Canon 600mm f4 (£8900) vs 300mm f2.8 + 2x (£4100) for Birds and BIF

Brachytron

Brachytron

Suspended / Banned
Messages
1,823
Name
Mark
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi - I have an opportunity to get a big birding lens. My favoured option is the Canon 600mm f4. I am not keen on tripods or gimbal heads as they are too restrictive. I use a monopod often so hand-holding or monopod will be my modus operandi. I am tempted by the reduced weight and size of the 300mm f2.8 + 2xtc combo over the 600mm. BIF will be a major use of this lens, so AF speed is an important consideration. I would use this always with the tc as I have other lenses that cover the 300mm range. I'll be using it on a 7D2. Any advice from experience birding toggers gratefully received.
 
Try this idea buy the last generation
Lenses and you could have both the 600 and 300 plus 2 brand new mkiii convertors approx price £7000. You then have the choice of using a tripod when it is easy going and have the 300mm f2.8 is option with tele convertors which you can use with a monopod when you are going further. These are my current long lenses normally used with a 5d mkiii and 1d mkiv I have carried this kit for 6 miles before now. The 600mm will always have much better AF than the 300mm with the 2x fitted that said in decent light I have not had issues with the lens locking on to birds on flight
Regards
Richard
 
Last edited:
I think that you should also throw the new 400/4 DO MkII into the mix....cheaper than the 600 and lighter than the 300.

Bob
 
Canon Bob said:
I think that you should also throw the new 400/4 DO MkII into the mix....cheaper than the 600 and lighter than the 300.

Bob
Click to expand...

Hi Bob
The 300mm has the advantage of being a stop faster which could be useful in low light aiding both shutter speed and the AF being quicker
Regards
Richard
P.s The other bonus of the twin lens route if one breaks you still have the other when it is being fixed.
 
I have used a friends Canon 600mm handheld as your no doubt aware its a lump, I tried it handheld when deciding what birding lens to buy, he always uses it on a tripod, for my type of walk about birding I thought it was to much and too heavy, now I am a Nikon user an yeh I know your asking about Canon but I would have thought they must be of similar weight etc or then again maybe not, just trying to help, I decided on a 500mm F4 which I can carry quite easily on an over the shoulder strap I made up, I use it mostly with a 1.4 converter, if you look at my Flickr stream, all of the shots on it are handheld, though some are with my old lens, a Sigma 150- 500 which I have moved on.

I did think about an 300mm 2.8 and converter, but decided against it as with the Sigma I was always using it at full stretch an wishing for more length, I use the Nikon 500mm on a Nikon D7100 using it mostly with the extra crop mode it has, like I previously said all my shots are handheld, no monopod or tripod.

Hope this is of some help
 
The 300 f2.8 is a fantastic lens. I have hired one and was blown away with its performance. I have a mate who uses one with 1.4 & 2.0 TC and gets excellent image quality. If however you are always going to have a TC on it then it would seem pointless buying one as you would lose the true performance of the lens using it in this way.

The 600 is a heavy old beast, although the new one is about the same weight as the old 500f4. I'm a big bloke but I can only hold my 500 MkI for short periods of time, and sometimes use it with a small monopod in a waist belt to give my arms a rest. I have used the 500 MkII and this is much more arm friendly for handholding so I would throw that into the ring for consideration.

As for buying Mki versions of both the 300 & 600. First its finding really good examples of them to buy. They are out there but they tend to fetch good money. Also consideration needs to be given to the fact that Canon will continue to support the MkI lenses only up to 2017 and then plan to stop. That not to say you couldn't get them repaired but I think its something to consider.

Cheers
 
Correct me if i'm wrong, but the 7D II will focus at f8? Therefore if you really wanted you could have the 300 2.8 with stacked converters (2x and 1.4x) to give you focal length of 840mm (plus your crop factor which is 1.6 if I'm not mistaken). As @lost said, 300 f2.8 - nice fast lens, with the tele converters - 3 lenses in one.
 
Canon Bob said:
I think that you should also throw the new 400/4 DO MkII into the mix....cheaper than the 600 and lighter than the 300.

Bob
Click to expand...

Great idea Bob. Paring the 400mm DO with a 1.4tc III would give me 560mm (nearly 600mm) f5.6 in a really light weight package. I have read that the mk1 DO wasn't so sharp but that the mkII is a big improvement. Any thoughts?
 
twhite87 said:
Correct me if i'm wrong, but the 7D II will focus at f8? Therefore if you really wanted you could have the 300 2.8 with stacked converters (2x and 1.4x) to give you focal length of 840mm (plus your crop factor which is 1.6 if I'm not mistaken). As @lost said, 300 f2.8 - nice fast lens, with the tele converters - 3 lenses in one.
Click to expand...

That makes some sense Tim. Effective focal, length on a 7D2 = 1344mm should pick out a Blue Tit 1 mile away! Not sure about the IQ though?
 
