arbitrage Offline Upload & Sell: On
|
p.2 #4 · p.2 #4 · Canon 600 f/5.6 IS II vs Canon 200-400 IS 1.4TC at 560mm | |
Alrighty, time to spill the beans....1/3 are the 200-400 with internal 1.4TC and 2/4 and 5/6 are the 300II with 2.0TCIII. A few points:
* I did have to process the 300II combo to bring back contrast as the RAW is lacking compared to the 2-4 combo so most people were right in using contrast as a factor.
* I can't comment yet on AF differences between the two combos but both are lacking compared to the 600II obviously. I think they are actually very similar and I think that the 300II combo may be a bit better but I need to test some more.
* Handholdabiltiy is easiest with the 300II as it is a lot lighter even with the 2.0TC added on, the 200-400 despite weighing very similar to the 600II is way easier to manoeuvre, pack, carry on a tripod, carry on a Black Rapid and easier to handhold versus the 600II. it is much better balanced and most of the weight is where the TC is so close to the body.
* I wish the zoom ring was about 1" closer to the body as I hold with my CRX-5 low mount plate and if it was 1inch closer I could zoom without shifting my hand slightly foreword. Still I can zoom on the fly without much issue. I can also flip the TC in and out by feel now.
I think that the 1/3 and 5/6 images are so close that anyone who thinks it matters is crazy!!! As some people have already mentioned it comes down to if you want lighter 600 f/5.6 prime or crazy versatility with the cost of more weight. I'm leaning towards the latter but keeping the 300II for now and will see if it just sits around or not. The 600II is still vital to me as I need that extra stop and the 1200 f/8 with AF.
|