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 Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
Thread started 26 Jan 2009 (Monday) 16:57
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Canon 500mm, 600mm and 800mm owners and potential buyers please respond.

 
gasrocks
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
13,432 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Mar 2005
Location: Portage, Wisconsin USA
     
Jan 27, 2009 17:39 |  #46

Yes, the SIgmonster is great for quickly acquiring the subject and then zooming in.


GEAR LIST
_______________

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
yabbie
Senior Member
Avatar
824 posts
Joined May 2007
Location: Sydney, Oz
     
Jan 27, 2009 21:10 |  #47

Who has the best range of telephoto lenses for birding out of all of the companies...Canon...Ni​kon...Olympus...?


Alice
5DII, 35L, 50L, 85L, 135L, MP-E 65, 100 macro, Brolga the birding lens, macro twin flash, tripods, filters and a big box
http://www.lyrebird-gallery.smugmug.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
yabbie
Senior Member
Avatar
824 posts
Joined May 2007
Location: Sydney, Oz
     
Jan 27, 2009 21:30 |  #48

romulus_be wrote in post #7199298 (external link)
Arhur Morris has some interesting bulletins and has recently reviewed the 800 mm

Link? I can't find the review!


Alice
5DII, 35L, 50L, 85L, 135L, MP-E 65, 100 macro, Brolga the birding lens, macro twin flash, tripods, filters and a big box
http://www.lyrebird-gallery.smugmug.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
TooManyShots
Cream of the Crop
10,203 posts
Likes: 525
Joined Jan 2008
Location: NYC
     
Jan 27, 2009 21:32 |  #49
bannedPermanent ban

yabbie wrote in post #7202020 (external link)
Who has the best range of telephoto lenses for birding out of all of the companies...Canon...Ni​kon...Olympus...?


Canon.... Sigma is the second and they do make both Canon and Nikon mounts. Nikon is the worst. You pay more than $1000 more over the Canon with the same focal length. Also, Nikon does not make enough of them and many places are back ordered.


One Imaging Photography (external link) and my Flickr (external link)
Facebook (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
KenjiS
"Holy crap its long!"
Avatar
21,370 posts
Gallery: 555 photos
Likes: 2657
Joined Oct 2008
Location: Buffalo, NY
     
Jan 28, 2009 01:11 |  #50

TooManyShots wrote in post #7202169 (external link)
Canon.... Sigma is the second and they do make both Canon and Nikon mounts. Nikon is the worst. You pay more than $1000 more over the Canon with the same focal length. Also, Nikon does not make enough of them and many places are back ordered.

And Olympus has a limited but VERY interesting selection of lenses that are almost impossible for Canon and them to match.. [IE They have a 300mm f/2.8, which is equivalent to a 600mm f/2.8, a lens Canon could probubly never produce...] their 150mm f/2 is a well...300mm f/2 equivalent[A lens that is possible! Nikon made one].... for only $2250! the 300mm f/2.8 is a bargain at $5541 comparatively... and its worth mentioning one of their most kickass lenses, that monster 90-250mm f/2.8 [a 180-500 f/2.8 equivalent] that runs $5000

Of course none of them have in-lens stabilization, and I REALLY doubt the in-camera can deal with stabilizing most of those...Not to mention the 4:3 system has flaws [Especially relating to noise...]

and $1,000 is putting it LIGHTLY.....

the Nikon 300mm 2.8 is $4450 or so at Adorama, the Canon is $4100,

$8100 for the 400 2.8 and the Canon is a mere $6,800

$8000 for the 500 4 whereas the Canon is merely $5,800

$9700 for the 600 4 versus $7,600 for the Canon

I think the ONLY one of these big teles you save on when you shoot Nikon is the 200mm f/2, the Canon is $5,300, the Nikon is $4,100!

Nikon also does not have a 400mm f/5.6 or a 400mm f/4 in its lineup, and lacks a VR version of the 300mm f/4 prime [However I'll note I've seen that Nikon 300 f/4 prime used for a lot less than the Canon...BUT I'm betting its not as good]

Nikon's strength is its selection of lenses for photographers who shoot landscapes, the 14-24 is undisputedly the king of this...but for telephotos, Canon is the king, easy [A large reason I stayed with Canon is the fact I like big telephotos and I realized that Canon is just the best in that segment, and the rest of their lineup, while lacking the impressive absolute quality of the 14-24 is otherwise just about as good..]

Actually I think the weakest is Sony right now, they ONLY have a 300mm f/2.8, and uh..

its $6,000

Yep, $6,000....

