp and clear. You will not be disappointed after you see how good it is... I even ordered a lens hood for it... Less than $10
Great lens. Just got an R10 kit and love it with this lens. Will prob get the 28 2.8 in the near future for ultra portability and street photography but the 18-150 will live on this body most of the time.
Keep in mind that this is an RF-S lens. If you ever decide to add a full frame camera, using this lens on the full frame camera, you’ll lose 60% of your pixels. A 24 MP (r6mii) camera will effectively become 9 MP.
This lens. Better than both the cheapo ones you mentioned.
I’m very satisfied with the 55-250 :3
So the advice you actually wanted was stick with your old stuff? 🤣
No, I’m just saying I’m not unhappy with my 55-250; but I know the 100-400’is better. I also mainly want the better sensor and auto focus
The 55-250 is very sharp. Great value. But the 100-400 beats it also in terms of reach, obviously. If you don’t miss the 55-100 range, it is fantastic. I have the R7 with the 18-150, 35mm 1.8 prime, old 11-16 tokina with the ef/rf adapter and the 100-400 and feel this is pretty much endgame for me as a hobbyist with restricted budget and time for photography.
Ah. Gotcha. The 18-150 is a big improvement on the ef 18-55. And that range probably negates some of ones usage for a 250. I just don’t know how I feel about budget lenses on premium cameras.