October 20, 2014, 01:19:49 AM

Author Topic: Get a 300mm or 600mm? Oh the agony...  (Read 17493 times)

TexPhoto

  • 1D Mark IV
  • ******
  • Posts: 950
    • View Profile
Re: Get a 300mm or 600mm? Oh the agony...
« Reply #30 on: January 03, 2014, 09:30:39 PM »
It all comes down to budget, and what you shoot.  I have a 400mm f2.8 IS , and both 1.4X and 2X because i can afford that, and I shoot sports as much as nature.

When you need a 600mm the best lens to have is a 600mm.  But a 300mm f2.8 and 2X converter is certainly a great combo. 

When you need a 300mm f2.8, a 600mm is just not going to work. 
« Last Edit: January 10, 2014, 04:11:22 PM by TexPhoto »

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Get a 300mm or 600mm? Oh the agony...
« Reply #30 on: January 03, 2014, 09:30:39 PM »

candc

  • 6D
  • *****
  • Posts: 568
    • View Profile
Re: Get a 300mm or 600mm? Oh the agony...
« Reply #31 on: January 03, 2014, 09:57:02 PM »
OKee.. Here's the scoop. I have the 70-200 2.8L IS USM. But it just doesn't have the reach I want. I put a 2X on it and it gets me closer but still is short at 400mm.

Now if I get a 300mm 2.8 It will get me to 600 with the 2X but will it make me happy or not?

Since I can get to 400mm with the Zoom-2X combo,  would I just be better off with the 600mm that can get me to 1200mm if I ever want them.

I think if you get the 300 that you will still want the 600. If you want 600+ it's the best way I have seen

Eldar

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1645
    • View Profile
    • Flickr
Re: Get a 300mm or 600mm? Oh the agony...
« Reply #32 on: January 04, 2014, 12:49:06 AM »
OKee.. Here's the scoop. I have the 70-200 2.8L IS USM. But it just doesn't have the reach I want. I put a 2X on it and it gets me closer but still is short at 400mm.

Now if I get a 300mm 2.8 It will get me to 600 with the 2X but will it make me happy or not?

Since I can get to 400mm with the Zoom-2X combo,  would I just be better off with the 600mm that can get me to 1200mm if I ever want them.

I think if you get the 300 that you will still want the 600. If you want 600+ it's the best way I have seen
+1
With sailing boats people often get the 3-feet-desease (just 3 more feet and I´ll be happy ...) With tele lenses you find a similar problem. It may be an expensive route to go 300 -> 400 ->500 -> 600, if you should have gone for the 600 in the first place. A combo of 70-200 f2.8L IS II, 600mm f4L IS II, 1.4xIII/2xIII extenders and 5DIII/7DII bodies will cover just about everything.

But be aware that the 600mm is a Big lens. But it can still be handheld and with the right harness it is fairly easy to bring on hikes and full day jobs. I have attached an image of my carrying solution, which basically is a flag bandoleer.
5DIII, 1DX, 8-15/4L, 16-35 f4L IS, 24-70/2.8L II, 70-200/2.8L IS II, 70-300/4-5.6L IS, 200-400/4L IS 1.4x, Zeiss 15/2.8, 17/4L TS-E, Zeiss 21/2.8, 24/3.5L TS-E II, Zeiss Otus 55/1.4, Zeiss Otus 85/1.4, 100/2.8L IS Macro, Zeiss 135/2, 600/4L IS II

Hesbehindyou

  • Rebel SL1
  • ***
  • Posts: 97
    • View Profile
Re: Get a 300mm or 600mm? Oh the agony...
« Reply #33 on: January 04, 2014, 06:59:07 AM »
OKee.. Here's the scoop. I have the 70-200 2.8L IS USM. But it just doesn't have the reach I want. I put a 2X on it and it gets me closer but still is short at 400mm.

Now if I get a 300mm 2.8 It will get me to 600 with the 2X but will it make me happy or not?

Since I can get to 400mm with the Zoom-2X combo,  would I just be better off with the 600mm that can get me to 1200mm if I ever want to?

The question you should be asking is 600 f4 vs 800 f5.6.

What you get will probably depend on how much light you get where you live; I'm in the UK so compromising on focal length to get that f4 aperture is probably worth it... but 600 is still pretty short if you're a birder.

You mentioned that 300mm is perfect for the sports cars. That may be but who needs f2.8 when you're panning? For freezing-the-action head-on shots f4 and 600 (or f5.6 and 800) will still give you sufficient shutter speed on a bright day and the steeper drop off you get from in-focus to out of focus areas you get from the longer focal lengths will help the cars 'pop'.

