Primes for wildlife ...

[jrista]

Wildlife is, by definition, wild - you usually can't get all that close.

Unless you stand really still and they just walk right by you, like this little one did the other day while I was shooting Pelicans in flight. He was about 6-7 feet away (as you can see from the angle). This is the @600mm (300 2.8 IS II + 2x III), ISO 6400, 1/500s on my 5DIII, processed with the new DxO 9 PRIME. Killer combo on all fronts (forgive the white balance):

First off, great shot! Such a beautiful shorebird.

As an extra note, there is definitely something to be said about having the f/4 aperture at 600mm. Here is a Spotted Sandpiper shot with really nice, creamy boke with the 600mm at f/4:

Slap on a TC, and even at f/5.6, 840mm gets you headshot reach for even a shorebird, still with the phenomenal boke:

Personally, I'll likely get the 300 II at some point soon. However, while that's partly as a more portable bird/wildlife lens, it's main use will be sports, since my older daughter is now starting to participate in several.

I find it a killer combo with the teleconverters and as you say, it can be used for sports, landscapes, and many other things as well. I have hand held it 99% of the time no matter the light.

To the OP, I find 600mm enough reach for most wildlife, because most of what I shoot is either close enough for 600mm or way too far for an 800mm + 2x. Being able to drop down to 300mm is great for closer subjects as well, and I hear the 300 + extenders/extension tubes also make it a great macro lens for less than 1:1 work. To me, it's versatility and price trumped the other options. I'll happily rent a 600mm for trips and other occasions, though.
[/quote]

 

[mackguyver]

Slap on a TC, and even at f/5.6, 840mm gets you headshot reach for even a shorebird, still with the phenomenal boke:

Plus, you have a 1200mm f/8 when needed! That makes me a little jealous

 

[Loswr]

My wife and I were even closer to the mountain gorillas in Parc National des Volcans in Rwanda…and not inside a Land Rover.

Interesting photo.

Well I never thought you would have a hair style like that ;D

Lol. I still have it, albeit with a few gray hairs at the temples - three kids will do that to you. My wife got the cornrows done at the start of the trip, when we spent a week on Zanzibar before a week on safari in mainland Tanzania, then a week in Rwanda, with a day or two at various points between, e.g., Dar es Salaam.

 

[eml58]

My wife and I were even closer to the mountain gorillas in Parc National des Volcans in Rwanda…and not inside a Land Rover.

I'de say your head was fortunately placed otherwise this Image would have been 'R' rated and not for CR consumption.

Haven't done this, hope to before I can't, your very fortunate to have been able to do it before it's something we won't be able to do at all, well done.

 

[RGF]

I went from a 500F4 Mark 1 on a 1D (1.3 crop) to 200-400F4 on 1Dx (full frame). Decided there was too much overlap with 200-400 so I opted for a 600 II which I will mostly use with 1.4.

200-400 is a great lens and the zoom adds flexibility and the built in 1.4 is wonderful. Wish the 600 had a built in 1.4, perhaps Mark 3 will have it.

 

[dgatwood]

Even in the case of deer, 600mm at a moderate distance gets you some amazing detail.

Of course, if you walk through the UCSC campus sometime, you'll get that shots of deer like that from a 16-35 L II at the wide end.

I'm only half kidding. If you've never accidentally bumped into a deer and had it turn around and look at you as though to say, "Watch where you're going, you idiot," you've probably never walked through the UCSC campus.

 

[Morlin]

I am also looking for a great white prime. If all goes well hopefully in a couple of months.
I know that many of you want to answer "go and rent one" on my question but it´s hard to find a place where I can rent lenses like those where I live and it costs a lot. I prefer to spend those money on the lens itself when I buy it.

I am thinking of the reach of the 600mm. I would really like it for birds and mammals at a distance. And a 600mm would really make birds more interesting. But the question is how close can bigger animals get without only having partial body pictures of them because they fill the frame to much? I do use a 5d mkiii so at least it´s ff. Also have a 7d.

I do a lot of deer photography. Also foxes and other mammals. Let´s say you have a fellow deer 25-30m from you will it be too close to get pictures with the whole animal and a bit of the environment?
It´s so hard for me to imaging real life examples when it comes to the size of the animals and the distance at that focal length.

Maybe you who have experience of wildlife photography with focal length at 600mm can give me your suggestion on this and show examples of animals photographed at a given distance to show how they fill the frame.
I would like maximum reach but will there be too many limitations for bigger wildlife with a 600mm?