Feel bad for Sony photographers :)

Oh and yes, I was bored


Gear, New and Old! RAW Club Member
Wanted: 70-200. Time and good health
Deviantart (external link)
Flickr (This is where my good stuff is!) (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Anders ­ Östberg
Goldmember
Avatar
3,395 posts
Likes: 3
Joined Nov 2003
Location: Sweden
     
Jan 28, 2009 01:24 as a reply to  @ KenjiS's post |  #51

You have to factor in sensor size among other things when comparing lenses, you don't get the same result when taking pictures at the same aperture. Smaller sensor, like the Olympus 4/3 system = larger DOF ... whether that's good or bad is up to you, for tele shots you may like it sometimes (like for birds close up), for wide-angle shots maybe not so much. Smaller sensor usually also means not as good image quality, so it's all up to what characteristics you think are more important than the other.


Anders Östberg - Mostly Canon gear - My photos (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
KenjiS
"Holy crap its long!"
Avatar
21,370 posts
Gallery: 555 photos
Likes: 2657
Joined Oct 2008
Location: Buffalo, NY
     
Jan 28, 2009 01:27 |  #52

FretNoMore wrote in post #7203348 (external link)
You have to factor in sensor size among other things when comparing lenses, you don't get the same result when taking pictures at the same aperture. Smaller sensor, like the Olympus 4/3 system = larger DOF ... whether that's good or bad is up to you, for tele shots you may like it sometimes (like for birds close up), for wide-angle shots maybe not so much. Smaller sensor usually also means not as good image quality, so it's all up to what characteristics you think are more important than the other.

Yeh but you still get the shutter speed benefit, a full extra stop can be the difference between getting it and missing it, and the Olympus ones ARE a lot lighter and smaller than the Canons!

But I'd still take a Canon, the AF system in Olympus just is not as good...


Gear, New and Old! RAW Club Member
Wanted: 70-200. Time and good health
Deviantart (external link)
Flickr (This is where my good stuff is!) (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
yabbie
Senior Member
Avatar
824 posts
Joined May 2007
Location: Sydney, Oz
     
Jan 28, 2009 01:35 as a reply to  @ KenjiS's post |  #53

Thanks for all the info Kenjis!
I'm glad you were bored... figured someone on the forum would have done all the research.


Alice
5DII, 35L, 50L, 85L, 135L, MP-E 65, 100 macro, Brolga the birding lens, macro twin flash, tripods, filters and a big box
http://www.lyrebird-gallery.smugmug.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
KenjiS
"Holy crap its long!"
Avatar
21,370 posts
Gallery: 555 photos
Likes: 2657
Joined Oct 2008
Location: Buffalo, NY
     
Jan 28, 2009 01:41 |  #54

yabbie wrote in post #7203389 (external link)
Thanks for all the info Kenjis!
I'm glad you were bored... figured someone on the forum would have done all the research.

Well Olympus I know off the top of my head because a good friend of mine shoots Olympus, and one of his HUGE complaints is that for the photography he did a lot of [In low light] he suffered because 1. Their equivalent of a 70-200 f/2.8 costs twice the ammount of a 70-200 f/2.8L IS and 2. the low light performance was poor..very poor

I also was a Nikon shooter, and I looked into switching systems heavily, weighing pros and cons and everything, so i knew some of this off the top of my head..a good reason I stayed is that I really would love to one day own the 400mm f/4L DO IS, it strikes me as the perfect hiking birding/multipurpose long lens [Its about the same size/weight as a 100-400]

Of course if i ever get the money, ill be weighing the 300mm f/2.8, and the 200 f/2....


Gear, New and Old! RAW Club Member
Wanted: 70-200. Time and good health
Deviantart (external link)
Flickr (This is where my good stuff is!) (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
willz75
Senior Member
Avatar
449 posts
Joined Oct 2006
Location: Darwin, Australia
     
Jan 28, 2009 02:55 |  #55

I have the 600, great lens if you don't plan to hike a lot. The weight becomes are problem for me if I have to lug it for more than 1/2hr... If you want a good compromise between reach and weight then I'd recommend the 500. I believe Arthur Morris uses the 400 f4 IS DO a lot on hikes and recommends it due to its weight even though IQ isn't as good as the 500 or 600.

For me personally I have the 300 f2.8 IS which is my 'portable' hiking prime :) it takes 1.4x and 2.0x TCs well with acceptable IQ results.


