August 21, 2014, 05:06:59 AM

Author Topic: EF 600mm f/4L IS II USM or EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II USM  (Read 4328 times)

jasonsim

  • EOS M2
  • ****
  • Posts: 210
  • Hobbyist
    • View Profile
Re: EF 600mm f/4L IS II USM or EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II USM
« Reply #15 on: March 05, 2013, 04:25:01 PM »
That's a pretty big field (for soccer) but I think the 400mm f/2.8L II is going to be your best option.  I think you might find 600mm too long.  You probably want to have a second body with a 70-200mm attached also.   

The choice, 400mm or 600mm, depends on where you will be in relation to the athletes.  If on the side lines, I think 400mm is enough.  You can crop some and, if you have one, use a 1.4x extender on the 400mm.  That will give you 560mm f/4.  Not shabby and on a 1Dx should still AF very fast. 

Kind regards,
Jason Simmons 
Cams: Canon 1Dx, EOS M
Zooms: 17-40mm f/4L, 70-200mm f/4L, 24-70mm f/2.8L II, 70-200mm f/2.8L II; Primes: 22mm f/2, 40mm f/2.8, 50mm f/1.2L, 100mm f/2.8L, 135mm f/2L, 300mm f/2.8L IS II, 600mm f/4L II
Support: Gitzo GT4542LS/G2258, RRS BH-55, Wimberley WH-200

canon rumors FORUM

Re: EF 600mm f/4L IS II USM or EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II USM
« Reply #15 on: March 05, 2013, 04:25:01 PM »

expatinasia

  • 1D Mark IV
  • ******
  • Posts: 898
    • View Profile
Re: EF 600mm f/4L IS II USM or EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II USM
« Reply #16 on: March 05, 2013, 07:07:12 PM »
Thank you everyone.

I have decided to go with the 400 ii f/2.8L, and as someone mentioned I could always stick my 1.4x iii on that if I do need the extra reach.

I must say I am very excited about finally trying one of the big whites. The 70-200 f/2.8 ii is a great lens, but I have worked next to those big lenses for years, and have seen the outstanding results they produce when the guys are working on the images post-match.

The IS Mode 3 is also something I am really looking forward to experiencing.

I am sure it will be hard to give back once I am done, but then I just have to look at the price tag to realise it just is not a viable option right now. Time to start saving me thinks. ;-)

« Last Edit: March 05, 2013, 07:11:35 PM by expatinasia »
1D X + backup + different L lenses etc.

TexPhoto

  • 1D Mark IV
  • ******
  • Posts: 889
    • View Profile
Re: EF 600mm f/4L IS II USM or EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II USM
« Reply #17 on: March 05, 2013, 08:56:29 PM »
Cool!  I have the 1.4X III and have to say my 400 seems as sharp with it as it does without.

Are you going to use a monopod or tripod?  For sideline sports like football you generally can't use a tripod.  Players could be injured by it.  A monopod is far less dangerous. 

expatinasia

  • 1D Mark IV
  • ******
  • Posts: 898
    • View Profile
Re: EF 600mm f/4L IS II USM or EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II USM
« Reply #18 on: March 05, 2013, 09:19:52 PM »
Cool!  I have the 1.4X III and have to say my 400 seems as sharp with it as it does without.

Are you going to use a monopod or tripod?  For sideline sports like football you generally can't use a tripod.  Players could be injured by it.  A monopod is far less dangerous.

I would only use a monopod for sports. A tripod is fine for portraits or landscapes, where your subjects do not move, but for sports - when space is also often limited due to the number of other media - then a monopod is the only option.
1D X + backup + different L lenses etc.

Menace

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1340
  • New Zealand
    • View Profile
Re: EF 600mm f/4L IS II USM or EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II USM
« Reply #19 on: March 05, 2013, 10:06:52 PM »
Cool!  I have the 1.4X III and have to say my 400 seems as sharp with it as it does without.

Are you going to use a monopod or tripod?  For sideline sports like football you generally can't use a tripod.  Players could be injured by it.  A monopod is far less dangerous.

I would only use a monopod for sports. A tripod is fine for portraits or landscapes, where your subjects do not move, but for sports - when space is also often limited due to the number of other media - then a monopod is the only option.

+1

Monopod is your only option really - a nice carbon fibre one will be light and strong.
1Dx | 5D III
85 1.2L II | 100 2.8 | 400 2.8L IS II 
24-70 2.8L II | 70-200 2.8L IS II

dolina

  • 1D Mark IV
  • ******
  • Posts: 973
    • View Profile
Re: EF 600mm f/4L IS II USM or EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II USM
« Reply #20 on: March 07, 2013, 09:05:03 PM »
GM5561T if you want the most compact and light weight monopod that has the highest load capacity.
Cool!  I have the 1.4X III and have to say my 400 seems as sharp with it as it does without.

Are you going to use a monopod or tripod?  For sideline sports like football you generally can't use a tripod.  Players could be injured by it.  A monopod is far less dangerous.

I would only use a monopod for sports. A tripod is fine for portraits or landscapes, where your subjects do not move, but for sports - when space is also often limited due to the number of other media - then a monopod is the only option.

+1

Monopod is your only option really - a nice carbon fibre one will be light and strong.
Visit my Flickr, Facebook & 500px and see my photos. :)

expatinasia

  • 1D Mark IV
  • ******
  • Posts: 898
    • View Profile
Re: EF 600mm f/4L IS II USM or EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II USM
« Reply #21 on: March 07, 2013, 10:18:40 PM »
GM5561T if you want the most compact and light weight monopod that has the highest load capacity.

Thanks. I already have a monopod that can hold up to 15kgs so won't be buying a new one.

This was more about the lens choice for renting, and I am glad I asked as I had a feeling I should have gone for the 400 2.8 II which is what most here have confirmed.
1D X + backup + different L lenses etc.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: EF 600mm f/4L IS II USM or EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II USM
« Reply #21 on: March 07, 2013, 10:18:40 PM »