As you see a tricky thing to answer so that´s why I am looking for pictures or examples showing what distance something was photographed at.

 

[Loswr]

Let's say a typical deer is 1 m tall and 2 m longn, and you might want it to fill 2/3 of the frame for a reasonably tight shot, meaning a 2 x 3 m image. With a 600 mm lens on FF, that means you'd need to be 50 m away.

 

[M.ST]

I love to use the EF 600 II lens with / or without the TC´s for wildlife shots.

For Tiger images shot from the back of an elephant I prefer the 70-200 2.8 II or 300 2.8 II lens.

 

[Eldar]

What other lenses do you have?

If you are planning on buying something as expensive as the 600 f4L IS II, I assume you also buy the 1.4xIII and 2xIII extenders. If you also have the 70-200 f2.8L IS II, you will be fairly safe in most situations.

In general with birds, there is no limit to how much focal length you would want. For wildlife, my experience is that it is very difficult to get much closer than 50-100meters. And, as Neuro's example confirms, that means you can shoot full figure of small deer at 50m, moose at 75m and elephants at just over 100m.

I had the 500 f4L (version I), which went into retirement, and for a replacement, I thought I would be happy with the 400 f2.8L IS II with extenders. But I ended up buying the 600 to get the extra reach and selling the 400. More than 75% of my pictures with that lens is with the 1.4xIII extender. I don't use 1200mm very often, but I know it's there ...

 

[DaveMiko]

What other lenses do you have?

If you are planning on buying something as expensive as the 600 f4L IS II, I assume you also buy the 1.4xIII and 2xIII extenders. If you also have the 70-200 f2.8L IS II, you will be fairly safe in most situations.

In general with birds, there is no limit to how much focal length you would want. For wildlife, my experience is that it is very difficult to get much closer than 50-100meters. And, as Neuro's example confirms, that means you can shoot full figure of small deer at 50m, moose at 75m and elephants at just over 100m.

I had the 500 f4L (version I), which went into retirement, and for a replacement, I thought I would be happy with the 400 f2.8L IS II with extenders. But I ended up buying the 600 to get the extra reach and selling the 400. More than 75% of my pictures with that lens is with the 1.4xIII extender. I don't use 1200mm very often, but I know it's there ...

I bought the 600 f4L IS II (alongside the 1DX). 8) ... I already own the 2x and 1.4x extenders. ... Looking forward to my next safari in Kenya! 8)

 

[Morlin]

Ok. I am pretty good at getting close to the animals =) Look like a bush and birds have landed on me several times believing I am a tree. But it truly seems good to be able to fill the frame with a deer in that distance that is mentioned. And also for birds the 600mm might be the better choice for me then. They are extremely expensive so why not get the most reach I can for the money. I am just a bit afraid of constantly coming home with head shots of deers because they are too close but in those cases I can have the 7D body with the 70-200 instead.

I have the 70-200 2,8 II and a 2x TC version iii. Thinking of getting the 1,4 TC also. Maybe that combination together with a 600mm ii fills my "need".

I often read that many use the 600mm with extenders and that might be the proof that I don´t have to be too worried of getting too much reach by getting the 600mm. Especially on a FF-body.

This is the reason why I am a member here. So many nice people with experience in both photography itself and also knowledge about gear.

 

[Don Haines]

Even in the case of deer, 600mm at a moderate distance gets you some amazing detail.

Of course, if you walk through the UCSC campus sometime, you'll get that shots of deer like that from a 16-35 L II at the wide end.

I'm only half kidding. If you've never accidentally bumped into a deer and had it turn around and look at you as though to say, "Watch where you're going, you idiot," you've probably never walked through the UCSC campus.

I work on a military firing range... it is deer central here...when I turn my head and look out the window I can see about 20 of them... You can get within 50 feet of them before they wander away and NO CAMERAS ALLOWED ON SITE There is a flock of wild turkeys in the field and a porcupine in one of the trees....

Interstingly enough, a military firing range is the safest place for wildlife... there is nobody to chase them and shooting anything other than a target is a career ending move....

 

[mackguyver]

I bought the 600 f4L IS II (alongside the 1DX). 8) ... I already own the 2x and 1.4x extenders. ... Looking forward to my next safari in Kenya! 8)

Nice choice, I'm sure you'll be plenty happy and it should be perfect combo for your safari and lots of other shooting.