Last edited:
Brachytron said:
That makes some sense Tim. Effective focal, length on a 7D2 = 1344mm should pick out a Blue Tit 1 mile away! Not show about the IQ though?
Click to expand...
I watched a review not long ago about someone that had this set-up shooting game out in the masai mara. Images looked pretty spot on. I'l see if I can dig it up for you.
 
Gaz J said:
The 300 f2.8 is a fantastic lens. I have hired one and was blown away with its performance. I have a mate who uses one with 1.4 & 2.0 TC and gets excellent image quality. If however you are always going to have a TC on it then it would seem pointless buying one as you would lose the true performance of the lens using it in this way.

The 600 is a heavy old beast, although the new one is about the same weight as the old 500f4. I'm a big bloke but I can only hold my 500 MkI for short periods of time, and sometimes use it with a small monopod in a waist belt to give my arms a rest. I have used the 500 MkII and this is much more arm friendly for handholding so I would throw that into the ring for consideration.

As for buying Mki versions of both the 300 & 600. First its finding really good examples of them to buy. They are out there but they tend to fetch good money. Also consideration needs to be given to the fact that Canon will continue to support the MkI lenses only up to 2017 and then plan to stop. That not to say you couldn't get them repaired but I think its something to consider.

Cheers
Click to expand...

Thanks for your comments @lost and gary. The mk1's don't really appeal to me as the mk11's offer lower weight, improved IS, better AF etc.
 
lost said:
Hi Bob
The 300mm has the advantage of being a stop faster which could be useful in low light aiding both shutter speed and the AF being quicker
Click to expand...
On its own, sure, but the only requirement mentioned was for obtaining 600mm and a 400/4 or 300/2.8 are both at f/5.6 with their respective converter needs (okay, the 400 would only get to 560mm). I suspect a 400 with 1.4x will AF as fast as a 300 with a 2x given the converter degradation speed differential.

Bob
 
twhite87 said:
Correct me if i'm wrong, but the 7D II will focus at f8? Therefore if you really wanted you could have the 300 2.8 with stacked converters (2x and 1.4x) to give you focal length of 840mm (plus your crop factor which is 1.6 if I'm not mistaken). As @lost said, 300 f2.8 - nice fast lens, with the tele converters - 3 lenses in one.
Click to expand...
Be aware that the MkIII converters won't stack and the 2x would need to be a MkII. The downside is that the lens (if it's a 300/2.8 MkII) won't be able to benefit from the improved focus speed that the MkIII converters bestow on it.

Bob
 
Canon Bob said:
Be aware that the MkIII converters won't stack and the 2x would need to be a MkII. The downside is that the lens (if it's a 300/2.8 MkII) won't be able to benefit from the improved focus speed that the MkIII converters bestow on it.

Bob
Click to expand...
Are you able to tell me why this is? I seem to remember something about this.
 
It's the baffle in the back of the converter, Tim, that prevents stacking (except the 2x MkII which will fit onto another converter).

Bob
 
If you are always going to have a tc on I would look at a longer FL to start with .

Rob.
 
I shoot Nikon but had the same dilema a few months ago. I did own the 300 F2.8 and the mk iii 2x TC. Focus speed was impacted with the TC on and I used to stop down to 7.1 to get good sharp images.
In the end I opted for the 500mm F4. It is hand holdable and ok to carry around when I fancy a mooch and it takes the 1.4 TC well (but I rarely use it)
The bonus I have found with the 500 is thst I can get good pictures wide open at F4.
I decided against the 600mm due to weight and price.

Dave.
 
Dave Semmens said:
I shoot Nikon but had the same dilema a few months ago. I did own the 300 F2.8 and the mk iii 2x TC. Focus speed was impacted with the TC on and I used to stop down to 7.1 to get good sharp images.
In the end I opted for the 500mm F4. It is hand holdable and ok to carry around when I fancy a mooch and it takes the 1.4 TC well (but I rarely use it)
The bonus I have found with the 500 is thst I can get good pictures wide open at F4.
I decided against the 600mm due to weight and price.

Dave.
Click to expand...

Thanks Dave useful to know. Do you find that the 500mm is long enough?.
 
Brachytron said:
Thanks Dave useful to know. Do you find that the 500mm is long enough?.
Click to expand...

There are always occasions when we need more reach but I think I have only had the 1.4 TC on a couple of times. The TC works really well but I just don't seem to need it much.

The real positive is the weight - the 600 is a real beast and I would not think about carrying on long walks. My 300mm with 2x TC was probably as heavy as the 500 (it felt it anyway :) )

I think the 500mm has enough reach for most situations and can give me 700mm with the 1.4.

It also depends on what body you plan to mount it on. I use a D810 full frame but I can crop a certain amount due to the 36mp sensor. On a Canon crop body you will be looking at 800mm and still have the option of a 1.4 TC if needed.

All this AND you can walk around with it and hand hold it with a bit of practice ;)

Dave.

