500mm F/4L II vs 600mm F/4L II

[HDNitehawk]

oh then somebody's 500mm lens must be better than mine...lol...

I think Jonathan's new 500mm may be

[Vern]

I'm new to the forum and joined after benefiting from reading the great reviews from Bryan and advice from the senior members.

I just returned from a week at the NC coast test driving the new Canon 500mm f4L IS II and I had a few things to share plus questions to add to this thread. Surrounding kit with this great lens - 5DMKII, gitzo tripod with Really Right stuff full gimbal, Canon 1.4 and 2X version III extenders. Needless to say, I loved the lens - I have the 300 f2.8L IS II and was struck by how light the 500mm is now - doesn't seem that much harder to handle than the 300 (though I backpack with the 300, and probably wouldn't with this lens - weight + volume too high). I used it primarily to capture seabirds in flight and wading birds. Per the 500 -vs- 600 question, I almost never took the 1.4X off this lens for these applications. The sharpness, color and contrast were great with the 1.4X (some flare trouble with backlit subjects relative to the lens alone - my impression anyway) and I used the 2X for wading birds with good IQ results as well. Questions: 1) Is 'live-view' with 5X or 10X the best means to manually focus with the 2X extender? This was challenging even with slower moving subjects and I had to use the IS set on #1 to stabilize enough to focus accurately at 1000mm, which generates a problem with tracking as it corrects for your attempts to move with the subject (windy conditions meant quite a bit of vibration, so I needed IS help while focusing). 2) What pins can be taped to permit autofocus at f8? 3) I used IS mode 3 for most of the in flight shots (lens + 1.4X) - which came out very sharp when I executed everything else properly (luckily light levels were not an issue). Should I have used IS mode 2 instead? Shutter speeds were usually faster than 1/2000, so maybe it doesn't matter?

What I learned: 1) I need the 5DMKIII autofocus ability b/c the 5DMKII focusing ability was the major limitation to good shots of birds in flight (ordered one last night). 2) Although the IQ of the 500 with the 2X was fine (when I manged to get the focus right before the subject was out of frame), not having autofocus with a 1000mm lens is a non-starter for me (too much frustration) - unless someone has advice on how to enable this without buying an older Canon body just for this purpose. 3) I think I'll buy the 600mm instead of the 500, as others here have said, "you are almost never too long..." and since the 300 works exceptionally well with both teleconverters, the 600 will give me more autofocusable reach when I can carry a bigger lens. It isn't as sharp with the 2X as the 500, but w/o autofocus, the 1200mm wouldn't be that useful anyway (I think...).

Speaking of the next edition of these lens (per Nitehawk) - why doesn't every supertele come with a built-in 1.4X converter customized to that lens (like the 200-400 that's "on the way")? For almost every application with these lens, fiddling to change the extender will lead to lots of missed shots and per the discussion in this thread, everyone tries to add as much flexibility in focal length as can be manged given the huge investment in the basic lens.

Thanks for reading.

[HDNitehawk]

It sounds like you had a good test drive. Whay you say you leanred, it would be a very nice kit, a 600mm II paired with a new 5D III.

[Jonathan Huyer]

Hi Vern -

Welcome to the forum! Thanks for the report on your field test of the new 500... that's a lot of good information.

I agree, if you are aiming primarily for birds and you are using a full-frame camera, you will probably be happier with the new 600. Especially since the weight of the 600 has been reduced so much that you can hand-hold it on occasion. Regarding your use of live-view to focus on a moving subject, I can't imagine how hard that must be. I use live-view for manual focus of stationary objects only (like the osprey nest in my previous post in 'Current Shots'), and that is more than fussy enough.

I have not tried my 500 with a 2x extender, and I'm not interested in that much focal length anyway. I'm going after somewhat larger targets like bears, and I also really like the reduced weight of the 500 for extended hand-holding ability. Sure it would be great to have a built-in 1.4 extender, but I'm quite delighted with the lens as-is and it already cost more than enough. I can't imagine what they'd charge for that added feature, if it ever came to pass. I don't mind swapping in the 1.4 TC when needed (unless it's raining of course). Bears don't move too quickly, so if they start getting closer then there is usually enough time to remove the extender. Or I can just run further away .

I like the new IS mode 3, and it will likely become my default for all shooting situations (both hand-held and tripod). Mode 2 will cover you for panning, which could work well for BIF. I will have to defer to the real bird experts on this forum to answer that properly for you. At 1/2000 second you are correct that you could probably just switch off the IS completely.

Another option for you would be to use a crop-sensor camera for bird photography, and benefit from an immediate jump in apparent focal length. A full-frame sensor is nice for many applications, but birds isn't one of them.

Thanks again for posting!

[Joel Eade]

If birds are your primary interest I would look into finding a 1DMKIV body.

It will autofocus at f/8 (500mm f/4L + 2X TC) using the center point. It is slower but with wading birds it can be done, especially in good light.

The 1.3 crop factor and the 12 fps also a big advantage for bird photography compared to the 5DIII. The AF system is excellent for BIF but prob not quite as good as the 5DIII or 1DX.

As for IS on the 500mm, I have the Version I 500mm f/4L IS USM, I usually do not use image stabilization unless the shutter speed is less than 1/100 sec. For flight images I am usually at 1/1600 or faster, so I turn IS off.

[Richard Lane]

Hi Vern,

Welcome and Great first post, thanks for sharing your experiences!

Since you have a 300mm f/2.8L IS II, and you stated that you always had the 1.4X on the 500mm, I would agree that you should be looking at the 600mm II.

The 300mm + 1.4 gives you 420mm f/4 which is too close to the 500mm f/4. Plus, since the 300mm is f/2.8, you can add the 2x to get 600mm f/5.6 and still maintain AF.

