I have been waiting on these lenses for some time. My question on deciding which to go with was which would give me the longer focal length using an extender, and still give IQ good enough to be acceptable.
It appears that the 500mm will be able to give decent IQ at 1000mm, and the 600mm will not at 1200mm. In some ways this makes the 500mm the longer acceptably usable lens.
Thoughts?
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/R...mp=2&APIComp=0
Was wondering how the TC shots would work out myself. Once the MTF charts became available I chose the 300 & 500 combo relying on the accuracy of the charts. Having a 300mm already leads my preference to the 500mm as it will offer me the most versatility. 300, 420, 500, 600, 700, and 1000mm focal lengths become available all with usable IQ. Yes the 300 with 2x TC is better stopped down and the 1000mm at f8 will be MF only on my bodies but those are tradeoffs against weight and cost that I am willing to make.
From a cash outlay perspective the 500 costs less than the 600mm. The 500 weighs less than the 600 which will improve handling and lugging the beast around.
Not sure if my rationale will be similar to yours but it makes sense to me.
jrw; no that is my logic to. The 2x and the ability to focus at F/8 is one reason I am thinking of staying away from the 1D X as well.
Another thing that is interesting, when choosing the 800mm vs the 600mm with a 1.4x. With the ISO charts you are not loosing that much going the 600mm 1.4x over the 800mm. http://www.the-digital-picture.com/R...mp=1&APIComp=2
The difference in vignetting was the most noticeable difference to me followed by distortion. Otherwise much the same to my eyes.
Given the time I spent pondering the decision it looks like the time has come to just do it. What could possibly go wrong?
Who knows, may wind up with used 1D4 or 1Ds3 if I use the one combo enough to think it is justifiable for f8 AF. Not likely though.
considering the prices difference, the IQ of version II lens with the 2X should be good enough for the price difference, on the other hand, paying this much money for the version II lenses but depending on the TCs results to decide which lens to get is kind of sad, i know, tough decision Rick, I d go with 600mm haha.
JJphoto, well it isn't the only reason to go with the 500mm but it was one of the last factors. One of things I am always thinking about when using the 500mm is I wish this thing was a bit lighter and had better IS. I can say that I was honestly glad that I didn't buy the 800mm after carrying the 500mm for the first year. I wouldn't get a lighter lens with the 600mm and it would be a bit longer. Canon really messed the plan for replacing the 500mm with the new one when they introduced the 1D X and took away our crop factor. But...there definitely wouldn't be anything sad about owning either one of these lenses. (other than the hit to your bank account)
I just about have myself convinced to put the 500mm L up for sale to help fund the upgrade.
Last edited by HDNitehawk; 06-13-2012 at 06:05 PM.
Thinking the same thing plus.... adding in my 300/2.8 and 1DIII body I might come close to breaking evenOriginally Posted by HDNitehawk
Actually, I have seen the 300mm selling between $4,500 and $5,200 and the 500mm selling between $6,200 and $6,900. You might be able to keep the 1D III. I am thinking about selling the 300mm as well to help fund the upgrade, but what I should do is sell the 16-35mm II and add a few dollars for the remainder. I don't use the 16-35mm at all.Thinking the same thing plus.... adding in my 300/2.8 and 1DIII body I might come close to breaking even
If I don't use a lens much at all in a 12 month cycle, I sell it. Now I have just four (although my wife seems to think I have 10). Makes it easier (both cash-flow and mentally) to fund that next big lens purchase? So what's mine going to be....I drool over the 500 II, but it's not gonna happen any time soon.
But to your earlier question, I'd get whichever lens you will use most often in the greatest number of shooting scenarios. I know that for me, between the two, I would likely use the 500 more; the 600 is pretty darn big.
BTW, I'm not fully following your conclusion that the 600II with a 2x has worse IQ than the 500II with a 2x. To my eyes the center actually looks better on the 600II with 2x; but the corners are much better on the 500II with a 2x.
I noticed this to. The corners and mid frame are very much better on the 500mm II. It appears the corners and mid frame will be unusable on the 600mm by my standards. It will probably be 10 years before we see a 500mm III, and if Canon keeps heading the direction it is going there will be only full frame high end cameras, the corners and mid frame will really matter.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote