Need a 600mm. Don't want to pay for one

[Kerry B]

Wow Alan that is some image with that lens combination. Does show how good that set up is.

 

[NancyP]

Weixing, the heat expansion issue and the consequent effect on autofocus is exactly why the Canon supertelephotos are white/cream colored. FWIW, I try to find light colored backpacks for the same reason, avoiding cooking the camera gear within.

 

[AlanF]

Scott
To compare further, I took this about 3 hours ago out on a walk. Hand held Canon 5DIII + 300mm f/2.8 II 2xTCIII, 1/400 s, f/5.6, iso640. With four stops of IS I don't need a tripod at 1/400s.

 

[GMCPhotographics]

One of the other reasons for getting a native 600L instead of a 300L and a 2X converter, is that the 600L can be used with converters to extend the focal length even further. The 600L makes a great 840mm f5.6L and a very good 1200mm f8 lens when using converters.
My 400L pretty much maxxes out at 800mm. I've tried it with a 2x and a 1.4x and the results weren't good, even by stopping down 2 or 3 stops. The 2x is usable wide open and a bit better stopped down a stop. The 1.4x is pretty much as sharp as the native lens wide open.

 

[mackguyver]

One of the other reasons for getting a native 600L instead of a 300L and a 2X converter, is that the 600L can be used with converters to extend the focal length even further. The 600L makes a great 840mm f5.6L and a very good 1200mm f8 lens when using converters.

And that is why I still need a 600mm and will buy one as soon as I can justify the expense

 

[Loswr]

One of the other reasons for getting a native 600L instead of a 300L and a 2X converter, is that the 600L can be used with converters to extend the focal length even further. The 600L makes a great 840mm f5.6L and a very good 1200mm f8 lens when using converters.

Indeed… Most of my shots with the 600/4L IS II are with the 1.4xIII behind it.

 

[AlanF]

It's horses for courses. Ideally, I would like a 600mm f/4 L II + 1.4xTCIII for excursions when I don't have to carry far and will be sitting in a hide or fixed spot with a good tripod. For hiking and using hand held for impromptu shots of birds and for birds in flight, the 600mm f/5.6 (aka 300mm f/2.8 II x2) is best because of weight and ability to hand hold for a length of time - I didn't particularly like taking my new monopod this weekend. Whereas the 600mm at 840mm would give me the length I frequently crave, the shot of the wren in the tree just posted required me to be quick on the uptake and swing the 300x2 into position for a transient moment when walking.

I just wish Canon would make a lightweight 600mm f/5.6 prime as it would be perfect for to use native and at 840 f/8 with a TC.

 

[weixing]

Hi,
For your reference, below are some of my lightroom screenshot (at 100% view) of birds I took using my Tamron @ 600mm F6.3. All are without processing (just open using lightroom and took the screenshot):

Have a nice day.

 

[westr70]

Hi,
For your reference, below are some of my lightroom screenshot (at 100% view) of birds I took using my Tamron @ 600mm F6.3. All are without processing (just open using lightroom and took the screenshot):

Have a nice day.

Great Shots weixing. So long does it take to get one of these? Hmm...

 

[GMCPhotographics]

Here's a recent 400 f2.8 LIS (mkI) with a 2x converter. One image over view and the other at 100% crop.
This is very nearly wide open:

It's a heavy lens but worth it. Not many lenses can come close to this level of quality

 

[Click]

Beautiful shot. The 400 f2.8 with the 2x converter is very impressive. Well done.

 

[Steve]

It's a heavy lens but worth it. Not many lenses can come close to this level of quality

Sure, but if you're going to spend the money and carry the weight, you might as well get a 600 f4, at least if your main shooting subject is going to be wildlife.

 

[Loswr]

It's a heavy lens but worth it. Not many lenses can come close to this level of quality

Sure, but if you're going to spend the money and carry the weight, you might as well get a 600 f4, at least if your main shooting subject is going to be wildlife.

That's what I did. I'll take 1200mm over 800mm, and 840mm over 560mm...

 

[Click]

I agree with you neuro. That's what I did too.

 

[GMCPhotographics]

It's a heavy lens but worth it. Not many lenses can come close to this level of quality

Sure, but if you're going to spend the money and carry the weight, you might as well get a 600 f4, at least if your main shooting subject is going to be wildlife.

That's what I did. I'll take 1200mm over 800mm, and 840mm over 560mm...

Absolutely true if you assume you need 1200mm to reach your wild life. I regularly need 400mm for my working distance. The original OP requested a 600mm not a 1200mm.

 

[Loswr]

The original OP requested a 600mm not a 1200mm.

The original OP indicated a price range that clearly excludes a 400/2.8 (even used, deals involving wiring funds to Nigeria notwithstanding).

 

[eml58]

Here's a recent 400 f2.8 LIS (mkI) with a 2x converter. One image over view and the other at 100% crop.
This is very nearly wide open:

It's a heavy lens but worth it. Not many lenses can come close to this level of quality

Lovely Image GMC, Nailed focus & beautiful background to complement the colours of the Puffin, well done.

It's a great lens as well, enjoyed mine when I had it, enjoyed the weight saving of the Mk II even more, but IQ was similar in both, brilliant.