Live view is really only practical for static subjects, especially at 1200mm with that limited FOV.

"IS" is mainly used for slower shutter-speeds but it can also help stabilize the image in the VF. Mode 2 is continuous IS for vertical or horizontal panning which can sometimes fight or counter your own movements. Mode 3 is the new mode that you probably want for action shots, which only becomes activated when you press the shutter button, thus it doesn't fight your movements, but it still stabilizes the long lens to reduce camera shake.

I've been saying that they needed a new IS system for a while now, as I've always felt that the old IS system would fight me and it felt like someone bumped into me when it finally would kick in, causing me to miss the shot, so I'm glad to hear that you were happy with the new mode 3, as I haven't tried it yet.

Here is a little explanation:

Image Stabilizer:
The Image Stabilizer in a Canon lens works by shifting a stabilizer group of elements to compensate for motion detected by a gyroscope in the lens. There are now three IS modes – Mode 1 for general shooting, Mode 2 for panning and Mode 3 which is aimed at sports photographers.

The panning mode, Mode 2 features a modified IS algorithm as well. This new algorithm negates the IS ‘bump’ that can occur when you first start panning the lens providing a more stable viewfinder image. The new IS mode, Mode 3, only activates the IS mechanism when you full depress the shutter button to shoot an image. For sports photographers moving between shots, this avoids the lens trying to stabilize random, rapid movements and only begins to compensate while you are shooting.

Under Key Technologies tab:

http://cpn.canon-europe.com/content/...L_IS_II_USM.do

Sorry, I can't help you with pin taping.


Rich

[Vern]

Thanks for the welcome and feedback gents.

I'll give some more thought to a cropped sensor camera like the 1DMKIV. Am I correct in assuming that the 5DMKIII images can almost be cropped by a factor of 1.3 with a resulting resolution similar to the 1DMKIV? - of course this approach doesn't give you the other capabilities of the 1D. Since backpacking with gear is a major pursuit of mine, I'm a little reluctant to have a cropped body that won't satisfy the landscape angle. I'll always choose to carry more lenses instead of two bodies. But, a cropped body for birding with the 600mm +/- the 1.4X (which is highly unlikely to go in my backpack) might be pretty useful. The technical details of explaining why I need another camera body may escape my wife's level of interest/credulity (maintaining credibility with her is getting pretty tough since I rented the 500 just to see if I really needed it and then convinced myself that I needed the 600).

I assume that the panning mode 2 does not correct for the lens motion parallel to the panning direction even when it activates (?) so maybe this would be better than mode 3 for birds in flight - which I assume tries to correct for all lens motion when it activates. At 1/2000 with a bird moving 60 kilometers/hour the motion of the subject during exposure is roughly 8mm (if my math is right? [60kilometers/h = 1K/min = 1X10e6mm/min = 16,667mm/sec divided by 1/2000sec = 8.33 mm motion) - this is enough to matter, I think. I probably wasn't shooting subjects moving this fast but I think I'll compare the two modes once I have a camera that can autofocus better than the 5DMKII - with it the comparison is hard since I can't easily distiguish image quality effected by subject motion/IS mode from shots slightly OOF.

My vision is just not good enough these days to manually focus an f8 lens through the viewfinder so I resorted to the live view..... This was barely OK for a slowly wading heron, but would be useless for a more lively subject.

Thanks again.

[Sean Setters]

Stick the 600mm onto a 7D (crop body, 1.6x focal length multiplier, great autofocus) and pack a Canon 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 or similar UWA lens. With that, I don't think you'd be compromising that much to have such a long focal length at hand.

[Richard Lane]

I agree with the 7D and the Canon 10-22 is a great landscape lens. It sounds like the 600mm worked for you, but that is still a pretty heavy lens for backpacking. If you got the 7D and used your 300mm f/2.8 that would give you an effective focal lenghth of 480mm and with the 1.4X, you will be at 672mm. An even lighter lens for backpacking would be the 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II with 1.4X and a 7D (up to 448mm). If you need longer, then the 500mm on the 7D (800mm) would be obviously lighter than the 600mm for backpacking.

Cropping the MKIV can help, but the MKIV is pretty heavy too and then for landscapes you would need a 16-35mm and that would give you 21mm on the wide end as opposed to 16mm on the wide end for the 7D with the 10-22mm.

I believe Mode2 and Mode3 IS are the same except that mode2 is always active and mode3 is only active while shooting. It sounds like Mode2 has also been improved with a new algorithm to prevent the bump/jump in the viewfinder.

Rich

[Vern]

Thanks Richard and Sean for the 7D suggestion. My typical backpacking kit is the 5DMKII, 16-35mm 2.8L II (great for shots while hiking w/o taking off my backpack to work with the TS lens), 24mm 3.5L TS ( a must to me for landscapes and panos), 70-200mm 2.8L IS II, 300 2.8L IS II and 1.4X and 2X teles + Gitzo tripod w Arca Z1, pano bar and Wimberly sidekick. My wife thinks I'm crazy to carry this plus all the other gear, but as long as I can walk, I pack it along. The 600mm would be the straw that broke even this camel's back, so if I backpack where a real supertele is needed, your compromise is a great idea. If I was really disciplined, I could get by with the 24TS and the 70-200 w the tele's. Age will force this eventually anyway. I guess from a weight perspective carrying a 7D body along to use with the 300 to give a supertele equivalent with the converters and a 5DMKIII to use with the 24TS might be an flexible package (would probably still want the 70-200 for the midrange - I find myself shooting lots of panos in the 70-100mm focal length).

Cheers