Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Photography Talk by Genre Wildlife Talk 
Thread started 17 Oct 2014 (Friday) 11:22
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Is the 500mm f/4 IS worth it?

 
sweetlu60
Member
Avatar
151 posts
Likes: 7
Joined Mar 2006
     
Oct 19, 2014 12:22 |  #16

I own both the 100-400 and the mark I 600mm. If the choice was between the 500 and the 600 and you can afford both, then I would choose the 600, as you will always be wanting the extra reach, and since you probably should be using a support for either one, then there is no real difference in usage between the two (IMHO).

Now, I did borrow the 200-400mm and that is an awesome lens and is actually one of the next lenses that I intend to buy. With the built in teleconverter this gives the range of 200-560 and this becomes a highly useful tool. Coupled with a camera that will focus at f8.0, then you can add the 1.4x, and have a great range for the lens. So I would pick this one up first.


Steven Lewis
Western Skies Photography (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
Mybludog
Senior Member
Avatar
273 posts
Gallery: 12 photos
Likes: 252
Joined Nov 2013
Location: Newcastle, Australia
     
Oct 20, 2014 03:41 |  #17

Ok. Thanx guy's for the info. Sold me on the 200-400. Now just have to rob a bank !!!


Just like a dung beetle......flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Sibil
Cream of the Crop
9,267 posts
Likes: 41870
Joined Jan 2009
Location: SoCal
     
Oct 20, 2014 04:14 |  #18

Mybludog wrote in post #17222631 (external link)
Now just have to rob a bank !!!

Do you have a team in place yet? :D




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
buddy4344
Goldmember
1,533 posts
Gallery: 400 photos
Best ofs: 14
Likes: 992
Joined Nov 2006
Location: Allentown, PA
     
Oct 22, 2014 14:32 |  #19

I'll put my two cents in. I own the 100-400 and love it. I also own the 400 DO and the 500 f/4 Ver1. These latter two are a step up for sure. On recent trips to Africa, I did not take my 500 because of the number of other lenses I was taking along and because I knew I'd be quite close to subjects on the game drives I was on. That said, if I lived in Africa, it would be a no brainer to get the 500mm as there are many times when this is the perfect lens.

Let me also add that over the last few years, this lens has held value . I worried that the Ver II would crush resale, but just the opposite happened as they priced the Ver. II much higher, causing folks to covet the value of the Ver. 1. If you buy a good used copy and take care of it, you'll be able to sell it for about what you bought it for.


Buddy4344

Gear: Canon 1Dx MkII, 7D MkII, Canon Lenses: 100 macro, 100-400 Ver.IIL IS, 24-105L IS, Canon 17-40, Canon 1.4x TCon, Rokinon 14mm. Kenko extension tubes, Kenko 1.4x pro TCon.and Kiboko 30L and 22L+

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Kickflipkid687
Senior Member
921 posts
Likes: 24
Joined Jan 2014
     
Feb 07, 2015 21:20 |  #20

I'm still going back and forth on buying this lens. I've been thinking about it for at least a year now.

Mainly because of the cost, but also I wonder how much better it would be than my Tamron 150-600.
I know the Canon will be better in some situations, and of course you get F/4 and 700 5.6, and the AF should be better.

But I was able to test/compare one against my Tamron for 15-20 min., and I really couldn't tell the difference between the images at similar apertures.
This was a bit surprising to me. Although the differences might show up more in harsher light or even dimmer conditions.

Unfortunately I wasn't able to test the AF on moving subjects to get a better idea either. Which I'm sure it would excel at.

Maybe the lens I used needed Micro-Adjustment or something else was up. But I'd hate to get one finally and only see marginal improvements :\.
I wish I could test one out again, but it doesn't seem like it's going to happen. Unless I test the Version II, which probably isn't a good test.

Here's one of the comparison shots I was able to take.

http://img5013.photobo​x.co.uk …a94fbb8d6781d46​bbdbde.jpg (external link)


My Flickr page - https://www.flickr.com​/photos/86957042@N07/ (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
buddy4344
Goldmember
1,533 posts
Gallery: 400 photos
Best ofs: 14
Likes: 992
Joined Nov 2006
Location: Allentown, PA
     
Feb 18, 2015 15:08 as a reply to  @ Kickflipkid687's post |  #21

I've shot both the Tamron and the original 500mm f/4. The shots may seem the same on the back screen of the camera for subjects nearby (less than 50 meters) or at f11 or f/16, but in real wildlife scenarios and editing in Photoshop, one clearly sees where this is a pro lens. Also have to say focus speed if tracking birds in flight (in my case diving eagles), it's amazing how fast the 500 is to less expensive lenses. For me, the only drawback to my using the 500 more often is the weight.


Buddy4344

Gear: Canon 1Dx MkII, 7D MkII, Canon Lenses: 100 macro, 100-400 Ver.IIL IS, 24-105L IS, Canon 17-40, Canon 1.4x TCon, Rokinon 14mm. Kenko extension tubes, Kenko 1.4x pro TCon.and Kiboko 30L and 22L+

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mesodan
Senior Member
Avatar
407 posts
Likes: 21
Joined May 2006
Location: Dubai/New Zealand
     
Mar 01, 2015 22:24 |  #22

If you were shooting FF, the 600L would probably be a better lens for most wildlife.


