Results of my new Canon 600mm f/4 III with the 1.4x III converter to make it 840mm

JohnGerlach

EOS M50
Aug 28, 2018
27
26
I have never used the previous 600mm versions, so I can't compare them. I do know the 600mm III is lighter and I wonder if it focuses closer. I tend to upgrade whenever I can as I like the latest gear.
 

Cryve

EOS 80D
Jul 4, 2018
102
66
Germany
In the first one there is no detail around the eye because it it over exposed. The key to using manual exposure is to expose to retain detail in the brightest part of the image that you still want detail. That first image os a good case for auto exposure and highlight tone priority where the camera will automatically try to protect the highlights.
does this feature make the camera meter for the highlights so it wont ever overexpose?
 
Last edited:

JohnGerlach

EOS M50
Aug 28, 2018
27
26
I don't find it to be useful. By the way, I have seen wood ducks in captivity and I can't see any detail in the white area around the eyes then either.
 

AlanF

5DSR
Aug 16, 2012
5,161
2,089
In the first one there is no detail around the eye because it it over exposed. The key to using manual exposure is to expose to retain detail in the brightest part of the image that you still want detail. That first image os a good case for auto exposure and highlight tone priority where the camera will automatically try to protect the highlights.
I don't find it to be useful. By the way, I have seen wood ducks in captivity and I can't see any detail in the white area around the eyes then either.
I googled "female wood duck images" and can see lots of detail around the eyes. It looks like the white areas are bleached as privatebydesign suggests. And you can see that for sure by downloading the image and adjusting gamma in PS.
 

Hector1970

EOS 6D MK II
Mar 22, 2012
1,059
230
On my 600/4 II, the 2xIII does give acceptable (to me) results, although there is a slight decrement in sharpness compared to the 1.4xIII.
I'd agree. The 2XIII works better on the 600 II than it would say the 70-200. Focusing does slow down but for stationary objects the image quality is good with it. I was amazed they shaved the weight they did off the III. The 600II is awkward to get out of bags and mount. Much better when on a gimbal. I used the 600II on safari and it was a workout moving it up and down. A high price though for that weightloss on the 600III
 

JohnGerlach

EOS M50
Aug 28, 2018
27
26
A sandhill crane made with the 600mm III and the 1.4x converter. I have used it a ton now, and the results of the combo wonderful. Though, I also have the Canon 800mm, I prefer to shoot with the 600 and 1.4x
 

degos

EOS 80D
Mar 20, 2015
194
119
The 600II is awkward to get out of bags and mount. Much better when on a gimbal. I used the 600II on safari and it was a workout moving it up and down.
That made me laugh!

EF 600mm USM 6.05kg
EF 600mm USM IS 5.36kg
EF 600mm USM IS II 3.92kg

And to think we used to shoot with the old 6kg anchor!

I'm sure the III is very nice to manoeuvre with its redistributed elements, but the II itself was a flyweight amongst superteles.
 
Reactions: Pape

JohnGerlach

EOS M50
Aug 28, 2018
27
26
I agree the lenses are no problem to move around with. Though I am a senior citizen now, I still have no trouble tossing bales of hay around, and the weight of photo gear is nothing in comparison.
 

Pape

EOS RP
Dec 31, 2018
299
153
That made me laugh!

EF 600mm USM 6.05kg
EF 600mm USM IS 5.36kg
EF 600mm USM IS II 3.92kg

And to think we used to shoot with the old 6kg anchor!

I'm sure the III is very nice to manoeuvre with its redistributed elements, but the II itself was a flyweight amongst superteles.
Lot of computer workers nowadays , and those mostly can afford 600mm as hobby stuff :)