Advice for an prime lens >400mm for wildlife

[Dylan777]

My financial range is 9000Euros, I can get the 500mm for 8800. The 600mm is to expensive for me.

Honestly, I think you'd be better off deciding which is best for your needs, and continuing to save if needed. Personally, I find the 600 + 2x too short sometimes, had I bought the 500/4 I would have regretted it – and with that expense, regret is bad (and buying the other likeky precluded).

OTOH, while I can certainly handhold the 600 II the 500 II is lighter.

Excellent advice, I'd also emphasize that with some practice it is possible to handhold the 600 II for short periods of time with surprisingly good results.

Yes, indeed.

Neuro,
What is that?

 

[applecider]

Here's my advise from a 60 y/o in fair shape who likes to do BIF and general wildlife, some 1-2 miles round trip max hiking. I've used the 400 2.8ii , the 500 f4 ii, the 600 f4 ii, all with extenders, carried on a Black rapid double strap, one at a time.

I've no experience with the 400 DO or the 100-400's though I've used the 70-200 f2.8 with 2x extender.
The 500ii is for me hand holdable for BF and general wildlife photography, while the 400 and 600ii's are not for any length of time all with or without extenders.

My 2 cents is therefore to go with the 500ii which has excellent images even with the 2x exiii, particularly if you intend to be mobile. If your shooting is sessile (from a tripod) most of the time then the longer lenses might be for you. I have rented in the past a 600 version 1 and find it to be too heavy for any hand holding (in case you were thinking of finding a used version 1). The version ii 600 used might fit your needs if you really need the extra length

A gimbal head is a must for all of the above, ballheads alone just don't cut it for the superteles. Another vote for the Wimberley II.

Also I deep the hood on all the time in position of function, it protects the front element by making it pretty hard to get to. Unless I'm traveling I never use the canon hoods, I store the lenses on the floor on the hood in a dry little used room.

 

[Loswr]

Neuro,
What is that?

Besides my wrist and hand?

It's part of the Blackrapid Sport-L strap I use to carry the 600II/1DX while hiking, with a Kirk 1" clamp on the strap connected to the RRS replacement foot on the lens.

 

[xps]

Hello Thomas!

A gimbal head is something very useful and satisfying if you have to move fast. If you come from the south of Germany, think of buying an Eki Teleneiger Pro MS (http://www.eki-foto.com/de/). Well balanced and there is no friction. Or consider the Wimberley WH-200 Wimberley Head V2.

 

[Dylan777]

Neuro,
What is that?

Besides my wrist and hand?

It's part of the Blackrapid Sport-L strap I use to carry the 600II/1DX while hiking, with a Kirk 1" clamp on the strap connected to the RRS replacement foot on the lens.

It looks like you were using some kind of special lens support. I thought I saw video shooters have something similar, where the chest supports the weight...

 

[Loswr]

It looks like you were using some kind of special lens support. I thought I saw video shooters have something similar, where the chest supports the weight...

Nope, just the strap.

 

[Mt Spokane Photography]

My financial range is 9000Euros, I can get the 500mm for 8800. The 600mm is to expensive for me.

Honestly, I think you'd be better off deciding which is best for your needs, and continuing to save if needed. Personally, I find the 600 + 2x too short sometimes, had I bought the 500/4 I would have regretted it – and with that expense, regret is bad (and buying the other likeky precluded).

OTOH, while I can certainly handhold the 600 II the 500 II is lighter.

Excellent advice, I'd also emphasize that with some practice it is possible to handhold the 600 II for short periods of time with surprisingly good results.

For me and my original 600mm f/4, it was a very short time. Add a TC, and it was shorter yet. Certainly, the latest one is a lot lighter but I'd expect it to get tiring after a pretty short time. Since photographing wildlife can require a lot of patience, holding the lens on a animal for a long time, often 15 or 30 minutes until it gets into the right position, I'd prefer a tripod, or at very least a monopod.

 

[Halfrack]

What are you planning to do with the photos after being shot? You may consider going with a 7d mk2 crop setup with the 100-400 mk2 to get the length.

What gear are you shooting with now?

 

[tomcat]

What are you planning to do with the photos after being shot? You may consider going with a 7d mk2 crop setup with the 100-400 mk2 to get the length.

What gear are you shooting with now?

I shoot with an Canon Eos 7D, 5D Mark2 and an 6D. The 5D is temporarilly out of duty. For wildscape I only own the 100-400mm L (sometimes with an extender 1.4x), for bigger animals an 70-200mm 2.8 LII with an extender 1.4x and 2.0x). So, you see, I am limited.
I want to spend <=9000€ for the lens and max. 1600€ for an new tripod. In 2016/17 a new body (5D Mark 4 (?)) will follow.
My shots are mostly printed on aluminium dibond and hanging on the wall or are printed in photo-books.

 

[xps]

My financial range is 9000Euros, I can get the 500mm for 8800. The 600mm is to expensive for me.

Honestly, I think you'd be better off deciding which is best for your needs, and continuing to save if needed. Personally, I find the 600 + 2x too short sometimes, had I bought the 500/4 I would have regretted it – and with that expense, regret is bad (and buying the other likeky precluded).

OTOH, while I can certainly handhold the 600 II the 500 II is lighter.

Excellent advice, I'd also emphasize that with some practice it is possible to handhold the 600 II for short periods of time with surprisingly good results.

For me and my original 600mm f/4, it was a very short time. Add a TC, and it was shorter yet. Certainly, the latest one is a lot lighter but I'd expect it to get tiring after a pretty short time. Since photographing wildlife can require a lot of patience, holding the lens on a animal for a long time, often 15 or 30 minutes until it gets into the right position, I'd prefer a tripod, or at very least a monopod.

Mr. Spokane, I saw such a lens over 20 years ago. You own one? The first thoughts when I saw this lens, were: what the hell is this?
Do you still use it?

 

[anolis23]

I would go for the 500 II if money wasn't an issue, and if you don't mind carrying the extra weight. With wildlife photography you always want more reach, as much as you can afford, and as much as you are willing to carry. The 400 DO does seem to be an excellent lens specially for the weight, and if that is something that you are very worried about then I would choose that one instead. I currently use the 100-400 II because I move around allot and take pictures of varied subjects (birds, butterflies, reptiles, etc.) so having the focal length flexibility and being mobile is very important for me. Also less conspicuos that carrying one of the white monsters Which I honestly wish I had but at this point I can't see myself justifying purchasing such a lens.

Here is a short video were I did a quick take on the new 100-400 II: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uAMoWZYTico

Here is a link to a trip report in which I used the 100-400 II together with other lenses and systems to get an idea of the type of photography I do: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CM9EapZJt_8 There is a link to my flickr on the description...

Any comments on Youtube would be appreciated since we are making these videos for fun and would like to get better at making them!

 

[NancyP]

I suggest this a lot. See if you can rent the candidate lens. If you can rent it for a few days, you will know for sure if you can handle it in the conditions you shoot in all day. Me - I have to get back to pumping iron, then I can try pumping magnesium and silica. I currently use the 400 f/5.6L, a very appealing lens, I can easily handhold it and pan.