November 20, 2017, 10:06:58 PM

Poll

Which one would you prefer?

Canon 600mm f4 IS II
35 (40.2%)
Canon 200-400mm w/1.4x TC
52 (59.8%)

Total Members Voted: 85

Voting closed: March 07, 2015, 09:24:56 AM

Author Topic: Canon 600mm f4 IS II Vs Canon 200-400mm w/1.4x TC  (Read 47736 times)

kirispupis

  • EOS 6D Mark II
  • *****
  • Posts: 444
    • CalevPhoto
Re: Canon 600mm f4 IS II Vs Canon 200-400mm w/1.4x TC
« Reply #15 on: March 07, 2014, 07:01:50 PM »
A few months ago I had to make the same choice and I picked the 200-400/1.4x.  I do not regret this choice.

Ultimately it really boils down to what you like to photograph.  I use this lens for a wide variety or purposes - wildlife, sports, and landscapes.  For these purposes there is no contest - the 200-400 is the best lens that can achieve all three.

If I were only photographing wildlife, or more specifically birds, then the 600/II would be the better choice.  You simply need as much length as possible.  If an 800/4 existed that was actually portable, I would recommend that.  That being said, you can certainly accomplish a lot with 560mm.

For a real world example see this set http://www.flickr.com/photos/calevphoto/sets/72157641149672084/  Three of these images were taken at 560mm, but three were not.  The versatility of the 200-400 certainly wins out here.

For sports I almost never use the extender.  I also find myself switching a lot between 200mm and 400mm.  It is one case where a zoom is invaluable.

Finally for landscapes I am all over the place.  That was really the deciding factor for me.  I wanted a lens I can use for landscapes to catch the shots many landscape photographers miss.  For these I rarely shoot at 560mm. 

This set illustrates the flexibility - http://www.flickr.com/photos/calevphoto/sets/72157640572094314/  Most of the landscape shots were not taken at 560mm, while most of the close up bird shots were.  A 600/4 would have probably done an even better job, but the 200-400 certainly did a very good job.

Someday I may pick up a 600/II if I have a sudden influx of cash, but it is not a huge priority given the excellent performance of the 200-400 at 560mm already.

BTW, the Tamron is a very nice lens, but the 600/II and 200-400 are in a completely different class.  There are vast differences in AF speed, image quality, and the extras that go into a top end lens.
1Dx2|TS-E 24 II|TS-E 17|TS-E 90|200-400/1.4x|MP-E 65|100/2.8 IS Macro|70-200/2.8 IS II||16-35/2.8 II|EOS M

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Canon 600mm f4 IS II Vs Canon 200-400mm w/1.4x TC
« Reply #15 on: March 07, 2014, 07:01:50 PM »

sanj

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • ********
  • Posts: 2899
Re: Canon 600mm f4 IS II Vs Canon 200-400mm w/1.4x TC
« Reply #16 on: March 07, 2014, 07:10:01 PM »
The two have different functions.  600 for birds and such, 200-400 for sports/action of larger subjects.  really depends on the intended use.  As a birder the 600 with 1.4TC wins hands down and this is often not enough.

Perfect.

Dylan777

  • Canon EF 600mm f/4L IS II
  • **********
  • Posts: 5465
Re: Canon 600mm f4 IS II Vs Canon 200-400mm w/1.4x TC
« Reply #17 on: March 07, 2014, 07:14:21 PM »
Thanks for your thoughts guys. The poll shows 50/50, interesting.

candc

  • EOS 5DS R
  • ******
  • Posts: 1259
Re: Canon 600mm f4 IS II Vs Canon 200-400mm w/1.4x TC
« Reply #18 on: March 07, 2014, 07:17:54 PM »
...you pay a lot for that 1stop at 400 or even more extreme

That's nothing new...  300/4 vs. 300/2.8, 400/5.6 vs. 400/4 DO vs. 400/2.8, 200/2.8 vs. 200/2, 17-40/4 vs. 16-35/2.8, etc.

True enough, there is a point where cost and weight explode. the law of diminishing returns seems very apparent when it comes to lenses

Dylan777

  • Canon EF 600mm f/4L IS II
  • **********
  • Posts: 5465
Re: Canon 600mm f4 IS II Vs Canon 200-400mm w/1.4x TC
« Reply #19 on: March 07, 2014, 07:42:39 PM »
A few months ago I had to make the same choice and I picked the 200-400/1.4x.  I do not regret this choice.

Ultimately it really boils down to what you like to photograph.  I use this lens for a wide variety or purposes - wildlife, sports, and landscapes.  For these purposes there is no contest - the 200-400 is the best lens that can achieve all three.

If I were only photographing wildlife, or more specifically birds, then the 600/II would be the better choice.  You simply need as much length as possible.  If an 800/4 existed that was actually portable, I would recommend that.  That being said, you can certainly accomplish a lot with 560mm.

For a real world example see this set http://www.flickr.com/photos/calevphoto/sets/72157641149672084/  Three of these images were taken at 560mm, but three were not.  The versatility of the 200-400 certainly wins out here.

For sports I almost never use the extender.  I also find myself switching a lot between 200mm and 400mm.  It is one case where a zoom is invaluable.

Finally for landscapes I am all over the place.  That was really the deciding factor for me.  I wanted a lens I can use for landscapes to catch the shots many landscape photographers miss.  For these I rarely shoot at 560mm. 

This set illustrates the flexibility - http://www.flickr.com/photos/calevphoto/sets/72157640572094314/  Most of the landscape shots were not taken at 560mm, while most of the close up bird shots were.  A 600/4 would have probably done an even better job, but the 200-400 certainly did a very good job.

