I can't stop thinking about A MONSTER!
- Thread starter cervantes
- Start date
- Status
Rent one like others are saying and you'll see for yourself. The lens is awesome, but it's also very heavy, will sway in ANY wind, becomes a target for vandalism or theft and requires a very stable tripod. Oh, and it's $13,000 dollars. Now if you are the person who won the Powerball last night, go for it. The thing takes awesome pictures and you'll be surprised at it's IS capabilities. Lug it around for a while and you'll have arms like Popeye! ;D
Upvote
0
To the OP: The 500 f/4 is a birding lens. Are birds the primary wildlife you like to shoot? I've rented the version 1; the 300 f/4 IS; the 400 f/5.6; and the 200 f/2. If you want to shoot in low light, get an f/2.8 or faster lens. I wound up with usable results of nearly 1 second exposure (of a non-animal target), on a monopod...with the 200 f/2, and a crop camera. It's IS is out of this world. It's sharpness is extremely high. It's contrast is extremely high. It's color rendition and spectrum, are beyond that of the 85mm f/1.2L "magic canonball" (which is saying something).
The 200 f/2 is the one I would buy, and use it with TC's, if I was limiting myself to Canon. If cost was no object, then the new version 2 of the 400 f/2.8, is the best overall choice of all the superteles, in my opinion (unless you absolutely do not need the reach of 400mm or more).
The yet-to-be-released Sigma 120-300 f/2.8 OS zoom, is said to have two fluorite elements, where the 2011 version had none. It is half the price of the Canon 200 f/2, and less than a third the price of Canon's longer, newer superteles. I plan to rent it soon after the rental place gets some. It's not white, so if that is all you care about, I doubt you will even consider trying one. Snob appeal isn't what makes great photographers, though.
The 200 f/2 is the one I would buy, and use it with TC's, if I was limiting myself to Canon. If cost was no object, then the new version 2 of the 400 f/2.8, is the best overall choice of all the superteles, in my opinion (unless you absolutely do not need the reach of 400mm or more).
The yet-to-be-released Sigma 120-300 f/2.8 OS zoom, is said to have two fluorite elements, where the 2011 version had none. It is half the price of the Canon 200 f/2, and less than a third the price of Canon's longer, newer superteles. I plan to rent it soon after the rental place gets some. It's not white, so if that is all you care about, I doubt you will even consider trying one. Snob appeal isn't what makes great photographers, though.
Upvote
0
go all out, it won't stop your addiction
- get the car
- work harder
- get the 600mm II
- if your really want, get the 800mm II
get the 1.4x iii
i don't have anything over 200mm f2
i want it though but wildlife isn't for me, no time to go that far
good luck, this addiction is a good thing, better than spending on something else
- get the car
- work harder
- get the 600mm II
- if your really want, get the 800mm II
get the 1.4x iii
i don't have anything over 200mm f2
i want it though but wildlife isn't for me, no time to go that far
good luck, this addiction is a good thing, better than spending on something else
Upvote
0
Now those are some interesting responds, THANK YOU - much appreciated!
A quick summary and a few comments on what I have read so far:
- Get the 400 f4 DO: I don’t particularly like that lens: It’s big, it’s heavy, it’s also very expensive, and IQ is not up to the 500 (by far as I hear).
- Get the 100-400: I don’t need the 100-399 part so I don’t want a zoom. Besides it’s still rather big, it’s not light either and IQ is not anywhere in the same League than the 500. 400 f5,6 L would be the only “alternative” but 400 is rather short e.g. for birds and lacks IS.
- Get the 300 2.8 2: This would be a great lens without any doubt but I had a cheap 300mm and it is still too short for what I’m planning to do with it. So I would probably only use it with the 1,4x or the 2x – and doing so is not optimal.
- Get the 200 2: I have a 200. 200 is waaaaaaaaaaaay to short. I would use it with 2x exclusively and it would still be short so what’s the point?
- Get the 500 4 1: This one is too heavy. I’d rather spend more and have a more usable lens. Besides IS is better on the V2 and I plan to use it handheld so that is important to me.
- Get the 400mm 2.8 1: Are you serious? I’m not Hercules’ bigger brother!
- Use the money to buy a house / retirement fund etc.: Honestly thanks for the advice! But there are still probably 40 years left till retirement and I think it is not so likely that I will see any of the money spent again (you know economic crisis, climate change etc.). Besides we have a very good social system here in Austria. I was looking into buying a flat about a year ago but that is somewhere in the region of €300k-€400k and I do not want to lose the freedom of going anywhere I want in a couple of years. But that’s a little off topic anyways.
