Canon 600mm f4 IS II Vs Canon 200-400mm w/1.4x TC
- Thread starter Dylan777
- Start date
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...
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...
Upvote
0
tron said:
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... :
Upvote
0
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 ...
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 ...
Upvote
0
tron said: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 :
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.
Upvote
0
tron said:
Its no joke at 500 for the tamron they look about the same, at least in the center, the tamron even looks a bit better to me?
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=929&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=4&API=0&LensComp=764&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=5&APIComp=2
Upvote
0
Almost the same at center, Tamron just a little worse at midframe and garbage at Corner.candc said:tron said:
Its no joke at 500 for the tamron they look about the same, at least in the center, the tamron even looks a bit better to me?
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=929&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=4&API=0&LensComp=764&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=5&APIComp=2
This is not better exactly. And since in reality Tamron at 600 is about 580-585mm you have to use the tool at 600mm for Tamron if you want to compare :
Upvote
0
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.
Upvote
0
candyman said:
I zoom with my feet. ;-)
I chose the 600 II when I bought a big lens. Would make the same choice today, especially given that it is just as good as the EF 800 f/5.6 with the 1.4x TC attached (840mm f/5.6) and has the option to use the 2x TC for 1200mm f/8.
Upvote
0
You can also check this:candc said:
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=929&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=5&API=2&LensComp=113&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=10&APIComp=2
Even a 100-400 L with the 1.4III extender is comparable with Tamron (just a little worse at the center but better at mid-frame and edges...)
Upvote
0
candc said:
The Tamron is better in the center compared to the 100-400+1.4x. It is similar, but with different aberrations, midframe. The only place it really performs more poorly than the Canon 100-400 is the corner. And arguably, the center is the most important place in a lens like this for the primary target audience (i.e. birders/wildlifers w/ 7D|70D.)
For the price, the Tamron is an excellent lens, and I honestly think Canon will have a tough time competing with it with the current 100-400mm lens. Once Canon releases a 100-400mm II, then I think things might shift a bit back towards the 100-400mm lens being the better performer (albeit at a shorter focal length.)
Upvote
0
As I said at the center a little worse but better at mid-frame and much better at the corners. I am not suggesting to chose this but
I mentioned it as an exaggeration, just as Tamron was suggested as an alternative to the big whites. But true it is value for money...
I mentioned it as an exaggeration, just as Tamron was suggested as an alternative to the big whites. But true it is value for money...
Upvote
0
jrista said:
Good one
Somtimes zooming with feet may result in causing the subject to fly/run away because you step on branches (by accident) With the zoom you can sit in the same position, rotate with the gimbal and zoom close and further away (even add the 1.4 ext)
Upvote
0
If I had the money, I'd go with the 600II as well. It seems like you never have a long enough lens....jrista said:
You can zoom with your feet, but many time you can't because of terrain, water, or common sense (a 24mm lens and a grizzly bear are not a good combination). For those cases you either need a long lens or a bear-proof suit.
https://www.nfb.ca/film/project_grizzly/
Upvote
0
Similar threads
