400/500/600

[minime]

After a lengthy delay (it feels like anyway), my loss adjusters have come up with a final price (following my gear being stolen in a burglary in March)...I am now in a position to replace the 500mm lens stolen. My dilemma (a fortunate one considering what happened) is this:

My mk1 ef500mm was 136.6 ounce = 3 .87 kilo...significantly different to the old 600mm which would simply have been to heavy for me to cope with.

Do I replace it with the ef400mm f/2.8 (weighing 135.9 ounce = 3.85 kilo ) which is 20grams lighter than the old 500 and faster

or the ef500mm f/4 mkii (weighing 112.6 ounce = 3.19 kilo) which is 660 grams lighter than the old 500 so easier to carry around

or the ef600mm f/4 mkii (weighing 138.4 ounce = 3.92 kilo) which is now only 50 grams heavier than the old 500! So more reach and not significantly more weight than the 500 I had.

money is not an issue...I have been replacing some of the items that were stolen at my own expense since they were stolen so the money I have is specifically for one of the above...IT IS A ONCE IN A LIFETIME JOBBY THOUGH!

I would add a 1.4 converter to the mix as well.

My primary reason for the purchase is mainly birds in flight but would also like to use it for other wildlife etc.

Any ideas?

[Hereford_EOS2]

Re: 400/500/600

400mm f/2.8L IS (3.85kg) or the 300mm f/2.8L IS (2.40kg), add converters for longer reach.

[colin C]

Re: 400/500/600

That's a tough call.

When I did the calculations, I went for the 300mm f2.8 and the 500mm f4. Cost and weight were part of the considerations and although weight of the larger lenses has moved in our favour, price has gone too far the other way. The equation can be further complicated by the different body sensor sizes. What you have now may not be the same as you have in the future and the ideal solution for a 1.6 crop sensor could be less than ideal if you change to a 1.3 crop or full frame sensor.

Let us know what you decide.

Colin

[minime]

Re: 400/500/600

It's a very difficult call Colin...I am losing sleep! I have a 1d mk iv...bought about a month ago so not at all likely to change in the next five years if I can help it! Money is not a problem...as I said, I have been replacing items for the last three months since the burglary, and some items, despite their sentimental value are impossible to replace but I have still been paid out for them so the funds from them is in the mix...money will be a problem after I replace this big lens though...as far as my wife is concerned!

[colin C]

Re: 400/500/600

Well, if it helps, I never seem to feel the need for anything bigger than the 500mm on a MK IV. I sometimes use the 1.4x with it, but that's to be expected. I would "quite like" an 800mm, but that would be as well as, not instead of.

Rest assured that with those lenses in the hat to choose from, you cannot make a wrong decision. Perhaps you could hire one of each for a week at a time.

Colin

[mwphoto]

Re: 400/500/600

Optically the 500 Mk1 was always considered a bit better than the 600 - or am I making that up? No idea about the Mk2s as not in the market - I'd have to have a major lottery win to justify the cost of changing from my current Mk1 500 which does pretty well everything I want it to do. As Colin says though you can't really go wrong with any of them - just be careful of second-guessing yourself!!!!

[minime]

Re: 400/500/600

I am leaning towards the 500 or 600 at the moment for nothing else but the reach...but I have been second guessing myself for ten weeks now! I have tried speaking to camera retailers, but the simply want to sell me a lens...any will do...I have emailed several pro wildlife photographers...all yet to reply...I have even spoken to canon and they are of little help to be honest! If the new 600 was the same weight as the old one it would be a no brainer...but it is not...it is now within a duck egg of the old 500's weight and I handled that fine.

[colin C]

Re: 400/500/600

Sometimes the extra reach can work against you.

I generally carry a second body with a 300mm, because there are time when the 500mm is just too much glass. I suspect that would happen even more with a 600mm. Oh for an affordable, fast, high quality 400 - 600mm zoom.

Colin

Colin

[rajjayaraj]

Re: 400/500/600

I agree Colin, I was thinking the same why is there not a 400-600mm zoom manufactured, i know it is not for every one but the special wild life photographer.

[George Bear]

Re: 400/500/600

A sort of 'real mans' version of the *fabled?* Canon EF 200-400 f/4L IS 1.4x lens called a Canon EF 400-600 f2.8L IS 1.4x and very nice it would be tooooo. But can you imagine the weight, bulk and cost!

Thinking back didn't Nikon use to do manual 200–600 f/9.5, 360–1200 f/11.0 and 1200–1700 f/5.6-8.0 lenses? and Canon a FD 150-600 f/5.6L ??

So with a converter, well I'm just thinking aloud.

[mwphoto]

Re: 400/500/600

400-600 f2.8 with a nice chiropractors bill!! Personally don't think you can go wrong with the 500 - yes you always need more reach occasionally but suspect that would be offset by the shots you can lock onto easier with the 500. Bottom line though as Colin suggests is try before you buy so hire each for a day or two