Edit - Just seen that you are using a 7D2 so 800mm it is :)

Edit again :) Take a look at @Mikechappers Flickr (he commented above) - he has some great shots of birds using a crop sensor and 500mm lens. And the Nikon only reaches 750mm ;)
 
Last edited:
twhite87 said:
Correct me if i'm wrong, but the 7D II will focus at f8? Therefore if you really wanted you could have the 300 2.8 with stacked converters (2x and 1.4x) to give you focal length of 840mm (plus your crop factor which is 1.6 if I'm not mistaken). As @lost said, 300 f2.8 - nice fast lens, with the tele converters - 3 lenses in one.
Click to expand...

You can't stack the mkiii converters :(
 
Teleconverters will degrade the image slightly and slow down focussing speed. They have there use but when it comes to the point of discussing multiple TCs and extension tubes then I think we may be pushing it a tad too far if we are spending £1000s to get the best IQ possible :help:
 
Got the 300mm f2.8 IS MKI and MKII TCs, used each separately with some very good results, I've stacked them with some partial success, but I've recently bought the 500mm f4 IS MKI to give my the extra reach, definitely heavy, but have used handheld. I would probably go for the new 500mm f4 MKII weight wise it will be more manageable than the 600mm f4.
 
Hi All
As Gaz says use an extension tube. The best way is mount the 1.4 to the camera body then use a 12mm extension tube then fit the 2x
Regards
Richard
 
Get the tool for the job, if you need 600 then buy a 600!

I can't see the point in spending a small fortune on quality glass and then degrading your images by adding converters - especially stacking them.:exit:

If weight is more of an issue than image quality then I'd seriously look at the Tamron.

my 2c

cheers, cw
 
Chris Wilson said:
Get the tool for the job, if you need 600 then buy a 600!

I can't see the point in spending a small fortune on quality glass and then degrading your images by adding converters - especially stacking them.:exit:

If weight is more of an issue than image quality then I'd seriously look at the Tamron.

my 2c

cheers, cw
Click to expand...

Thanks Chris - it's getting that balance right in considering whether the drop in quality is worth the weight saving.
 
Last edited:
What about the 200-400? Pretty special lens i hear! Plus will take extra converter?
One for the mix lol
Personally i would get the 600! No brainer really.
 
Get the 600mm best of the options and will produce superb IQ, Its really a no brainer as Steve says.

I wouldn't be put of with the weight of the lens at all personally, I find the 400mm f/2.8 handhold able ( weighs 5kg lens only ) really easy and don't use the tripod 80% of the time, but that depends on many factors about your physical condition how you use the lens tripod, monopod, handhold etc.

I would avoid the 300mm option at all costs as you will be needing to use the TC all the time which is no good, if you can afford the 600mm then simply get the 600mm as they will produce the best results possible, you will get use to the size and weight :)
 
cookyboy said:
What about the 200-400? Pretty special lens i hear! Plus will take extra converter?
One for the mix lol
Personally i would get the 600! No brainer really.
Click to expand...

Thanks Steve, I was put off the 200-400mm because it "only" goes to 560mm with the 1.4.
 
Joeturner11 said:
Get the 600mm best of the options and will produce superb IQ, Its really a no brainer as Steve says.

I wouldn't be put of with the weight of the lens at all personally, I find the 400mm f/2.8 handhold able ( weighs 5kg lens only ) really easy and don't use the tripod 80% of the time, but that depends on many factors about your physical condition how you use the lens tripod, monopod, handhold etc.

I would avoid the 300mm option at all costs as you will be needing to use the TC all the time which is no good, if you can afford the 600mm then simply get the 600mm as they will produce the best results possible, you will get use to the size and weight :)
Click to expand...

Thanks for your input Joe. I am bending towards the 600mm with a good carbon fibre monopod.
 
I have a Nikon 600mm f4 and a 300mm f2.8VR with x 1.4 and x 2 TC

I could never hand hold the 600mm and the 300mm f2.8 is a strain without the TC's - BIF I use the 300mm f4 plus x 1.4

I am an OAP of a few years

Mark the Sigma 150 600mm seems to be getting good results? - not expensive
 
Last edited:
BillN_33 said:
I have a Nikon 600mm f4 and a 300mm f2.8VR with x 1.4 and x 2 TC

I could never hand hold the 600mm and the 300mm f2.8 is a strain without the TC's - BIF I use the 300mm f4 plus x 1.4

I am an OAP of a few years

Mark the Sigma 150 600mm seems to be getting good results? - not expensive
Click to expand...

Hi Bill. I looked at the Sigma, but the angle of view at 600mm is only 4.1degrees. The Canon 600mm is 3.5 degrees which is quite a bit narrower. Interestingly the Canon 200-400mm with 1.4tc (@560mm) is 3.7 degrees which is much better than the Sigma @600mm.
 
IMO you'd be much better off with the 500/4 II given your portability & hand holding requirements.
 
Not much help i know but there's no way i would be asking anyone how i should spend £8900 of my hard earnt money :thinking:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top