Review - Canon EF 600mm f/4L IS II
- Thread starter Canon Rumors
- Start date
- Status
Nice review and pictures…
But, does anyone use a super tele here and NOT take pictures of birds?
There must be other uses!
But, does anyone use a super tele here and NOT take pictures of birds?
There must be other uses!
Upvote
0
kaihp said:
I know, it's just that it would be nice to see some occasionally instead of nothing but birds.
Upvote
0
Much better. Now let's see a 600mm used for things that nobody would expect it to be used for.
I'd take up this challenge myself, but I don't shizzle money. 8)
I'd take up this challenge myself, but I don't shizzle money. 8)
Upvote
0
The review must reinforced by decision to buy the 600 II and sell my 500 I. Only thing stopping now, is $. Just got the 200-400 so I need to refill the piggy bank.
On the review, the last comment about the tight lens cap, most people I know use neoprene (lenscoat) caps. At least versus the old leatherette condoms.
On the review, the last comment about the tight lens cap, most people I know use neoprene (lenscoat) caps. At least versus the old leatherette condoms.
Upvote
0
neuroanatomist said:Harry Muff said:
Wait, wait...you expected a 600mm lens to be used for indoor portraits?
You've proved it can be done, Neuro. Come on this could be fun. What's the most unlikely use of a 600mm that you could actually pull off?
On your marks… 8)
Upvote
0
pharp said:neuroanatomist said:Harry Muff said:
Wait, wait...you expected a 600mm lens to be used for indoor portraits?
Sure, how about discrete street photography - from down the street, WAY down the street!
Sounds good. See what you can come up with.
Upvote
0
H
Hobby Shooter
Guest
Man you have a big house!neuroanatomist said:Harry Muff said:
How about a squirrel?
EOS 1D X, EF 600mm f/4L IS II USM, 1/320 s, f/4, ISO 6400
Actually, it also makes a very nice indoor portrait lens. For example, this one which was a handheld shot at 1/160 s:
Upvote
0
H
Hobby Shooter
Guest
BTW, I always love a squirrel. Considering the last couple of weeks' discussions, I've been out in the garden trying to get squirrel pictures, without luck so far. Only thing I see are those deer.neuroanatomist said:Harry Muff said:
How about a squirrel?
EOS 1D X, EF 600mm f/4L IS II USM, 1/320 s, f/4, ISO 6400
Actually, it also makes a very nice indoor portrait lens. For example, this one which was a handheld shot at 1/160 s:
Upvote
0
Glenn argues that the 600mm gives 1.44x more magnification than the 500 (i.e. (600/500)^2) not 1.2 (600/500). But, is that relevant? The resolution of a lens, the most important factor, is a linear function of focal length, not of length squared. For example, a 600mm lens will give the same size image as a 500mm at 20% further away, not 44% further. When you use binoculars, you talk about x8 vs x10, i.e. the linear magnification, not x64 vs x100, the square. A 600mm lens would seem to me to be a 20% increase in reach, not 44%.
Upvote
0
"For those who already own the older 600mm lens the decision becomes slightly more clouded. The new lens does not bring any real world sharpness advantages over the older version. The decreased weight and minimum focus distance however may just be worth the cost of the upgrade."
Really??? Pay another 6K just for some weight and closer focus?
He really missed the boat on the reasons to upgrade such as improved image stabilization and all but highly desired increase in AF accuracy with newer bodies like the 5D3 and 1DX due to closed loop AF system....and even with that is it still worth spending 6K to upgrade from the 600 F4L IS? I could buy a couple more 5D3's or a 1DX with that 6K.
Really??? Pay another 6K just for some weight and closer focus?
He really missed the boat on the reasons to upgrade such as improved image stabilization and all but highly desired increase in AF accuracy with newer bodies like the 5D3 and 1DX due to closed loop AF system....and even with that is it still worth spending 6K to upgrade from the 600 F4L IS? I could buy a couple more 5D3's or a 1DX with that 6K.
Upvote
0
L
Loswr
Guest
East Wind Photography said:
I don't think he missed the boat, at all. Sure, on test charts the 600 II is better. But the original was very sharp. The AF might be slightly more accurate with a new body - but the AF on the old superteles was already excellent.
There's no way I'd have considered buying a 600/4 MkI, even if it cost less than a 300 MkI. The original is too heavy to hike with, too heavy to handhold. I'd have bought the 500 I, even though it's really not long enough for me on FF. The reduced weight of the 600 II (as the reviewer aptly stated, it's a 600/4 lens in a 500/4 package) was the main reason I bought the 600 II.
Upvote
0
- Status
Similar threads