- Safety and Security concerns: If the lens gets stolen from my home or my home burns down the lens would be covered by insurance. If I take it out I’m on my own. The danger of damaging it in a bicycle accident (although those are extremely rare and the lens has very good impact resistance) is a real concern – thanks for that hint. Getting robbed or something like that is highly unlikely where I live since crime rates are very, very low and people are not allowed to have handguns or anything - so that is not a real concern. Although I would have to think twice to travel abroad with it, for that reason.
- Renting: Well, this would be a nice thing but I do not have really a possibility to do so here. There are some shops that rent but I couldn’t find one that rents superteles.
In conclusion I am a little surprised that nearly everyone said that I shouldn’t do it. Well, I guess you are right. So my alternatives at this point are:
- getting the 400mm 5,6 (don’t think so)
- waiting for the rumored 400mm f4 (non DO) that will probably be announced this year (and then use it with 1,4x most of the time)
- forgetting about wildlife and continue to make macro shots and a few landscape and night shots in between
I will sleep a few nights over it.
A quick summary and a few comments on what I have read so far:
- Get the 400 f4 DO: I don’t particularly like that lens: It’s big, it’s heavy, it’s also very expensive, and IQ is not up to the 500 (by far as I hear).
- Get the 100-400: I don’t need the 100-399 part so I don’t want a zoom. Besides it’s still rather big, it’s not light either and IQ is not anywhere in the same League than the 500. 400 f5,6 L would be the only “alternative” but 400 is rather short e.g. for birds and lacks IS.
- Get the 300 2.8 2: This would be a great lens without any doubt but I had a cheap 300mm and it is still too short for what I’m planning to do with it. So I would probably only use it with the 1,4x or the 2x – and doing so is not optimal.
- Get the 200 2: I have a 200. 200 is waaaaaaaaaaaay to short. I would use it with 2x exclusively and it would still be short so what’s the point?
- Get the 500 4 1: This one is too heavy. I’d rather spend more and have a more usable lens. Besides IS is better on the V2 and I plan to use it handheld so that is important to me.
- Get the 400mm 2.8 1: Are you serious? I’m not Hercules’ bigger brother!
- Use the money to buy a house / retirement fund etc.: Honestly thanks for the advice! But there are still probably 40 years left till retirement and I think it is not so likely that I will see any of the money spent again (you know economic crisis, climate change etc.). Besides we have a very good social system here in Austria. I was looking into buying a flat about a year ago but that is somewhere in the region of €300k-€400k and I do not want to lose the freedom of going anywhere I want in a couple of years. But that’s a little off topic anyways.
- Safety and Security concerns: If the lens gets stolen from my home or my home burns down the lens would be covered by insurance. If I take it out I’m on my own. The danger of damaging it in a bicycle accident (although those are extremely rare and the lens has very good impact resistance) is a real concern – thanks for that hint. Getting robbed or something like that is highly unlikely where I live since crime rates are very, very low and people are not allowed to have handguns or anything - so that is not a real concern. Although I would have to think twice to travel abroad with it, for that reason.
- Renting: Well, this would be a nice thing but I do not have really a possibility to do so here. There are some shops that rent but I couldn’t find one that rents superteles.
I know the “song” but I have no idea what you mean.Ray2021 said:Let me quote an important American who has become an internet sensation recently... I am sorry this will be lost on our euro friends...
"Aint nobody got time for that!!!" :
LOL! Well, you guessed wrong! And the funniest thing is: My girlfriend totally approves this lens. If it was for her I would already have it - she even offered to pay for it! I know I'm a lucky sob...agierke said:i'm guessing there is no woman in your life, this type of venture seems indicative to a single persons lifestyle.
In conclusion I am a little surprised that nearly everyone said that I shouldn’t do it. Well, I guess you are right. So my alternatives at this point are:
- getting the 400mm 5,6 (don’t think so)
- waiting for the rumored 400mm f4 (non DO) that will probably be announced this year (and then use it with 1,4x most of the time)
- forgetting about wildlife and continue to make macro shots and a few landscape and night shots in between
I will sleep a few nights over it.
Upvote
0
Hi,
have a look here: http://www.digitalkameraverleih.com/
The rent lenses in Austria, but sadly don't have the supertele ones. You could rent a Canon EF 300mm f/2,8 L IS II USM with 2,4 KG, just that you get a feeling of the weight
I recently bought an old 400mm Sigma lens (around 1,5 KG) and already that is quite heavy to carry around and make wildlife pictures.
But if you get it, much fun with it!
have a look here: http://www.digitalkameraverleih.com/
The rent lenses in Austria, but sadly don't have the supertele ones. You could rent a Canon EF 300mm f/2,8 L IS II USM with 2,4 KG, just that you get a feeling of the weight
I recently bought an old 400mm Sigma lens (around 1,5 KG) and already that is quite heavy to carry around and make wildlife pictures.
But if you get it, much fun with it!
