Well, speak for yourself. This is the 600 II, which I routinely use handheld.An EF 600mm f / 4L IS III of 3.1 Kg is too heavy for use without a tripod...
Well, speak for yourself.
I just hope the IQ and durability hasn't been compromised (and has in fact been improved)
To hold it at arm's length is one thing, to make 100% of photographs which are not blurred, it is certainly certainly impossible in this way ...Well, speak for yourself. This is the 600 II, which I routinely use handheld.
To make 100% of photographs which are not blurred is certainly impossible on a tripod, also. Importantly, I do not have any problems getting a very high keeper rate shooting handheld. With birds in flight (my most frequent subject with the 600/4 II), shutter speeds of 1/2000 s or faster are needed, which combined with IS effectively eliminates the effect of camera shake. But I have shot handheld with shutter speeds in the 1/60 - 1/200 s range with excellent results. In winter when shooting raptors, I use a tripod and gimbal because that use case involves a lot of standing and waiting. But in more clement weather, I prefer to hike and shoot. I can assure you that even if I could achieve 100% not blurred shots by stopping to set up the tripod and mount the lens on it, the majority of those images would be sharp, crisp images of an unoccupied tree branch or empty sky, since my subject would have long since flown away.To hold it at arm's length is one thing, to make 100% of photographs which are not blurred, it is certainly certainly impossible in this way ...
I know looking at charts has it's limits but the 600 MTF chart doesn't look as good as for the II.
An EF 600mm f / 4L IS III of 3.1 Kg is too heavy for use without a tripod...
To hold it at arm's length is one thing, to make 100% of photographs which are not blurred, it is certainly certainly impossible in this way ...
To make 100% of photographs which are not blurred is certainly impossible on a tripod, also. Importantly, I do not have any problems getting a very high keeper rate shooting handheld. With birds in flight (my most frequent subject with the 600/4 II), shutter speeds of 1/2000 s or faster are needed, which combined with IS effectively eliminates the effect of camera shake. But I have shot handheld with shutter speeds in the 1/60 - 1/200 s range with excellent results. In winter when shooting raptors, I use a tripod and gimbal because that use case involves a lot of standing and waiting. But in more clement weather, I prefer to hike and shoot. I can assure you that even if I could achieve 100% not blurred shots by stopping to set up the tripod and mount the lens on it, the majority of those images would be sharp, crisp images of an unoccupied tree branch or empty sky, since my subject would have long since flown away.
The middle lens group is smaller and shifted back. Probably requiring much more manufacturing precision than before, and made possible with recent upgrades in Canon's lens manufacturing plant.So what is the sacrifice to gain 1.9lbs on the 500mm?
No plans to upgrade, sorry. If this was a 600/4 DO, I might feel differently...This will be a nice step up, just let us know when your ready to sell your version II.
Well, speak for yourself. This is the 600 II, which I routinely use handheld.
600/4L IS II:
600/4L IS III:
I’m not sure I’d call the MkIII worse, but based on MTF charts I’d conclude that the MkIII does not offer any meaningful improvement in sharpness or contrast. The new coatings are likely better at reducing flare (and of course, that affects contrast when present), but I haven’t found that to be an issue with the 600 II (unlike, for example, the 70-200/2.8L IS II, where despite the claims of no improvements, I expect that lens to have meaningfully better performance in backlit situations, where the MkII just washes out with veiling glare).