Messages

1

Lenses / Re: Teleconverter

« on: March 23, 2013, 01:12:47 AM »

Some hesitation on BIFs, could be frustration on the focus for you. No comparison on that part. The extra glass is usable, but not for everything. I would say using auto ISO is a good idea to insure enough shutterspeed for moving birds. Posed birds take pretty well with the new 2x. I am happy with it on my 500mmf4IS II. I won't use it, for instance if the shoot is important like one of a kind birds like Golden Eagles, etc. Your keeper rate goes down.

But in good light and with good shutterspeed control  and posing targets you may have some fun with it. Your DOF will be smaller area of the target also. I use mine occasionally. The newer model is the only way to do it right. What camera do you have?

2

Lenses / Re: 500 x $10K or 600 x$13K

« on: January 03, 2013, 12:33:58 PM »

I had the 500f4IS for 3 years and felt it was a good length for wildlife and birds, even for a female. And if you shoot larger animals other than birds, the 600 may be too close much of the time. The added weight is a real issue, unless you are planning on a full time tripod. BTW I bought the new 500 II this month and the weight difference is substancial, enabling me to hike further and hand hold longer. A dream lens.

I added a 2x just for reference and am amazed of the clarity at 1000mm!! My 1.4x could also be used full time, no problems with focusing on BIFs. Clarity excellent with the new lens.

3

Lenses / Re: Canon EF 200-400 f/4L IS 1.4x TC Information

« on: December 02, 2012, 02:46:22 AM »

Well the big worry is will that 560mm be as clean as the old 500mm? If it is, then that old heavy 500 will be less missed than I thought.

And will I want to shoot at f5.6 for the duration of a day in shadows and late afternoons?....back to shooting at 400mm. Not that big of a deal. I do find when shooting with my 300, I am always wishing for a 400. 400 is useful for sports and larger wildlife. Quite a few times I had to run backwards so I could get far enough away for a full shot of a close Bobcat. Tree shooting would be great at 400 also.

Air shows, well 500mm was tight. I had myself wishing for a 400 a few times. It's too bad they could apply that inboard teleconverter to a 500mm. That would be a big seller. Sure, I prefer 500mm, but there are quite a few uses for 400. A revamp of the 400DO would have been great. I'm tired of my shoulders hurting! So the 200-400 still doesn't help that much.

4

Lenses / Re: Canon EF 200-400 f/4L IS 1.4x TC Information

« on: December 02, 2012, 02:23:34 AM »

I'm considering selling a few lenses to get this one. Looking forward to trying it out. I read it will weight 335g or around 7.4lbs. Thats a biggy to me. I'm needing to lighten my gear. [which is usually the old 500mm and iDMK4 around 12 lbs total. With a possible 7DII + 200-400, I would increase distance, and decrease weight. So tempting! Either that or the new 500, which weighs just a little less than the 200-400. Hard decision! I love my 500.
BTW, I'm Linda, hello. I read this forum alot.

5

Lenses / Re: 70-200 f/2.8 II + 2X converter versus 100-400 f/4.5-5.6

« on: October 25, 2012, 12:33:43 AM »

Shawn, the 2xII +70-200will be similar to the 100-400,  try renting it. May I add to this post that if you use it for sports and birding, some frustrations will occur in the speed of focusing on a fast moving object vs. The 100-400. Ive used telecoverters for years and they are very usable, but all lenses focus faster without them. So for still photography the converters are very good, but if your main needs are focus speed and 400 mm or bifs,  I'd opt for the 100-400is.