Someday I may pick up a 600/II if I have a sudden influx of cash, but it is not a huge priority given the excellent performance of the 200-400 at 560mm already.

BTW, the Tamron is a very nice lens, but the 600/II and 200-400 are in a completely different class.  There are vast differences in AF speed, image quality, and the extras that go into a top end lens.

Thanks kirispupis for your feedbacks and photos ;)

I recently bought 400m f2.8 IS II - mainly for indoor swimming and ballet. All  I can say is AWESOME and now going for bit longer for outdoor activities ;)

Dylan777

  • Canon EF 600mm f/4L IS II
  • **********
  • Posts: 5465
Re: Canon 600mm f4 IS II Vs Canon 200-400mm w/1.4x TC
« Reply #20 on: March 07, 2014, 07:44:16 PM »
Milk or honey? Yes please, both :)

I wish I can say that Eldar :)


canon rumors FORUM

Re: Canon 600mm f4 IS II Vs Canon 200-400mm w/1.4x TC
« Reply #21 on: March 07, 2014, 07:54:18 PM »

tron

  • Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *********
  • Posts: 3209
Re: Canon 600mm f4 IS II Vs Canon 200-400mm w/1.4x TC
« Reply #22 on: March 07, 2014, 07:54:38 PM »
You can already reach 400mm so only you know whether you need 600mm.

I do believe though that unless you intend to sell your excellent 400mm 2.8L IS II the choice of 600mm is obvious.

You already have 400mm...

If you are going to carry something expensive and heavy get the 600mm...


Dylan777

  • Canon EF 600mm f/4L IS II
  • **********
  • Posts: 5465
Re: Canon 600mm f4 IS II Vs Canon 200-400mm w/1.4x TC
« Reply #24 on: March 07, 2014, 08:07:30 PM »
You can already reach 400mm so only you know whether you need 600mm.

I do believe though that unless you intend to sell your excellent 400mm 2.8L IS II the choice of 600mm is obvious.

You already have 400mm...

If you are going to carry something expensive and heavy get the 600mm...

Tron, my 400mm f2.8 IS II "ain't gonna go no where"  ;)

This 600mmish will mainly be used for BIF and surfing. Speed & reach are important. Summer is right around the corner and I live 10mins away from: http://www.huntingtonbeachca.gov/

However, to have high quality long zoom lens is also important in many cases... ::)
« Last Edit: March 07, 2014, 08:16:31 PM by Dylan777 »

tron

  • Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *********
  • Posts: 3209
Re: Canon 600mm f4 IS II Vs Canon 200-400mm w/1.4x TC
« Reply #25 on: March 07, 2014, 08:30:28 PM »
Well, your dilemma reminds me of mine at the opposite site of focal lengths.

I sold my 16-35 2.8L (version I) and I wonder whether to get the 16-35 2.8L II.

Around this focal length I have just the 14mm 2.8L II, TS-E17 4L, TS-E24mm 3.5L II, 35mm 1.4L, 24-70 2.8LII  ::) ::) ::)   (  ... oh and the Zeiss 21mm 2.8 (this is not a joke I had forgotten it!)

I guess I should not get the 16-35 2.8 II and instead get the fisheye 8-15 zoom but still...

P.S To tell the truth I obviously do not carry all of them at the same time...
P.S2 I wish for a coma free 16-35 2.8L III ...

Random Orbits

  • EOS-1D X Mark II
  • *******
  • Posts: 1946
Re: Canon 600mm f4 IS II Vs Canon 200-400mm w/1.4x TC
« Reply #26 on: March 07, 2014, 08:42:41 PM »
Well, your dilemma reminds me of mine at the opposite site of focal lengths.

I sold my 16-35 2.8L (version I) and I wonder whether to get the 16-35 2.8L II.

Around this focal length I have just the 14mm 2.8L II, TS-E17 4L, TS-E24mm 3.5L II, 35mm 1.4L, 24-70 2.8LII  ::) ::) ::)   (  ... oh and the Zeiss 21mm 2.8 (this is not a joke I had forgotten it!)

I guess I should not get the 16-35 2.8 II and instead get the fisheye 8-15 zoom but still...

P.S To tell the truth I obviously do not carry all of them at the same time...
P.S2 I wish for a coma free 16-35 2.8L III ...

+1 on skipping the 16-35 and getting the 8-15.  I used the 16-35 a lot more when I didn't have a mid-range zoom (16-35/50/70-xxx)  With the 24-70 II as good as it is, I opt for carrying the 14 a lot more (14/24-70) if I need AF.


canon rumors FORUM

Re: Canon 600mm f4 IS II Vs Canon 200-400mm w/1.4x TC
« Reply #27 on: March 07, 2014, 08:48:34 PM »

tron

  • Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *********
  • Posts: 3209
Re: Canon 600mm f4 IS II Vs Canon 200-400mm w/1.4x TC
« Reply #28 on: March 07, 2014, 09:18:23 PM »

candc

  • EOS 5DS R
  • ******
  • Posts: 1259
Re: Canon 600mm f4 IS II Vs Canon 200-400mm w/1.4x TC
« Reply #29 on: March 07, 2014, 09:28:08 PM »
The point I am making is that I believe the 2 canons are the best but the tamron is very close behind and will give you undiferentiaded results under most conditions so anyone on a budget should take a good look at it.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Canon 600mm f4 IS II Vs Canon 200-400mm w/1.4x TC
« Reply #29 on: March 07, 2014, 09:28:08 PM »