500mm vs 600mm

postcardcv

postcardcv

Messages
2,661
Name
Peter
Edit My Images
No
I currently use a 500 f4 and have been very happy with it but every now and again I get tempted to change up to the 600 f4. Anyone shot with both and got any opinions? It would be used for wildlife (mainly birds) and my current tripod would still be fine with the bigger lens. Is the extra reach worth the extra weight?
 
I have the Canon 500 MkII and for birds/wildlife find it brilliant. I couple it, on occasions with either a 1.4x III OR 2x III TC which add excellent reach. The fact you lose up to a couple of stops I haven't had any issues with. I don't own a 600 but tried one when purchasing the 500 as I, like you, was toying with which one to go for.

Personally, I found the 5 better for IQ with & without TC's on and, coupled with its superb IS system giving you up to 4 stops easier to use handheld than the 600 although it's not something I do often. I don't have an issue over the weight difference but PERSONALLY with the imagery I take, found and now find the 5 a better option.
 
Last edited:
postcardcv said:
I currently use a 500 f4 and have been very happy with it but every now and again I get tempted to change up to the 600 f4. Anyone shot with both and got any opinions? It would be used for wildlife (mainly birds) and my current tripod would still be fine with the bigger lens. Is the extra reach worth the extra weight?
Click to expand...

Are we talking m1 or mk 2 here?...I'd agree with Bruce, and I know others may disagree, but I find the m2 lenses with mk 3 converters absolutely superb, particularly the 2x shows a big improvement over the mk 1 lenses and the mk2 extenders.....I'd opt for the 500 mk2 and extenders...but why not try both........your CPS rep should be able to help.
 
postcardcv said:
MkI lenses, mkIIs are beyond my reach.
Click to expand...

Yeah, the price of the mk2 s are substantial, and changing to mk 3 extenders won't really help, they really work best with mk 2 lenses....have you tried a 1.4?....should be pretty good!...what body are we talking?
 
.....well it always is, Peter!!!!!
 
Two reasons I bought the 600mm most people I know who have the 500mm have the 1.4 extender on a lot of the time
So you have a 5.6 lens the auto focus time is now a lot slower
And you have to bump up the iso to get your shutter speed back. That said the 500 is a great lens
Regards
Richard
 
lost said:
Two reasons I bought the 600mm most people I know who have the 500mm have the 1.4 extender on a lot of the time
So you have a 5.6 lens the auto focus time is now a lot slower
And you have to bump up the iso to get your shutter speed back. That said the 500 is a great lens
Regards
Richard
Click to expand...

Well, Richard, again are you talking mk1 or 2 lenses?
I know all the theory, but frankly my 300 mk2 with a x2 mk3 extender on the 1 Dx is really fast af, and I'd suspect the 500 and 600 mk2s are equally so.......but theorists will tell you this can't be the case...however, I'm happy and at the end of the day, results speak for themselves!!
 
...and I know it's a bit off the OP's question, but I've been lucky to borrow a 200-400 + 1.4 for a month, didn't find af slowed down at all at 5.6, I suspect the new lenses and bodies are just that bit better...after all, the original 5 and 600s have been out a while now.......
 
George said:
Well, Richard, again are you talking mk1 or 2 lenses?
I know all the theory, but frankly my 300 mk2 with a x2 mk3 extender on the 1 Dx is really fast af, and I'd suspect the 500 and 600 mk2s are equally so.......but theorists will tell you this can't be the case...however, I'm happy and at the end of the day, results speak for themselves!!
Click to expand...

:plus1:. No slow AF on my Dx using either the 1.4x III or 2x III with the 500 MkII
 
BMD said:
:plus1:. No slow AF on my Dx using either the 1.4x III or 2x III with the 500 MkII
Click to expand...

Glad I've got a bit of backup, there, Bruce, lots of people argue differently, but I suspect they are talking from theory father than practical use.
I may quote you in the future!!

George.
 
