I've started shopping for Great whites... and I mean great... someone stop me.

[canonvoir]

Don't look for us to stop you!

I'm wanting a 400/2.8 but that's some serious scratch for a hobby.

 

[mrsfotografie]

You know you want one - just do it!
The only question is which one. To me there are only two choices, either the 800mm or 600mm, I suppose you could include the 500mm for mobility.
Many people go on about lenses being too long - this is the opposite of my experience, in fact on only 2 occasions has my 800mm proved too long normally it's too short!

I most definitely would go for the 300 f/2.8 IS II because it's not too heavy of a monster and you have the option of extending its range using tele converters. Such a lens would have to get a lot of use from me, and I usually don't have a need for 400mm plus.

 

[GMCPhotographics]

Don't look for us to stop you!

I'm wanting a 400/2.8 but that's some serious scratch for a hobby.

True, but the lenses rarely drop their value...unless you drop one on concrete. So they are an investment, sometimes they go up in value. There are very few things we can buy which hld their value. Some cars, if you don't use them. Some guitars, a few Hi Fi components, some specific wine, some pieces of art...but Canon's great whites hold their resell value so well city traders have been known to invest in them too.

 

[Deleted member 91053]

You know you want one - just do it!
The only question is which one. To me there are only two choices, either the 800mm or 600mm, I suppose you could include the 500mm for mobility.
Many people go on about lenses being too long - this is the opposite of my experience, in fact on only 2 occasions has my 800mm proved too long normally it's too short!

I most definitely would go for the 300 f/2.8 IS II because it's not too heavy of a monster and you have the option of extending its range using tele converters. Such a lens would have to get a lot of use from me, and I usually don't have a need for 400mm plus.

I have the 300 F2.8 but, unfortunately, it get far less use than my 800 F5.6 L. The 300 is a great lens and very portable, plus it works well with extenders. The 800 is just better for my uses.

 

[mackguyver]

You know you want one - just do it!
The only question is which one. To me there are only two choices, either the 800mm or 600mm, I suppose you could include the 500mm for mobility.
Many people go on about lenses being too long - this is the opposite of my experience, in fact on only 2 occasions has my 800mm proved too long normally it's too short!

I most definitely would go for the 300 f/2.8 IS II because it's not too heavy of a monster and you have the option of extending its range using tele converters. Such a lens would have to get a lot of use from me, and I usually don't have a need for 400mm plus.

I have the 300 F2.8 but, unfortunately, it get far less use than my 800 F5.6 L. The 300 is a great lens and very portable, plus it works well with extenders. The 800 is just better for my uses.

John, I saw your post in another thread about the 800 even being too short for you many times. I did a CPS loan of the 800 a couple of years ago and found that to be the case, too, even on a 7D. I thought the 800 would solve all of my problems by getting me close, but that's when I realized I really need a 2000mm to get those shots! And as such, that's when I decided to change my approach (literally) to wildlife and work on getting closer to them for the shot. The 300mm (with or without extenders) turned out to be the perfect lens for that purpose because of it's small size & weight, and the IS in the Mk II is so good, I have stopped using a monopod, let alone a tripod for most things. Some other members on the forum and Canon Explorer of Light Art Morris (see his related blog posts here) is also finding this lens + extenders combination to be well suited for his work, so I'm not alone in my opinion. Obviously it's not for everyone, but if you can live without 601mm+ or the convenience of the 200-400 1.4x, it's a nice set up for everything from sports to wildlife, especially with the 1D X and 5DIII.

 

[RGF]

Stop you - hell go full speed ahead. They are great lenses.

Nice one and I think if you shoot with Canon long enough, the great white fever eventually gets you

I have three small whites, does that count too?

Mini whites. Not quite the great one, but still white fever

 

[mackguyver]

Stop you - hell go full speed ahead. They are great lenses.

Nice one and I think if you shoot with Canon long enough, the great white fever eventually gets you

I have three small whites, does that count too?

Mini whites. Not quite the great one, but still white fever

I was trying to think of a witty reply...but I had white fever for the 70-200 in my early days - back when I would say to myself, "How could I ever spend over $500 on a lens?" Then I made the fooli$$$h decision to shoot wildlife

 

[Deleted member 91053]

You know you want one - just do it!
The only question is which one. To me there are only two choices, either the 800mm or 600mm, I suppose you could include the 500mm for mobility.
Many people go on about lenses being too long - this is the opposite of my experience, in fact on only 2 occasions has my 800mm proved too long normally it's too short!