Upvote
0
T
trygved
Guest
If reach is this critical to you, I strongly suggest you pick up a 7D or wait for the 7DII
A 300 f2.8 IS FoV on APS-C = 480mm
It'd be $$$ smart + leagues more portable.
My ¢¢
A 300 f2.8 IS FoV on APS-C = 480mm
It'd be $$$ smart + leagues more portable.
My ¢¢
Upvote
0
trygved said:
Oh please! Don't start another "FF vs APS-C" war! Before giving advice like that, did you read what's said in this thread? (Quote below)
neuroanatomist said:I'm curious - you like the 7D for the 'reach' and 'pixels on target' especially with a supertele, but have you tested a 1D X or 5DIII along side the 7D in the same scenarios? I ask because in many cases, empirical reality trumps theory. Case in point are some tests from AlanF. Some time back, he posted some real-world testing of the 7D (and note - only the 7D), and came to the conclusion that, "It doesn’t matter how superior the 5D III is than the 7D, the laws of optics and information theory dictate that at 9 m you can resolve the barbs of feathers on a 7 D but you see a blur with the 5D using a 600mm lens." That conclusion sounds quite consistent with your comments.
Subesquently, Alan got himself a 5DIII and actually tested it along side the 7D - he concluded, "... the 5D III is just about as good for detail as the 7D (now my back up) and has all the advantages of much better focussing and lower noise," and also stated, "...in practice the higher IQ and lower noise of the 5D III more than makes up for the loss of crop factor."
Personally, I had planned on keeping my 7D even after getting the 1D X, for the (supposed) 'reach advantage' in focal length-limited situations. In practice, I came to the same conclusion as AlanF, and my 7D has been a very nice paperweight (ok, that was a little harsh...let's say, a very nice backup camera
Upvote
0
T
trygved
Guest
marinien said:
Hahahaha! Then let me adjust my statement!
If reach is this critical to you, I strongly suggest you
If they throw in a couple more MP and improve the high ISO noise & AF the way I imagine they will, cropping down a FF to match the FoV won't be as neck and neck.
And heaven forgive me if this turns into another bloodbath of a debate.
I just ❤ APS-C FoV, and do not find cropping every image to be a realistic alternative.
I acknowledge that I may be in a distinct minority here.
What can I say? I'm a Rebel.
... which has a very different connotation here. Hahaha
Upvote
0
Would the new EF 200-400 IS (forthcoming) be something for you? It has a built-in 1.4x converter, so you can have a 560mm lens if you wish. Don't know about the price.
You make some very good pics, why not try to sell some? At least you could earn some money back.
I am curious about your cycling. Austria is a mountaineous country, do you avoid high places altogether or do you have 24+ gears or what? I could not imagine myself cycling in Austria but then I am from Holland which is a flat as a pancake (and ideal for cycling in my opinion).
Kind regards,
Rob.
You make some very good pics, why not try to sell some? At least you could earn some money back.
I am curious about your cycling. Austria is a mountaineous country, do you avoid high places altogether or do you have 24+ gears or what? I could not imagine myself cycling in Austria but then I am from Holland which is a flat as a pancake (and ideal for cycling in my opinion).
Kind regards,
Rob.
Upvote
0
There is one major flaw here: Owning the lens for ten years and calculating the deprication to €2500.
IF you buy the lens, write it off immediatley! IF you then want to sell it later on anything >0 will be a bonus.
What if Canon decides in 5 years from now to bring out a new lens mount?? That is vastly improved... what will happen to the value of your lens?
Interests come and go, and you do the right ting, saving up to spend on expensive stuff! Do start save, if you reach your goal of €10k maybe you found something else to get, still you do have the cash, and Cash is King
IF you buy the lens, write it off immediatley! IF you then want to sell it later on anything >0 will be a bonus.
What if Canon decides in 5 years from now to bring out a new lens mount?? That is vastly improved... what will happen to the value of your lens?
Interests come and go, and you do the right ting, saving up to spend on expensive stuff! Do start save, if you reach your goal of €10k maybe you found something else to get, still you do have the cash, and Cash is King
Upvote
0
something about a bicycle and a 500mm just doesn't sound right to me...
in this case, i might actually say to wait for the 7DII. I'm thinking the 7DII might be a monster APS-C body, on par with the 5DIII, and around 2500 bucks.
i am a tried and true full frame lover, and i NEVER recommend APS-C, but in this case, it might be worth waiting for the (hopefully for you) cutting edge 7DII, and pairing it with a 100-400 or another slightly smaller lens. I honestly cannot imagine anyone handholding a 500mm for more than a few random shots.
is there ANYONE on here that uses the 500mm handheld exclusively? this doesn't sound like a recipe for great shots.... and it is really expensive.
but hey, if you really want it, and you can handhold it, and no other lens works for you, i don't think it's the worst thing you could spend your money on.
in this case, i might actually say to wait for the 7DII. I'm thinking the 7DII might be a monster APS-C body, on par with the 5DIII, and around 2500 bucks.
i am a tried and true full frame lover, and i NEVER recommend APS-C, but in this case, it might be worth waiting for the (hopefully for you) cutting edge 7DII, and pairing it with a 100-400 or another slightly smaller lens. I honestly cannot imagine anyone handholding a 500mm for more than a few random shots.
is there ANYONE on here that uses the 500mm handheld exclusively? this doesn't sound like a recipe for great shots.... and it is really expensive.
but hey, if you really want it, and you can handhold it, and no other lens works for you, i don't think it's the worst thing you could spend your money on.
