Canon super tele for BIF - but which one?

TimHughes

TimHughes

Messages
3,084
Name
Tim
Edit My Images
Yes
After about a year or so of less than satisfying results with birds of prey I'm thinking of investing in a canon 500 or 600 f4. My current longest lens is 100-400 with 1.4 TC. For many things it's superb but I'm just not able to achieve the shots I'm looking for. Looking at Flickr I can see others get better results than I have with the same kit, so for sure I have room to improve technique. However images with the super teles are much better again....I'm quite keen on the 600 f4 ii as it has the extra reach and not much extra weight than the 500. Thoughts?
 
Often its reach that is the problem the 600 gives 25% more MPs on the bird and that's always handy to have but its not that simple to get the best speed out of the lens you need a 1d series camera as they drive the servos a little quicker .
But then you run into the low MPs count even the new 1dxmkII is only 20mp sometimes that is enough sometimes its not so 2 cameras can be very handy 5dsr + 1dxmkII

for me Canon don't make a perfect camera for birding as it needs to be a cross between the 2 and also have a Silent shutter mode meaning Silent .

Rob.
 
I don't know about canon but I just picked up a Nikon 500mm. From what I've read, people tend to go out with the 500 a lot more than they would with the 600 because the 600 is damn heavy and a chore to carry whereas especially with the canon 500 being so light (comparatively) it's more likely you'll actually use it often. As they always say, better to have a shorter focal length youll actually use than a longer one you'll rarely take out.
 
Thanks for the feedback. On paper the canon 600ii is not so much heavier than the 500ii. I went along to the local canon shop this morning and they will get one in to take a closer look in the next week or so. I plan to use with 5DM3.
 
newbie1 said:
Thanks for the feedback. On paper the canon 600ii is not so much heavier than the 500ii. I went along to the local canon shop this morning and they will get one in to take a closer look in the next week or so. I plan to use with 5DM3.
Click to expand...

800grams heavier is a lot when you're already carrying the other 3kg plus tripod/monopod etc ;) but yeah the only way to know is to try one out.
 
....plus gimbal, plus wet weather stuff, plus food and drink :)
 
PS htid, am I right in thinking your Nikon 500 is 3.8kg? This would be similar to the canon 600 weighing in at 3.9kg?
 
FWIW I use the Canon 500f4 and if I was buying again I'd buy the 600 f4 II. For me you can never have enough reach for birds.

The reason I went 500 was because (at the time) the 600 was too heavy to hand hold for extended periods. Now with the Mark II lenses this isn't the case. I believe the 600 II is very similar in size and weight to the 500 mark I.

Neil
 
Thanks Neil. The 600 ii will be in the shop next week so assuming all is well with it I will go with that. I also asked them to recommend bag options as my current is too small. Ideally something that will take the tripod and gimbal as well.
 
The 600mm f4 is superb put it on a 7D2 or 80D with a 2x extender and you have a v.powerful 1920mm equivalent lens. Be aware that actually finding your subject can be tricky with the 600mm because of the narrow field of view and exceptionally same dof. Get yourself the Lenscoat real tree cover and you'll really look the biz.
 
Looking forward to trying it out not sold on the real tree lenscoats though!
 
Definitely help protect the lens of nothing else.

If you're shooting from a huge you don't want a big white lens poking out.
 
I can confirm canon 600mm mk1 is a total beast. Handholding is no fun at all with the total weight of over 7kg before adding support. It sort of makes your day miserable.
 
The mkII can be hand held but only for 1 min or so then you start to wobble but its the mass that is the problem, when your panning say to the left then a bird comes to your right stopping the lens and changing direction is really hard to do by hand holding more so for birds like Redshank .

Rob.
 
newbie1 said:
After about a year or so of less than satisfying results with birds of prey I'm thinking of investing in a canon 500 or 600 f4. My current longest lens is 100-400 with 1.4 TC. For many things it's superb but I'm just not able to achieve the shots I'm looking for. Looking at Flickr I can see others get better results than I have with the same kit, so for sure I have room to improve technique. However images with the super teles are much better again....I'm quite keen on the 600 f4 ii as it has the extra reach and not much extra weight than the 500. Thoughts?
Click to expand...

Have you sought advice and feedback as to why your images are less than satisfactory?

Just seems like the logical step to me before dropping thousands on a big lens. The long tele lenses are a huge commitment over the 100-400mm and require a totally different shooting style.
 
RichardtheSane said:
Have you sought advice and feedback as to why your images are less than satisfactory?

Just seems like the logical step to me before dropping thousands on a big lens. The long tele lenses are a huge commitment over the 100-400mm and require a totally different shooting style.
Click to expand...
Richard good point. I have done this and making good progress. Right now just coming back from successful shoot with the 100-400 and I'm sure that lens will keep its place. I'm really keen to take my images to the next level and happy to make the commitment and learn the technique required to use it to max potential.
 