Don't listen to me though; my longest lens is a 300 f4.

surapon

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 2312
  • 80% BY HEART, 15% BY LENSES AND ONLY 5% BY CAMERA
    • View Profile
Re: Get a 300mm or 600mm? Oh the agony...
« Reply #34 on: January 04, 2014, 08:43:18 AM »
OKee.. Here's the scoop. I have the 70-200 2.8L IS USM. But it just doesn't have the reach I want. I put a 2X on it and it gets me closer but still is short at 400mm.

Now if I get a 300mm 2.8 It will get me to 600 with the 2X but will it make me happy or not?

Since I can get to 400mm with the Zoom-2X combo,  would I just be better off with the 600mm that can get me to 1200mm if I ever want to?

I am certain others have gone down this which to get path before so I can only ask for thier guidence. Fortunatly I have time before I buy. We have a Camera-imaging Expo coming to Phoenix next week and I plan on going to play with some big lenses to see how I like them.


Dear Ken B .
I am not the Sport shooter or Birders, But , When I need to shoot this Both Job, My Lovely EF 600 MM . MK I is my Weapon, Plus 70-200 F/ 2.8 IS on my 2 Camera, Plus On the third Camera  -85 mm. F/ 1.2 L MK II.
Good Luck for your Choice.
Your Friend.
Surapon
PS, Yes, If I wear the Press Badge( Some of my real Job--Not Just go to watch the excite Games), I use 70-200 mm fr/ 2.8, and 135 F/ 2.0  , because Short distant from the players.

PS-2, From Photo DB-2, I just Tired my monopod to the Metal  hand rail with Tied Cords.
« Last Edit: January 04, 2014, 08:50:20 AM by surapon »

surapon

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 2312
  • 80% BY HEART, 15% BY LENSES AND ONLY 5% BY CAMERA
    • View Profile
Re: Get a 300mm or 600mm? Oh the agony...
« Reply #35 on: January 04, 2014, 08:45:06 AM »
I am not the Sport shooter or Birders, But , When I need to shoot this Both Job, My Lovely EF 600 MM . MK I is my Weapon, Plus 70-200 F/ 2.8 IS on my 2 Camera, Plus On the third Camera  -85 mm. F/ 1.2 L MK II.

surapon

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 2312
  • 80% BY HEART, 15% BY LENSES AND ONLY 5% BY CAMERA
    • View Profile
Re: Get a 300mm or 600mm? Oh the agony...
« Reply #36 on: January 04, 2014, 08:47:56 AM »
I am not the Sport shooter or Birders, But , When I need to shoot this Both Job, My Lovely EF 600 MM . MK I is my Weapon, Plus 70-200 F/ 2.8 IS on my 2 Camera, Plus On the third Camera  -85 mm. F/ 1.2 L MK II.

Enjoy
Surapon

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Get a 300mm or 600mm? Oh the agony...
« Reply #36 on: January 04, 2014, 08:47:56 AM »

Eldar

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1645
    • View Profile
    • Flickr
Re: Get a 300mm or 600mm? Oh the agony...
« Reply #37 on: January 04, 2014, 09:36:47 AM »
OKee.. Here's the scoop. I have the 70-200 2.8L IS USM. But it just doesn't have the reach I want. I put a 2X on it and it gets me closer but still is short at 400mm.

Now if I get a 300mm 2.8 It will get me to 600 with the 2X but will it make me happy or not?

Since I can get to 400mm with the Zoom-2X combo,  would I just be better off with the 600mm that can get me to 1200mm if I ever want to?

The question you should be asking is 600 f4 vs 800 f5.6.

What you get will probably depend on how much light you get where you live; I'm in the UK so compromising on focal length to get that f4 aperture is probably worth it... but 600 is still pretty short if you're a birder.

You mentioned that 300mm is perfect for the sports cars. That may be but who needs f2.8 when you're panning? For freezing-the-action head-on shots f4 and 600 (or f5.6 and 800) will still give you sufficient shutter speed on a bright day and the steeper drop off you get from in-focus to out of focus areas you get from the longer focal lengths will help the cars 'pop'.

