800mm F5.6 - should I do it?

Are there any users of the Canon 800 F 5.6 out there?
I currently use a Canon 600mm F4 L IS for bird photography and like it very much - however I frequently have to resort to a 1.4 extender, I mainly photograph small birds and cannot often get close enough to get the subject a decent size in the frame. I also fancy the lighter weight of the 800, but I would also loose 1 stop of light.
If any of you have moved from a 500/600 F4 to the 800 I would appreciate your observations.
I am well covered at the shorter end by a Canon 300mm F2.8 IS which takes extenders remarkably well.
For reference my main camera is a Canon 1D4.

Why not pick up a 7D and use it when you need the extra reach? The 600 on a 7D gives you 960mm equivalent. 600 + 1.4TC on your 1D4 give you 1092mm equivalent. So only about 130mm shorter and I'd imagine the quality would be better since you're not having to use a TC. 800mm on your 1D4 gives you 1040mm so that's only 80mm more than the 600mm on the 7D.

I don't mean to sound rude, but if you cannot frame a bird with 600mm, I think you have bigger problems than what an 800mm will be able to solve. Try to get closer to the bird. Maybe try watching and learning their favorite spots and show up before they arrive. Try a blind even. 600mm is more than enough for birding.

Just for reference, I shot this at 200mm on a 5dmkii. Full frame shot, no crop at all.

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com/​photos/chan84/80840053​23/

SVTmaniac wrote in post #15483963
Why not pick up a 7D and use it when you need the extra reach? The 600 on a 7D gives you 960mm equivalent. 600 + 1.4TC on your 1D4 give you 1092mm equivalent. So only about 130mm shorter and I'd imagine the quality would be better since you're not having to use a TC. 800mm on your 1D4 gives you 1040mm so that's only 80mm more than the 600mm on the 7D.

I have had a few plays with the 7D but not impressed compared to the 1 series, though it is an excellent camera for the money.

RogerC11 wrote in post #15484034
I don't mean to sound rude, but if you cannot frame a bird with 600mm, I think you have bigger problems than what an 800mm will be able to solve. Try to get closer to the bird. Maybe try watching and learning their favorite spots and show up before they arrive. Try a blind even. 600mm is more than enough for birding.

Just for reference, I shot this at 200mm on a 5dmkii. Full frame shot, no crop at all.

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com/​photos/chan84/80840053​23/

As said earlier, you could also try shooting with a 1.6 cropper as well.

Don't worry, you don't sound rude. It is a fair point but unfortunately not practical for my purposes.
I have a (see original post) 300mm F2.8 for when I can get close.
The reason for wanting more reach is for when I cannot get close. It is not practical for me to get closer in deep water, at nature reserves, without trespassing etc. These, and others, are the reasons I got the 600mm. Where I live situations where the 300 is enough are not common and even the 600 is frequently too short hence my inquiry to users of the 800mm lens.

Its my Dream Lens and check the Lens Archive there is someone using one to its fullest .

David

I'd go for the new Canon EF 600mm f/4L I.S. II + 1.4x TC III. It's lighter than the 800 f/5.6, just as sharp if not sharper. (with the TC attached) and you'd have the versatility.

John, are you in the UK ?? Recently I went to the Brecon festival. There was a guy there who was exhibiting bird pics. What amazed me was how he framed his shots. Sometimes showing a bird in its environment is better than seeing every feather. I was so impressed as it contrasted how I shoot my bird shots which is bird full frame.
For the record he was using a 500/4. ( my dream lens )

SVTmaniac wrote in post #15483963
Why not pick up a 7D and use it when you need the extra reach? The 600 on a 7D gives you 960mm equivalent. 600 + 1.4TC on your 1D4 give you 1092mm equivalent. So only about 130mm shorter and I'd imagine the quality would be better since you're not having to use a TC. 800mm on your 1D4 gives you 1040mm so that's only 80mm more than the 600mm on the 7D.

Crop cameras do not give you extra reach at all, they just crop the frame. My lenses have the same reach on my crop DSLR as they do on my FF film camera, just on the crop they have less field of view.

Canonswhitelensesrule wrote in post #15484459
I'd go for the new Canon EF 600mm f/4L I.S. II + 1.4x TC III. It's lighter than the 800 f/5.6, just as sharp if not sharper. (with the TC attached) and you'd have the versatility.

I totally agree! I would much prefer to have a 600 Mk2, however this used 800 will be a lot cheaper than the mk2 600 and I simply can't stretch to 10+K.

Thanks for all your comments folks and yes I do live in the UK - about an hours drive from Brecon and I think I have seen their work. Personally I want to know what the bird/animal is thinking and as the photos are for pleasure that's what I am going for. If I were shooting professionally then it's a whole different ball game!
Thanks again.

If you use 800 more than 50% of the time you have to think "What about the other times?", f4 at 600 is nice to have, with the 300 you will be down at f5.6 and wont be tracking birds in flight with much success. I know I really want a 200-400 but having 500 at f4 would be missed, ALOT, even though it is often too long and changing lenses or TCs is not possible... think about what shots you might miss rather than the ones you will gain.

The 7D is not a replacement for a 1D body, even for small birds I find myself reaching for the 1DIV just becasue it is so responsive. The 7D feels sluggish now.

I think you should check out Authur Morris web site - just Google it - he swears by the 800 f5.6 as his main lens. The 800 also takes the 1.4x TC well, giving you up to 1200mm of focal length and is lighter than the 600 f4 I. Of course, there is also the newer 600f4 II that weighs the same as the 800 and takes both the 1.4X and 2x TCs well.

I'm shooting with a 500f4 II and routinely use both TCs. The 500 f4 II is just a dream lens in terms of I've, weight, and image quality. The 600f4 II undoubtedly is a great lens.

On a separate note, I will be going over to the Cornwall- Torquay area in Feb and can only take a 70-300L plus a Kenko 1.4x Tc and either a 5D3 or a T3i with me due to weight as I will be on a business trip. Is there a good place you would suggest for me to lend a day? Thank you.

On a separate note, I will be going over to the Cornwall- Torquay area in Feb and can only take a 70-300L plus a Kenko 1.4x Tc and either a 5D3 or a T3i with me due to weight as I will be on a business trip. Is there a good place you would suggest for me to lend a day? Thank you.[/QUOTE]

Sorry I don't know much about the area.
Have a look at these websites - they may help:
http://www.cornwall-birding.co.uk …dwatching-sites-cornwall/
http://www.picturesofe​ngland.com …on/Dartmoor_Nat​ional_Park
Also Buckfast Abbey is worth a visit.

I'd say go for the 800mm. You'd save 1.9 lbs (more if the 1.4x is attached to the 600) and have 4-stop IS. Magnification factor is also improved, and the 300/2.8 covers you when you need light, and is versatile enough to give you a great 420/f4 and very good 600/5.6.

The 800 + 1.4 gives you 1120/f8 vs the 1200/f8 the 600/4 gives you but I'd imagine IQ would be better due to comparing a 1.4x vs 2x converter.

I think you should read this blog

http://www.birdsasart-blog.com …l-is-and-the-winner-is-2/