Just back from the first trip out with it - got some great captures of Lynx :) awesome piece of equipment!
 
newbie1 said:
PS htid, am I right in thinking your Nikon 500 is 3.8kg? This would be similar to the canon 600 weighing in at 3.9kg?
Click to expand...

Hey you didn't tag me properly so I didn't know you'd asked me a question, which is why i didn't reply. Anyway No mine is the non VR version which is 3.4kg.
 
@htid is this the way to tag? Thanks for the follow up. In the end I went for the 600 mark ii. At 45cm and 3.8 kg It's shorter and lighter than the previous model. It fits inside the flipside 500 bag and proved fairly comfy to carry on today's test run.
 
In long long time ago i was thinking or planning to shoot birds and i was thinking between 500 or 600, my heart always saying 600 and my mind saying 500, and at the end i never shoot birds again after i moved from our old house and i forgot about wildlife/birds completely, but if i will do it one day and confuse between the two lenses then i think i will choose 600.

Now, my only hope or option is to buy Sigma or Tamron 150-600 and give it a try and see at which focal length i use mostly, but i think or i believe i will be using 600mm 98% no doubt, the only debate between 500 and 600 is about price and weight only, if it is about reach then 600 is always or 90% a winner, even if you say 60-80% this is still a winner over 500mm.
 
newbie1 said:
@htid is this the way to tag? Thanks for the follow up. In the end I went for the 600 mark ii. At 45cm and 3.8 kg It's shorter and lighter than the previous model. It fits inside the flipside 500 bag and proved fairly comfy to carry on today's test run.
Click to expand...

Yep that's it :) wow the canon 600 is 3.8kg?? The Nikon 500 is that! 600 is about 4.5 I think! Wonder why the Nikon ones are heavier than canon?
 
htid said:
Yep that's it :) wow the canon 600 is 3.8kg?? The Nikon 500 is that! 600 is about 4.5 I think! Wonder why the Nikon ones are heavier than canon?
Click to expand...
I think the newest nikon VR 500mm is about 3kg and the 600mm about 3.8kg (similar the canons).During the latest update they lost pounds in weight and gain many pounds in price, it seems to be the way most updates go now (both canon and nikon).
 
rob-nikon said:
I think the newest nikon VR 500mm is about 3kg and the 600mm about 3.8kg (similar the canons).During the latest update they lost pounds in weight and gain many pounds in price, it seems to be the way most updates go now (both canon and nikon).
Click to expand...

Yes I knew the FL versions are much lighter weight, but as you say also ridiculously expensive. But the comparitive versions (ie non VR/IS) came out in 2003 and back then the Nikons were already nearly 1kg heavier. It's taken them 13 years to get the weight down to the level of Canon? Crazy!
 
The 600 is a good choice however for your original thread I would say it's not the best option for birds in flight. I have had a Nikon 600 for several years now and love it however I miss so many flight shots with it where my mate using his Cannon 300 and tc can easily get to as he handholds a lot. The narrow field of view takes some getting used to as well. For bird in flight only I would be having a 300 and tc or a 500 which is easier to handhold. Enjoy your new purchase.
 
htid said:
Yes I knew the FL versions are much lighter weight, but as you say also ridiculously expensive. But the comparitive versions (ie non VR/IS) came out in 2003 and back then the Nikons were already nearly 1kg heavier. It's taken them 13 years to get the weight down to the level of Canon? Crazy!
Click to expand...

Just had a look - the new nikon and canon 600's are pretty close in weight and dimensions. I looked for second hand for a while but none to be had, and the weight advantage, guarantee and repair-ability of a new one clinched it. The lens, camera, gimball and tripod all fit inside a flipside 500 backpack making it quite comfy to carry around.
 
markyboy.1967 said:
The 600 is a good choice however for your original thread I would say it's not the best option for birds in flight. I have had a Nikon 600 for several years now and love it however I miss so many flight shots with it where my mate using his Cannon 300 and tc can easily get to as he handholds a lot. The narrow field of view takes some getting used to as well. For bird in flight only I would be having a 300 and tc or a 500 which is easier to handhold. Enjoy your new purchase.
Click to expand...

Thanks :) I'm expecting to have to practice a lot as the field of view is very small!
 
Thanks Nick! Beginner's luck :) It's quite testing - need to be fast with the controls. For these shots I had it on a tripod and gimball which worked very well. Today I tried hand-holding but I think I'm only going to manage that for birds overhead. Anything lower than about 60 degrees above the horizon is too much strain to be workable for me without the tripod.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top