5DIV | 16-35L f2.8 III | 24L II | 35L II | 50L | 85L II | 70-200L II | 300L II IS | 1.4x III | 2x III | 580EX II
www.dsw-photo.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
navin2233
Senior Member
Avatar
254 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Dec 2010
Location: Illinois
     
Jun 05, 2015 16:51 |  #23

Is the 500mmf4 L worth it? Definitely YES! Get a good sharp used copy for the right price and if you take good care of it you will probably get back what you paid for it.

Image quality wise its a great step up from the 100-400. It will be more sharp and focus faster than the zoom. If you need more reach get the 1.4x iii.


Navin
My Flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Peter2516
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
26,309 posts
Gallery: 953 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 24426
Joined Oct 2010
Location: State of Washington
     
Jun 10, 2015 08:19 |  #24

Like others said it is worth it, I have mine for a little over a month. I forgot how much I paid for it once I downloaded my first outing with it. ;)


Peter
http://www.flickriver.​com/photos/peterbangay​an (external link)
EOS 5D Mark IV, 1Dx1, 7D Mark I & II/Canon T2i Gripped/EF 500mm f/4L IS USM MK1 / EF70-200mm f2.8L IS II USM / EF100 -400 f4.5-5.6L USM/ EFS 10-22mm/EFS 17-55mm/EFS 18-200mm/Canon 1.4x II/Canon 2x III/ 430EXII / 580EXII.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
myphotographic
Member
Avatar
218 posts
Likes: 12
Joined Oct 2010
     
Jun 10, 2015 13:53 |  #25

It's fast approaching a year since I acquired my 500, and I can't imagine for a moment going back to a 100-400 again.


Paul

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
TheFloridaShooter
Senior Member
713 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 27
Joined Nov 2008
     
Jul 05, 2015 21:34 |  #26

I have the 400 f2.8 , 600 f4 and the 800 f5.6 the lense I go to most is the 600 f4. I recently picked up the 200–400 and it's getting a lot of use.


1Dx MKII | 1Dx | 5D MKIV | 5D MKIII | 5Ds r | 5Ds | 7D MKII | 7D | G16 | G3x | EOS M & M3 | 800 f5.6 | 600 f4 | 400 f2.8 | 300 f2.8 | 200-400 f4 | 100-400 f4.5 - 5.6 II x 2 | 70-200 f2.8 | 14 f2.8 II | 50 f1.2 | 50 1.4 | 85 f1.2 | 135 f2 | 24-70 f2.8 II | 11-24 f4 | 35 f1.4 II | Pentax 645Z | SMC Pentax-DA 645 25mm F4 AL | SMC Pentax-D FA 645 55mm F2.8 AL | Pentax 90mm f/2.8 D FA 645 Macro ED AW SR | SMC Pentax-D FA 645 200mm f/4 IF | SMC Pentax-D FA 645 300mm f/4 ED IF | SMC FA 645 400mm f/5.6 ED IF Lens

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
huntersdad
Goldmember
4,652 posts
Likes: 230
Joined Nov 2008
     
Aug 20, 2015 20:54 |  #27

Having sold all my camera a month or so ago due to potential cash problems (which were solved shortly thereafter), I've been in the same boat. 100-400, 150-600, go super prime. Having shot extensively with the 600II, it was difficult to walk away from the new supers, but they are just too expensive. I looked hard at the Sigma SPORT 150-600, read a number of great reviews with some good images, but in the end, the lens sample section here turned me off of that lens. Left with few options, I picked up a new 100-400II today and will receive my 500 V1 on Saturday, which I got at a fantastic price if you ask me. I already knew both were tremendous pieces and they are worth every penny I paid for them.

So, yes, it's worth the money. And they are a steal right now and have basically hit the bottom of the price ladder.


Facebook (external link)

http://WWW.BLENDEDLIGH​TPHOTOGRAPHY.COM (external link)
1DxII x 2 / 24-70L II / 70-200L II / 85 1.4L / 300 II / AD600Pros

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
johnf3f
Goldmember
Avatar
4,091 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 651
Joined Apr 2010
Location: Wales
     
Aug 21, 2015 18:23 |  #28

myphotographic wrote in post #17220971 (external link)
I've used one briefly at an air-show, when one of the UK's big retailers had a stand of stuff to try out, and it didn't disappoint. It's also seems to have become the default lens choice for Andy Rouse (click for long-review) (external link).

Yes Andy does like the 200-400 very much and gets great results with it, though I note he still uses hid 600 Mk2 quite a bit.

I have had a couple of plays with the Canon 200-400 and have been very impressed! The IQ, for a zoom, is simply superb even with the extender - really it gives up little/nothing (in IQ) compared to a prime. Unfortunately it is heavy (nearly as heavy as the 600 Mk2), expensive, and (for me) too short. A 500 F4 is simply a more useful lens to me (small birds) and a 500 with a 1.4 extender is better (though marginally shorter) than the 200-400 with the built in extender and an additional 1.4 extender. The 500mm (especially the Mk2) can also work well with the 2 x Mk3 extender in good light.

If I were into airshows and/or larger animals then the Canon 200-400 is simply THE lens to get bar none! Pity it just doesn't suit my uses. It's a wonderful lens - just not designed for me! I am not complaining, Canon do make the 800 F5.6 L IS = nirvana!

Is the 500 F4 L IS worth it? Simply yes...............


Life is for living, cameras are to capture it (one day I will learn how!).

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

14,343 views & 2 likes for this thread
Is the 500mm f/4 IS worth it?
FORUMS Photography Talk by Genre Wildlife Talk 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is skoczekan
1084 guests, 343 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.