Upvote
0
I've wanted this lens for years myself, so I think that I understand your predicament. I can also relate to your situation, although I'm a little older and a little better positioned - I have saved the money to buy this lens cash if I so desire - rather than putting that money towards the mortgage or new car or furniture or...
Anyways, after a full frame body, it's the final stage of my photographic needs & wants, as a gear knob amatuer.
There has been some extremely good advice in this thread about taking that money and investing in some manner instead of spending it. From experience, I cannot argue with that.
But - hey, some people in my neighbourhood put their money towards large boats or a cottage. In past, I've spent lots of money on rock climbing, adventure racing, sports gear, etc. You only live once and you don't know what tomorrow brings.
But - then, back to fiscal responsibility...
However, I looked through your excellent pictures, and I read through your reasoning. I think you seem to have a fairly good handle on advice, and your alternatives, wants, and needs.
+1 bro.
Anyways, after a full frame body, it's the final stage of my photographic needs & wants, as a gear knob amatuer.
There has been some extremely good advice in this thread about taking that money and investing in some manner instead of spending it. From experience, I cannot argue with that.
But - hey, some people in my neighbourhood put their money towards large boats or a cottage. In past, I've spent lots of money on rock climbing, adventure racing, sports gear, etc. You only live once and you don't know what tomorrow brings.
But - then, back to fiscal responsibility...
However, I looked through your excellent pictures, and I read through your reasoning. I think you seem to have a fairly good handle on advice, and your alternatives, wants, and needs.
+1 bro.
Upvote
0
EchoLocation said:
The 5DIII+500mmII is a little more than 4kg. For portrait sessions, I've handheld that weight (1D series + 580EXII + glass). My backpack is often >10kg. And I'm only 1m68 and 50kg. So I guess it depends on the person.
Sure, I never enjoyed the weight. I am trying to bring less gear and work with what I bring.
Upvote
0
I hike and canoe a lot.... and I see lots of birds and wildlife, usually about where the 1200mm f5.6 would be ideal. Even if I could afford it, I couldn't carry it.
My experience with teleconverters has been that they reduce the resolving power of the lens... the image is bigger, but less sharp. To be fair, I have not tried them on any of the BIG super-telephotos.... but since those lenses are too big for me to carry, the answer is moot.
About the best lens that I have seen for my purposes, the balance of reach, size, and quality, is the 400 f5.6.... a reasonable amount of reach, sharper than the zooms, and affordable. Although it is a nice chunk of glass, it is not of the same optical quality as the series II superzooms. I found that resolving power was the same (close as I can tell) on the 60D, 7D, or 5DII... so I carry along the 60D with a 18-200 lens (crappy lens but makes for lightweight covarage of a wide range) and a 120-400 f5.6, which I bought before I realized how little I really needed zoom in a longer lens. On multi-day hikes the 120-400 stays home...
If I were to buy today, I would get a 7D and the 400f5.6. If I were to wait a bit, I would wait for the 7DII and hope for an updated 400/5.6 with improved optics and IS. (IS is very important when shooting from a canoe).
My experience with teleconverters has been that they reduce the resolving power of the lens... the image is bigger, but less sharp. To be fair, I have not tried them on any of the BIG super-telephotos.... but since those lenses are too big for me to carry, the answer is moot.
About the best lens that I have seen for my purposes, the balance of reach, size, and quality, is the 400 f5.6.... a reasonable amount of reach, sharper than the zooms, and affordable. Although it is a nice chunk of glass, it is not of the same optical quality as the series II superzooms. I found that resolving power was the same (close as I can tell) on the 60D, 7D, or 5DII... so I carry along the 60D with a 18-200 lens (crappy lens but makes for lightweight covarage of a wide range) and a 120-400 f5.6, which I bought before I realized how little I really needed zoom in a longer lens. On multi-day hikes the 120-400 stays home...
If I were to buy today, I would get a 7D and the 400f5.6. If I were to wait a bit, I would wait for the 7DII and hope for an updated 400/5.6 with improved optics and IS. (IS is very important when shooting from a canoe).
Upvote
0
- Status