Don't listen to me though; my longest lens is a 300 f4.
I do not see how the 800/5.6 can be an alternative to the 600 f4L IS II. Combined with the 1.4xIII the 600 is sharper than the 800. But if you can get the 800 for a good price ...
5DIII, 1DX, 8-15/4L, 16-35 f4L IS, 24-70/2.8L II, 70-200/2.8L IS II, 70-300/4-5.6L IS, 200-400/4L IS 1.4x, Zeiss 15/2.8, 17/4L TS-E, Zeiss 21/2.8, 24/3.5L TS-E II, Zeiss Otus 55/1.4, Zeiss Otus 85/1.4, 100/2.8L IS Macro, Zeiss 135/2, 600/4L IS II

arbitrage

  • PowerShot G1 X II
  • ***
  • Posts: 58
    • View Profile
Re: Get a 300mm or 600mm? Oh the agony...
« Reply #38 on: January 04, 2014, 09:42:11 AM »
Okay, I quickly read the replies but mostly to see if the OP had given any more info on what he shoots and it looks like he hasn't yet.  Therefore, all I can do is sum up the pros and cons as I own the 70-200 f/2.8II, 300II and 600II and TCs.  So I think I can provide some good background info and if the OP has the time to reply to his own thread at some point then I may be able to help a little more with specifics......

First off the 70-200 with a 2.0TC (and I have the latest versions of both) is pitiful for AF speed.  My 100-400 runs circles around it at 400 f/5.6.  The 300II with 2.0TC is phenomenal at AF and the hit is there but it doesn't affect shooting.  I just finished using it over the holidays to shoot small chickadees and songbirds handheld through lots of branches and the AF on the 1DX and 5D3 is spectacular (other bodies may not perform as well).  The 600II bare lens at 600 f/4 is faster at AF and the IQ is a bit better than the 600 f/5.6 II IS(as I like to call it) but the IQ of the 600 f/5.6 is still pretty remarkable.  No lens made by Canon, Nikon, or others in the 300 and above FL can touch the bare 300II for IQ and AF.  That combo is simply unbelievable.  The 420 f/4 IS II (300II + 1.4III) is also pretty fricken amazing.

The 840 f/5.6 IS II is also very, very good for both AF and IQ.  The 1200 f/8 IS II is also very, very good for IQ....BUT, AF does take a hit because of the f/8.  I have great shots of large birds in flight (eagles and swans) but anything smaller is a lost cause.  For perched birds, the combo is phenomenal however.

If you really need 600 and want even more reach at times and can handle the bulk of the 600 then just go and get it.  The weight is a bit of a problem (I handhold about 75% of the time and use a gimbal for certain times) but the real issue is the actual size and not the weight.  This is where the 600 f/5.6 wins hands down as it is much smaller and lighter and I can handhold it for hours without fatigue.

These are my initial scramble of thoughts.....IMHO....YMMV

Posted below...Junco with the 600 f/5.6 IS II and Bald Eagle with the 1200 f/8 IS II both handheld.
« Last Edit: January 04, 2014, 09:50:03 AM by arbitrage »
7D\5D2\5D3\1D4\1DX\600II\300II\200-400Lw1.4TC\100-400\100L\24-105\17-40\24-70II\70-200f/2.8LISII\40pancake\Bower14f/2.8\Fuji XE-2\Fuji 18-55\Fuji23f/1.4\RRS34L\BH-55\and a bunch of other stuff.

arbitrage

  • PowerShot G1 X II
  • ***
  • Posts: 58
    • View Profile
Re: Get a 300mm or 600mm? Oh the agony...
« Reply #39 on: January 04, 2014, 09:47:12 AM »
OKee.. Here's the scoop. I have the 70-200 2.8L IS USM. But it just doesn't have the reach I want. I put a 2X on it and it gets me closer but still is short at 400mm.

Now if I get a 300mm 2.8 It will get me to 600 with the 2X but will it make me happy or not?

Since I can get to 400mm with the Zoom-2X combo,  would I just be better off with the 600mm that can get me to 1200mm if I ever want to?

The question you should be asking is 600 f4 vs 800 f5.6.

What you get will probably depend on how much light you get where you live; I'm in the UK so compromising on focal length to get that f4 aperture is probably worth it... but 600 is still pretty short if you're a birder.

You mentioned that 300mm is perfect for the sports cars. That may be but who needs f2.8 when you're panning? For freezing-the-action head-on shots f4 and 600 (or f5.6 and 800) will still give you sufficient shutter speed on a bright day and the steeper drop off you get from in-focus to out of focus areas you get from the longer focal lengths will help the cars 'pop'.

Don't listen to me though; my longest lens is a 300 f4.
I do not see how the 800/5.6 can be an alternative to the 600 f4L IS II. Combined with the 1.4xIII the 600 is sharper than the 800. But if you can get the 800 for a good price ...

I totally agree....
600II pros:
lighter
more FL flexibility
more available AF points on 5D3 and 1DX
shorter MFD and better MM at 840mm
Equal or better?? IQ even with the 1.4TC than the 800 (this is splitting hairs but there is definitely no loss in IQ from what I have seen out there from the 800)
Equal AF even with the 1.4 or at least no appreciable or effective difference.