 

[DaveMiko]

I bought the 600 f4L IS II (alongside the 1DX). 8) ... I already own the 2x and 1.4x extenders. ... Looking forward to my next safari in Kenya! 8)

Nice choice, I'm sure you'll be plenty happy and it should be perfect combo for your safari and lots of other shooting.

Yeppppp!

 

[eml58]

I bought the 600 f4L IS II (alongside the 1DX). 8) ... I already own the 2x and 1.4x extenders. ... Looking forward to my next safari in Kenya! 8)

Nice choice, I'm sure you'll be plenty happy and it should be perfect combo for your safari and lots of other shooting.

Yeppppp!

Well Done Dave, just to be sure, are your converters the Series III ?? To get the best out of the New Version II Lenses you need to be using Series III Converters, the Series II will work, but not as well.

The 1Dx + 600f/4 II is about as good as it gets, mine is pretty well always hooked up set to go with the 1.4x III Converter, provides the perfect accompaniment to the 1Dx + 200-400f/4.

Be careful going through Nairobi these days, I'm heading into the Masai Mara in March 2014 and I've arranged it so I don't overnight going in or out, pick up my Charter flight same day as I arrive, pick up my International same day I come back in, after the disaster they had earlier this Year Nairobi itself is off my list of spots to spend time, anytime.

 

[DaveMiko]

I bought the 600 f4L IS II (alongside the 1DX). 8) ... I already own the 2x and 1.4x extenders. ... Looking forward to my next safari in Kenya! 8)

Nice choice, I'm sure you'll be plenty happy and it should be perfect combo for your safari and lots of other shooting.

Yeppppp!

Well Done Dave, just to be sure, are your converters the Series III ?? To get the best out of the New Version II Lenses you need to be using Series III Converters, the Series II will work, but not as well.

The 1Dx + 600f/4 II is about as good as it gets, mine is pretty well always hooked up set to go with the 1.4x III Converter, provides the perfect accompaniment to the 1Dx + 200-400f/4.

Be careful going through Nairobi these days, I'm heading into the Masai Mara in March 2014 and I've arranged it so I don't overnight going in or out, pick up my Charter flight same day as I arrive, pick up my International same day I come back in, after the disaster they had earlier this Year Nairobi itself is off my list of spots to spend time, anytime.

Well, I spent almost 20k for the combo 1Dx + 600f/4 II, so, of course, I could spare (and I did) another 1k, roughly, for the 2x Mk III+1.4x Mk III. ... I think that, after what happened over there recently, Nairobi has to be one of the safest places on Earth now. Security must be even tougher than in Israel. ... That said, I don't plan on taking any chances and I shall spend the least amount possible of time in Nairobi. ... With South Africa is a different matter. I plan on getting there in March or April next year.

 

[scyrene]

I find the 500 great. Although I chose it over the 600 mostly because of the price, and have to say if I could afford to, I'd probably upgrade, I have no complaints over image quality, ergonomics, or ruggedness. My walkaround combination since the f/8 autofocus update to the 5DIII is the 500+2x extender, which produces good images when stopped down to f/10, at least in good light. I'm not strong, but I can handhold that for a few hours. When it gets darker, I swap to the 1.4x extender, then the bare lens, but most birds are too skittish to allow you to get close enough for such a short focal length. I also find stacking the extenders can produce usable images if I can't get closer, although this is manual focus only and works best with support.

I'm sure for larger animals the shorter lenses would be more appropriate, but the 'never enough focal length' mantra for birds really is true in most situations.

 

[Loswr]

I also find stacking the extenders can produce usable images if I can't get closer, although this is manual focus only and works best with support.

Just a side note on this, you cannot stack the Canon 1.4xIII and 2xIII extenders together, unless you use a small (e.g. 12mm) extension tube between them. The MkII extenders can be stacked, and 1.4xIII can be mounted behind a 2xII.

 

[scyrene]

I also find stacking the extenders can produce usable images if I can't get closer, although this is manual focus only and works best with support.

Just a side note on this, you cannot stack the Canon 1.4xIII and 2xIII extenders together, unless you use a small (e.g. 12mm) extension tube between them. The MkII extenders can be stacked, and 1.4xIII can be mounted behind a 2xII.

Interesting! I have a 1.4xIII and a 2xII. Does using an extension tube make any difference to function, e.g. losing infinity focus?