Allegedly the 1DX drives the superteles faster with the bigger battery over a 5D MkIII for example. Whether that is true and applies to cameras like the MkIV I've no idea.
 
George said:
Glad I've got a bit of backup, there, Bruce, lots of people argue differently, but I suspect they are talking from theory father than practical use.
I may quote you in the future!!

George.
Click to expand...

That's fine. I'm not into all the theory myself so if that's true about the AF slowing as your aperture narrows then I haven't noticed it, and I'll go so far as to say its the same with my other lenses.
 
Gaz J said:
Allegedly the 1DX drives the superteles faster with the bigger battery over a 5D MkIII for example. Whether that is true and applies to cameras like the MkIV I've no idea.
Click to expand...

Interesting comment. Can you recall where that info came from Gary?
 
BMD said:
Interesting comment. Can you recall where that info came from Gary?
Click to expand...

I've heard that as well, folks, could it be the higher battery voltage?...I think?...must check...
 
5D3....LP-E6......7.2V 1800mAh
1Dx...LP-E4-N...11.1V 2450 mAh.

George.
 
Quote from Chuck Westfall Canon USA talking about the AF system in the 5D3 and 1DX.

In addition, the EOS-1D X achieves a higher lens motor drive speed with select L-series USM telephoto lenses than the 5D Mark III because of the 1D X’s more powerful battery pack.
 
Gaz J said:
Quote from Chuck Westfall Canon USA talking about the AF system in the 5D3 and 1DX.

In addition, the EOS-1D X achieves a higher lens motor drive speed with select L-series USM telephoto lenses than the 5D Mark III because of the 1D X’s more powerful battery pack.
Click to expand...

Thanks, Gary, that's where I saw it...that was a bit ago, I think.......??
 
Gaz J said:
Quote from Chuck Westfall Canon USA talking about the AF system in the 5D3 and 1DX.

In addition, the EOS-1D X achieves a higher lens motor drive speed with select L-series USM telephoto lenses than the 5D Mark III because of the 1D X’s more powerful battery pack.
Click to expand...

Thanks Gary. That perhaps answers why I for one haven't seen any drop off in AF speed with my 500 M2
 
I'm sure that they optimise the lenses for their top cameras. The Mk IV has the big battery and it can't all be for driving the processors. Although ive not done any comparisons with my MkIV against the 5D3 As a matter of interest the 5D3 and the 1DX when used with the MkII teles are more accurate in their focusing consistency than other cameras used with the same lenses.
 
Last edited:
George said:
Well, Richard, again are you talking mk1 or 2 lenses?
I know all the theory, but frankly my 300 mk2 with a x2 mk3 extender on the 1 Dx is really fast af, and I'd suspect the 500 and 600 mk2s are equally so.......but theorists will tell you this can't be the case...however, I'm happy and at the end of the day, results speak for themselves!!
Click to expand...

Hi George
I do a lot of low light shooting early morning and late evening the 500mm mk2 was slower with the 1.4 on in those conditions than the old 600mm f4 i.s plus I had to up the iso. During normal daylight I could not see any difference between the two when the 1.4 was fitted speed wise without the 500mm was marginally quicker. I shall shortly be buying the 500mm mk2 i.s to run alongside my old war horse the 600mm f4 i.s. If you are happy that is the main thing you can't ask for more than that.

Just a thought for new members to long lenses.
Picture from the old 600mm new technology doesn't mean you are going to get more sharp images if your technique isn't up to scratch



Regards All
Richard
 
Last edited:
lost said:
Hi George

Just a thought for new members to long lenses.
Picture from the old 600mm new technology doesn't mean you are going to get more sharp images if your technique isn't up to scratch



Regards All
Richard
Click to expand...

...a VERY valid point there, big danger in getting caught up in the technology merry go round!!
 
When I got my 500 I thought great pics here I come. Oh I was a foolish boy. Easiest thing in the world to get OOF pics with a long lens wide open.
 