800 f/5/6 pros:
????????????????????????????????
Better price, maybe??
7D\5D2\5D3\1D4\1DX\600II\300II\200-400Lw1.4TC\100-400\100L\24-105\17-40\24-70II\70-200f/2.8LISII\40pancake\Bower14f/2.8\Fuji XE-2\Fuji 18-55\Fuji23f/1.4\RRS34L\BH-55\and a bunch of other stuff.

DaveMiko

  • Rebel T5i
  • ****
  • Posts: 104
    • View Profile
Re: Get a 300mm or 600mm? Oh the agony...
« Reply #40 on: January 04, 2014, 11:36:18 AM »
OKee.. Here's the scoop. I have the 70-200 2.8L IS USM. But it just doesn't have the reach I want. I put a 2X on it and it gets me closer but still is short at 400mm.

Now if I get a 300mm 2.8 It will get me to 600 with the 2X but will it make me happy or not?

Since I can get to 400mm with the Zoom-2X combo,  would I just be better off with the 600mm that can get me to 1200mm if I ever want to?

I am certain others have gone down this which to get path before so I can only ask for thier guidence. Fortunatly I have time before I buy. We have a Camera-imaging Expo coming to Phoenix next week and I plan on going to play with some big lenses to see how I like them.

For wildlife, enough is never enough. If IQ is paramount to you, then get the 300. You can crop all you want then. Otherwise, buy the 600.
1DX, 5D Mark III, 24-70 f2.8 II, 24-105 f4 IS, 70-200 f2.8 IS II, 70-200 f4 IS, 100-400 f4.5-5.6 IS, 600 f4L IS II, 300 f2.8L IS II, 2x Mark III, 1.4x Mark III.

neuroanatomist

  • CR GEEK
  • ********
  • Posts: 14705
    • View Profile
Re: Get a 300mm or 600mm? Oh the agony...
« Reply #41 on: January 04, 2014, 11:38:16 AM »
If IQ is paramount to you, then get the 300. You can crop all you want then. Otherwise, buy the 600.

So if I crop a shot with the 300 II to the FoV of the 600 II, will the cropped shot have better IQ?
EOS 1D X, EOS M, and lots of lenses
______________________________
Flickr | TDP Profile/Gear List

DaveMiko

  • Rebel T5i
  • ****
  • Posts: 104
    • View Profile
Re: Get a 300mm or 600mm? Oh the agony...
« Reply #42 on: January 04, 2014, 11:48:57 AM »
If IQ is paramount to you, then get the 300. You can crop all you want then. Otherwise, buy the 600.

So if I crop a shot with the 300 II to the FoV of the 600 II, will the cropped shot have better IQ?

Well, to be honest, Neuro, I haven't tried making this sort of comparison. But I've used the 300 f2.8 II extensively and I've cropped a few of its pics even 100%. The results have been very good.
1DX, 5D Mark III, 24-70 f2.8 II, 24-105 f4 IS, 70-200 f2.8 IS II, 70-200 f4 IS, 100-400 f4.5-5.6 IS, 600 f4L IS II, 300 f2.8L IS II, 2x Mark III, 1.4x Mark III.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Get a 300mm or 600mm? Oh the agony...
« Reply #42 on: January 04, 2014, 11:48:57 AM »

MichaelHodges

  • 7D
  • *****
  • Posts: 367
    • View Profile
Re: Get a 300mm or 600mm? Oh the agony...
« Reply #43 on: January 04, 2014, 01:12:35 PM »
Wow, that's some high praise for the 300 2.8 II.

Jack Douglas

  • 1D Mark IV
  • ******
  • Posts: 884
    • View Profile
Re: Get a 300mm or 600mm? Oh the agony...
« Reply #44 on: January 04, 2014, 02:57:18 PM »
IMHO, there is no way I can crop my 300 to a 600 FOV and be thrilled, as much as I wish I could. ;)  I see the 300 as simply the best compromise for portability.  A major issue with cropping is that in getting the original shot, if the subject is not prominent then there is a great tendency for the AF to lock onto other items.  If you don't manual focus then the shot is lost.  When I shoot 300 X2 this problem is largely absent and my exposures tend to be better as well. 

I would be lusting for 600 but I refuse to pack that kind of bulk and as a result I don't get those distant shots that others do.  However, I'm getting some of what others do not when I'm creeping through the grass and bush and sitting in the briar patch smelling the roses.  It's always about compromises.  This is an endless debate.  :)

Jack
6D  24-70 F4  70-200 F2.8 II  300 F2.8 II  1.4X III  2X III

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Get a 300mm or 600mm? Oh the agony...
« Reply #44 on: January 04, 2014, 02:57:18 PM »