I most definitely would go for the 300 f/2.8 IS II because it's not too heavy of a monster and you have the option of extending its range using tele converters. Such a lens would have to get a lot of use from me, and I usually don't have a need for 400mm plus.

I have the 300 F2.8 but, unfortunately, it get far less use than my 800 F5.6 L. The 300 is a great lens and very portable, plus it works well with extenders. The 800 is just better for my uses.

John, I saw your post in another thread about the 800 even being too short for you many times. I did a CPS loan of the 800 a couple of years ago and found that to be the case, too, even on a 7D. I thought the 800 would solve all of my problems by getting me close, but that's when I realized I really need a 2000mm to get those shots! And as such, that's when I decided to change my approach (literally) to wildlife and work on getting closer to them for the shot. The 300mm (with or without extenders) turned out to be the perfect lens for that purpose because of it's small size & weight, and the IS in the Mk II is so good, I have stopped using a monopod, let alone a tripod for most things. Some other members on the forum and Canon Explorer of Light Art Morris (see his related blog posts here) is also finding this lens + extenders combination to be well suited for his work, so I'm not alone in my opinion. Obviously it's not for everyone, but if you can live without 601mm+ or the convenience of the 200-400 1.4x, it's a nice set up for everything from sports to wildlife, especially with the 1D X and 5DIII.

The 300 F2.8 (Mk1 or Mk2) is a superb lens and really does well with extenders. I am more than happy with the performance of my 300 F2.8 IS Mk1 with my 2 x Mk3 extender. A few weeks ago I took 2400+ shots at an Air Display (sorry I got a bit carried away!) - my 300 F2.8 both with and without the 2 x extender, on my 1DX, did not miss focus on a single shot! IQ was excellent also.
However for my main pastime (small birds) the 800 F5.6 gives me better results and faster AF. As to getting closer I am normally shooting between 20 and 40 feet. I have to admit though the 300mm wins hands down if I need mobility!
I am interested in your comment on the Mk2 IS. My 300 has 2 stop IS and the 800 4 stop IS however I nearly always have it turned off as it improves the AF performance and, with the 1DX, shutter speed is rarely an issue. In fact the only time I have used my IS (on any lens) this year was once when hand holding my 800mm and then it was only to steady the image in the viewfinder! Shutter speed was 1/2000 sec so IS wouldn't help the image but it did help me get the focus point where I wanted!

 

[mrsfotografie]

Stop you - hell go full speed ahead. They are great lenses.

Nice one and I think if you shoot with Canon long enough, the great white fever eventually gets you

I have three small whites, does that count too?

Mini whites. Not quite the great one, but still white fever

I was trying to think of a witty reply...but I had white fever for the 70-200 in my early days - back when I would say to myself, "How could I ever spend over $500 on a lens?" Then I made the fooli$$$h decision to shoot wildlife

Actually I consider the 70-200 f/4's the 'mini' whites.

 

[jdramirez]

I was reluctant to shell out $80 for a 50mm f1.8...seems like such a long time ago when I ruined most of my Disney vacation photos... ahhh, sweet nostalgia.

Stop you - hell go full speed ahead. They are great lenses.

Nice one and I think if you shoot with Canon long enough, the great white fever eventually gets you

I have three small whites, does that count too?

Mini whites. Not quite the great one, but still white fever

I was trying to think of a witty reply...but I had white fever for the 70-200 in my early days - back when I would say to myself, "How could I ever spend over $500 on a lens?" Then I made the fooli$$$h decision to shoot wildlife

 

[mrsfotografie]

I was reluctant to shell out $80 for a 50mm f1.8...seems like such a long time ago when I ruined most of my Disney vacation photos... ahhh, sweet nostalgia.

Stop you - hell go full speed ahead. They are great lenses.

Nice one and I think if you shoot with Canon long enough, the great white fever eventually gets you

I have three small whites, does that count too?

Mini whites. Not quite the great one, but still white fever

I was trying to think of a witty reply...but I had white fever for the 70-200 in my early days - back when I would say to myself, "How could I ever spend over $500 on a lens?" Then I made the fooli$$$h decision to shoot wildlife

Yeah I remember when I thought 150 Euro's for a Sigma 70-300 was way too expensive. Mind you, the EOS 50e + Canon EF 28-80 mm f/3.5-5.6 IV USM I was using at the time was given to me out of old company equipment at the end of my internship. That's what got me into the EOS system by the way.