1D Mark IV | 5D Mark II | Lots of L Glass :D
http://ntwildscapes.co​m (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
GyRob
Cream of the Crop
10,051 posts
Likes: 791
Joined Feb 2005
Location: N.E.LINCOLNSHIRE UK.
     
Jan 28, 2009 03:14 |  #56

another vote for the 500f4 it does lose a tad IQ with the 1.4tc but overall it really is the best, lighter than the 600/800 .
I was going to get the 800f5.6 but being stuck at f5.6 here in the Dull UK would meen many times i just would not be able to use it at all
At leased with my 500f4 +1.4tc i can take the tc OFF and shoot at f4 .
Rob.


"The LensMaster Gimbal"
http://www.lensmaster.​co.uk/rh1.htm (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
romulus_be
Member
56 posts
Joined Feb 2008
Location: Belgium near Brussels
     
Jan 28, 2009 06:31 |  #57

yabbie wrote in post #7202160 (external link)
Link? I can't find the review!

here you go

http://www.birdsasart.​com/bn283.htm (external link)


We all go a little mad sometimes. Haven't you?
http://patrickfranqui.​zenfolio.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Bulbmogul
Member
136 posts
Joined Jul 2008
Location: NW Ohio, USA
     
Jan 28, 2009 06:58 |  #58

KenjiS wrote in post #7200136 (external link)
Wow....just...WOW

how is the 400 DO?



Love them..Great walk around 400 prime..


EF800MM F/5.6 L IS USM, EF600MM Fl4L IS USM, EF500MM F/4 L IS USM, EF400MM F/2.8L IS USM, EF400F/4DO IS USM, EF300MM F/2.8L IS USM. EF200 F/2 L IS USM, EF85MM F/1.2L USM, EF50MM F/1.2 L USM, EF35MM F/1.4L USM, EF24MM F/1.4L USM, EF70-200MM F/2.8L IS USM, EF24-105MM L IS USM, EF16-35MM L USM, EOS5D, EOS1DS, EOS1DMK2N, EOS1dMK3, EOS1DSMK3, (3) Gitzo 5540 LS Tripod Sets of legs, Wimberly Mk2 Full Head, Arca Swiss B1 Canon XLH1 HD Video Camera

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
gasrocks
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
13,432 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Mar 2005
Location: Portage, Wisconsin USA
     
Jan 28, 2009 08:25 |  #59

NIkon vs Canon. If you can handle MF, 95% of my bird pix are taken with MF, look at used long Nikon AI-S lenses. Some real bargains and quality there.


GEAR LIST
_______________

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
PM01
Goldmember
1,188 posts
Joined Dec 2007
Location: USA!
     
Jan 28, 2009 13:32 |  #60

I've spoken to artie many times - great guy. Some of the things that he mentions don't hold water though.

" The 800 is the most accurate focusing lens I have ever worked with, most likely a result of the improved lens coatings. "

Sorry Artie. But the focusing comes from the upgraded CPU. Both the 200 f/2.0L EF IS and 800 f/5.6L EF IS have the upgraded CPUs in them. The 200 is a touch faster than the 800 and I've shot with both of them. Lens coatings don't really improve the speed of focus - but the CPU does!

"Every camera that I used on it focuses faster and more accurately on the 800 than on any other lens."

Also because of the CPU.

"Color rendition and edge to edge sharpness are superb and assuming no operator error the images are exceedingly sharp."

Indeed, and they are sharper than the 600 w/1.4x combo that I've head to head compared up against with the 800 5.6L EF IS. Is it Canons sharpest lens? No. The 200/2L EF IS, at an equal area coverage (and moving closer to the object...) will prove to be sharper. At least on the samples that I've photographed with.

The 800 does have a flare problem that needs to be addressed. On a high contrast object, such as a white egret against a semi dark background, the egret will tend to "bloom", or it looks like an overexposed halo around the object, even with the correct or even darker exposure. Canon may come out with a mark 2 version of the lens to fix this if they deem it is important enough. Also, one of the sports photographers that uses this lens has also noticed this "halo". You can see it on most of the pictures if you know what you're looking for.

But, as I've mentioned before, at 800mm focal length or above, I generally use astronomical refractor telescopes. Quite a bit of difference in optical quality, and they're less expensive since they don't have an AF motor or aperture control.

If I HAD to have AF, then the 500/4 is still my lens of choice.




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

8,514 views & 0 likes for this thread
Canon 500mm, 600mm and 800mm owners and potential buyers please respond.
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
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 MartinG
1005 guests, 320 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.