Gaz J said:
When I got my 500 I thought great pics here I come. Oh I was a foolish boy. Easiest thing in the world to get OOF pics with a long lens wide open.
Click to expand...
...and those puffins are about as hard as it gets!!

Even cheetahs don't go as fast!!
 
George said:
...and those puffins are about as hard as it gets!!

Even cheetahs don't go as fast!!
Click to expand...
Didnt want to hear that............I am off to the Ilel of May first week in August to shoot some...................if they havent left already. I only have a 300mm f2.8 but saving for the 800mm f5.6
 
Neil, I go out to the Isle of May every year at least once, but much earlier in the year, usually in May, when the pufflings have hatched.
Of course, you don't see the pufflings, as they are deep in the burrow (or the gulls get them!!)

I've played with various combos, and find that, as the birds are quite close (although you can't go off the path) 300 or 420 is plenty, and even for the static shots, you'll be fine.
My (albeit limited) experience of the 800 is that the field of view is so narrow, you'd be extremely lucky to get a puffin in flight with it, that lens is good for static shots but in flight?....well perhaps its my cr@p technique but I just don't think it would be any good.

You'd be much better with a 5 or 600, imho.

Will research the dates a bit more, and perhaps pm you.

George.
 
George said:
Neil, I go out to the Isle of May every year at least once, but much earlier in the year, usually in May, when the pufflings have hatched.
Of course, you don't see the pufflings, as they are deep in the burrow (or the gulls get them!!)

I've played with various combos, and find that, as the birds are quite close (although you can't go off the path) 300 or 420 is plenty, and even for the static shots, you'll be fine.
My (albeit limited) experience of the 800 is that the field of view is so narrow, you'd be extremely lucky to get a puffin in flight with it, that lens is good for static shots but in flight?....well perhaps its my cr@p technique but I just don't think it would be any good.

You'd be much better with a 5 or 600, imho.

Will research the dates a bit more, and perhaps pm you.

George.
Click to expand...
Thanks for the info George.............the only date I have is the 6th August for the Ile of May.....fingers crossed
 
Joeturner11 said:
I'am still debating weather to get the Nikon 400/500mm f/4D ED II ( The last one without VR ) or getting a Nikon 300mm f/2.8VR II ( Current Version ) and using that with a 1.4x and 2x TC.
Click to expand...
Dont do it; TC's are terrible and you will regret if if you go down that road...........save for the 5/600mm and be done with it
 
Joe, my 300mm f2.8 VR plus the TC20lll is marvellous, albeit heavy

but I have never used anything longer
 
Last edited:
ndwgolf said:
Dont do it; TC's are terrible and you will regret if if you go down that road...........save for the 5/600mm and be done with it
Click to expand...

I personally prefer the lens raw with no TC aswell, The main reason I'am interested in a 300mm f/2.8 + 2x TC that gives a compact 600mm is that I go on walks up the river to the local res etc. as there is no one about and very peaceful though the countryside, and can get some decent stuff so doing alot of travelling on foot with my wildlife photography local and far, Some days mounting upto about 17miles round trip!
 
Joeturner11 said:
Do you use the VRI or VRII Bill?
Click to expand...

Hi Joe
Just VR1 …….. but if the non VR glass is as good as the VR glass I would save a load of money and go for the non VR as long as the AF was OK… if you pay the "right" price you could sell it for the same if, (when) you want to move up
I use mine on a tripod most of the time - probably 25% raw and 75% with the TC ……. hardly ever hand held …….. if I go for hand held I always use my 300mm f4 ……. with or without the x 1.4TC …….. but I also reckon, and I am going to try this as soon as I can ……. that if you are shooting from a hide hand held and the birds are close the 70 200mm f2.8 Vr with the x14 TC, maybe useful as you have almost 300mm at f4 with VR …… I have the 70 200mm f2.8 VR .. it always seems to get good reports and I have found it to be a clean and a nice lens to handle
But just my opinion of course ……. we can all debate lens combos for hours
 