 

[Menace]

I was reluctant to shell out $80 for a 50mm f1.8...seems like such a long time ago when I ruined most of my Disney vacation photos... ahhh, sweet nostalgia.

Stop you - hell go full speed ahead. They are great lenses.

Nice one and I think if you shoot with Canon long enough, the great white fever eventually gets you

I have three small whites, does that count too?

Mini whites. Not quite the great one, but still white fever

I was trying to think of a witty reply...but I had white fever for the 70-200 in my early days - back when I would say to myself, "How could I ever spend over $500 on a lens?" Then I made the fooli$$$h decision to shoot wildlife

Ha ha - I know that feeling. How times change? (or is it us and our outlook that's changed since getting into photography? )

 

[jdramirez]

Ha ha - I know that feeling. How times change? (or is it us and our outlook that's changed since getting into photography? )

What really changed my perspective is when I sold my Canon xs for what I paid for it originally. I might have even made a small profit... everything else in my house takes a loss in value after I use it... to include my wife... but not my gear.

 

[mackguyver]

The 300 F2.8 (Mk1 or Mk2) is a superb lens and really does well with extenders. I am more than happy with the performance of my 300 F2.8 IS Mk1 with my 2 x Mk3 extender. A few weeks ago I took 2400+ shots at an Air Display (sorry I got a bit carried away!) - my 300 F2.8 both with and without the 2 x extender, on my 1DX, did not miss focus on a single shot! IQ was excellent also.
However for my main pastime (small birds) the 800 F5.6 gives me better results and faster AF. As to getting closer I am normally shooting between 20 and 40 feet. I have to admit though the 300mm wins hands down if I need mobility!
I am interested in your comment on the Mk2 IS. My 300 has 2 stop IS and the 800 4 stop IS however I nearly always have it turned off as it improves the AF performance and, with the 1DX, shutter speed is rarely an issue. In fact the only time I have used my IS (on any lens) this year was once when hand holding my 800mm and then it was only to steady the image in the viewfinder! Shutter speed was 1/2000 sec so IS wouldn't help the image but it did help me get the focus point where I wanted!

John, that is a lot of shots, but it's not hard to do with the 1D X. I find myself constantly trying not to take too many photos with that camera - otherwise editing them down is a real chore.

As for the IS, I know we've discussed this before and at 1/2000s IS is pointless for sure, but most of my shots are in very dim light where I'm getting 1/30-1/60s at ISO6400, so IS is the difference between getting the shot or not. The Mk II IS is rated to 4 stops, and I've gotten that even with the 2x III extender attached. The new IS Mode 3, where IS kicks in when the shutter closes is great for birds in flight because it doesn't mess with focus or the viewfinder image.

I loved the 800mm, particularly on a monopod with IS, and I almost gave into the purchase during the last refurb sale, but unfortunately my wife knows how much it costs and an irate wife isn't a pretty thing

Ha ha - I know that feeling. How times change? (or is it us and our outlook that's changed since getting into photography? )

What really changed my perspective is when I sold my Canon xs for what I paid for it originally. I might have even made a small profit... everything else in my house takes a loss in value after I use it... to include my wife... but not my gear.

Yes, times do change and JD, you actually made a profit selling a body??? I've always lost 30% or more on them - mainly because I buy w/o rebates, and sell when they have a $200-400 rebate :'(

 

[jdramirez]

Yes, times do change and JD, you actually made a profit selling a body??? I've always lost 30% or more on them - mainly because I buy w/o rebates, and sell when they have a $200-400 rebate :'(

I'm patient... kinda. I seriously wanted the 50 art, but Damn if I don't wait for a sale.

When I bought the xs, there was a loyalty rebate and I got a cheap 75-300. Sold the 75-300 after a year, sold the xs and the kit lens after 2 years and I made a few bucks because I sold it to a guy who was buying it for his wife. Basically I got lucky.

I lost $300 on my 60d and I suspect I'll lose $1000 on my mkiii. But this is the business we chose...

Is that a godfather reference?

 

[Dylan777]

Yes, times do change and JD, you actually made a profit selling a body??? I've always lost 30% or more on them - mainly because I buy w/o rebates, and sell when they have a $200-400 rebate :'(

I'm patient... kinda. I seriously wanted the 50 art, but Damn if I don't wait for a sale.

