xterra07 Offline Upload & Sell: On
|
1DX with 600mm II with 1.4x and 2.0x
The reach is always an issue, unless you have the technique with blinds etc down very well, which most people don't, so the reach is what matters. Then you can go bare or with a teleconverter, 1.4x to get some tracking ability, or 2.0x when there isn't much motion.
Sometimes you just can't get close enough.
600mm II is the weight of the old 500mm I, and 500mm II is lighter than before.
People handhold both, both get heavy fast, but that's an option besides tripod use.
1D IV versus 1D X, 1D X should track faster sometimes, some people prefer one over the other, but both are great, but I would pick 1D X with 600mm over a 1D IV with 500mm, sometimes. There isn't a clear advantage always to either setup, both are good.
I didn't enjoy 7D, the color are different, the sensor size becomes very obvious when your exposure is not perfect, at ISO 400 and higher, when you crop... I didn't enjoy that body at all.
I would rather use 1D IV with older 500mm than 7D with a newer lens.
and I would use the new 1.4x III and 2.0x III, while it's the AF speed not image quality that's advertised as being improved, I would just really prefer the IIIs.
800mm f/5.6 won't focus in lower light as well as f/4 lens would, sometimes it is too long, minimum focusing distance is a few feet further than shorter lenses, I have missed shots because birds were too close to focus on with 800mm. I would say it's a great lens but a lot more limited for variety than 600mm with teleconverters would be.
Here I was with a 300mm II with 2.0x on it, the birds were 20 feet up, I had to get close but then I was shooting up and pictures were weak (no keepers).
With 600mm II with 2.0x, and this is 100% crop, I was further, getting a keeper.
(1D X, 600mm II, 2.0x,tripod)
http://robertbody.com/images/500/2013-12-31-joaquin-osprey-1x_04117.jpg
|