Last edited:
BillN_33 said:
Hi Joe
Just VR1 …….. but if the non VR glass is as good as the VR glass I would save a load of money and go for the non VR as long as the AF was OK… if you pay the "right" price you could sell it for the same if, (when) you want to move up
I use mine on a tripod most of the time - probably 25% raw and 75% with the TC ……. hardly ever hand held …….. if I go for hand held I always use my 300mm f4 ……. with or without the x 1.4TC …….. but I also reckon, and I am going to try this as soon as I can ……. that if you are shooting from a hide hand held and the birds are close the 70 200mm f2.8 Vr with the x14 TC, maybe useful as you have almost 300mm at f4 with VR …… I have the 70 200mm f2.8 VR .. it always seems to get good reports and I have found it to be a clean and a nice lens to handle
But just my opinion of course ……. we can all debate lens combos for hours
Click to expand...

The VR on the lenses doesn't bother me at all either, I either use the lens on a monopod or on a really small tripod for low POV shots, Its just the newer VR lens have better optical performance than the older ones, I want to have a play with the weight of the older 400mm f/2.8D ED II / 500mm f/4D ED II and see if there to big to have good versatile with as the 400mm weighs 4.440g and the 500mm weighs 3,430g compared to the 300mm f/2.8's 2,900g The 500mm does not weight much more but is a far sight bigger, as I will be using the lens on the move alot of the time the size of it plays a large part and too how much I can throw it about getting BIF.
 
Joeturner11 said:
I personally prefer the lens raw with no TC aswell, The main reason I'am interested in a 300mm f/2.8 + 2x TC that gives a compact 600mm is that I go on walks up the river to the local res etc. as there is no one about and very peaceful though the countryside, and can get some decent stuff so doing alot of travelling on foot with my wildlife photography local and far, Some days mounting upto about 17miles round trip!
Click to expand...
Joe,
using TC's (any of them) will downgrade the IQ of the immage by at least 30%.......it will also effect the AF by about 50%..............................Head to the gym and work on your sholders and arms and you will be fine with a600mm f4 :):)
 
ndwgolf said:
Joe,
using TC's (any of then will downgrade the IQ of the immage by at least 30%.......it will also effect the AF by about 50%..............................Head to the gym and work on your sholders and arms and you will be fine with a600mm f4 :):)
Click to expand...

I know what you mean as my 70-200mm with the 2x loses a lot of quality and speed compared to the lens without any TC, Are be interested to see what the new Nikon TC-14EIII is like when the reviews come out as it seems Nikon say there is a 0% quality lose and 40% gain of reach, Its not the weight side of things that is the issue I can happily carry something huge round its just how fast I can move it about as when I'am birding and see something quickly I need to be able to get the 500mm of my shoulder quick enough to get the shot and how practical it is too carry around, where as the 300mm will be a lot better for that type of shooting and much more portable, specially if shooting though hide windows, as some places don't have the biggest of windows at all. The major downside that is putting me off the 500mm currently is that it would be amazing for birding but I also do a lot of sport togging and f/4 is not the best way to go, specially in the winter section of the season!
 
I cant speak for the handling of anything longer than 300mm f2.8 as that is all I have and use that for shooting birds in flight hand held. I have just bought a Wimberley Gimbal Head and Gitzo 5 series set of legs in antisipation for a longer lens either 600 or 800mm but realistically I think it will be the 600 as the 800mm will be tough to lock onto a BIF due to the narrow field of view. Anyway when the lens arrives and I get some practic with it I will let you all know how I get on with it
 
ndwgolf said:
Joe,
using TC's (any of them) will downgrade the IQ of the immage by at least 30%.......it will also effect the AF by about 50%..............................Head to the gym and work on your sholders and arms and you will be fine with a600mm f4 :):)
Click to expand...
Neil, you really should not make sweeping statements like that, especially when you are wrong pal. Yeah, some lenses do not like tcs, the 300 and 500 f4s are fine with the 1.4. Never had a 400 2.8 Joe, but they are a big numb bugger when i have had the opportunity to use one.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top