When I bought the xs, there was a loyalty rebate and I got a cheap 75-300. Sold the 75-300 after a year, sold the xs and the kit lens after 2 years and I made a few bucks because I sold it to a guy who was buying it for his wife. Basically I got lucky.

I lost $300 on my 60d and I suspect I'll lose $1000 on my mkiii. But this is the business we chose...

Is that a godfather reference?

I bought my 1st 5D III from Canon 1st patch. I believe I paid $3500. After picking up 1dx, I sold for almost $2600 cash. Still cheaper than renting, if that help.

BTW...I bought my 400mm f2.8 IS II NEW in Dec 2013 around $10,000ish. The price went up, I believe BH is selling at $11,500 at this moment.

My advice, wait for body. Hurry in BIG WHITE ;D

 

[Deleted member 91053]

John, that is a lot of shots, but it's not hard to do with the 1D X. I find myself constantly trying not to take too many photos with that camera - otherwise editing them down is a real chore.

As for the IS, I know we've discussed this before and at 1/2000s IS is pointless for sure, but most of my shots are in very dim light where I'm getting 1/30-1/60s at ISO6400, so IS is the difference between getting the shot or not. The Mk II IS is rated to 4 stops, and I've gotten that even with the 2x III extender attached. The new IS Mode 3, where IS kicks in when the shutter closes is great for birds in flight because it doesn't mess with focus or the viewfinder image.

I loved the 800mm, particularly on a monopod with IS, and I almost gave into the purchase during the last refurb sale, but unfortunately my wife knows how much it costs and an irate wife isn't a pretty thing

You are quite correct I did go a bit silly - but then I don't often get to airshows!
When shooting wildlife, these days, I find that I am taking far fewer shots and being much more selective. As a result I have dramatically reduced my workflow and am ending up with better "Keepers".
Perhaps I am a Fair weather shooter or just not very good at post processing! But if the light isn't decent then I tend not to shoot. One of the reasons that I am so enamored of the 1DX is that what I used to consider as poor light is now good with this camera - though even the 1DX has it's limitations!

 

[mackguyver]

John, that is a lot of shots, but it's not hard to do with the 1D X. I find myself constantly trying not to take too many photos with that camera - otherwise editing them down is a real chore.

As for the IS, I know we've discussed this before and at 1/2000s IS is pointless for sure, but most of my shots are in very dim light where I'm getting 1/30-1/60s at ISO6400, so IS is the difference between getting the shot or not. The Mk II IS is rated to 4 stops, and I've gotten that even with the 2x III extender attached. The new IS Mode 3, where IS kicks in when the shutter closes is great for birds in flight because it doesn't mess with focus or the viewfinder image.

I loved the 800mm, particularly on a monopod with IS, and I almost gave into the purchase during the last refurb sale, but unfortunately my wife knows how much it costs and an irate wife isn't a pretty thing

You are quite correct I did go a bit silly - but then I don't often get to airshows!
When shooting wildlife, these days, I find that I am taking far fewer shots and being much more selective. As a result I have dramatically reduced my workflow and am ending up with better "Keepers".
Perhaps I am a Fair weather shooter or just not very good at post processing! But if the light isn't decent then I tend not to shoot. One of the reasons that I am so enamored of the 1DX is that what I used to consider as poor light is now good with this camera - though even the 1DX has it's limitations!

Airshows are a lot of fun and I was actually scheduled to do a special shoot with the Blue Angels in Pensacola a few months ago that fell through. I'm still sad about that one, but maybe next year.

For wildlife, I shoot in whatever light comes up with the sun, but have been making good use of of the NWS "cloud cover prediction" they now have in their forecast. If it's 50-90%, I head out to a pre-scouted location for landscape shots of the sunrise - if it's 0-50% or 90-100%, I head out early for wildlife with the 1D X + 300 f/2.8 IS II. I have found that I can now shoot before sunrise, which has really changed the way I shoot, and really put a cramp on my sleep. When I used to shoot with my 7D and 400 f/5.6, it was generally 30 minutes after sunrise before I could start shooting...and that's a lot of missed opportunities.

 

[Deleted member 91053]

Yup it looks like I am a fair weather shooter!
To be out and about at dawn here I would be getting up just after I went to bed!

 

[mrsfotografie]

I'm suddenly charmed by the 400mm DO. Is the contrast really that bad?

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-400mm-f-4.0-DO-IS-USM-Lens-Review.aspx