Field review of the new Canon 600mm MKII
/forum/topic/1135820/1

1      
2
       3       4       end

Schlotkins
Registered: Aug 06, 2004
Total Posts: 2019
Country: United States

speedmaster20d wrote:
Regarding 600 II vs. 500 II, IMO it all depends on the weight you are comfortable with. If you are happy with the weight of the current 500 I would def get the 600 as you get more reach that can increase your field productivity. If the current 500 feels too heavy then the new 500 is your lens. Both lenses can produce excellent images for sure.


Hmmm... I have been working out. I feel like probably the 500 II is the way to go for me, but that extra reach really is tempting.



WiredMike
Registered: Aug 19, 2010
Total Posts: 76
Country: United States

+1 for being able to read the write up on my mobile!



Paul Tessier
Registered: Dec 27, 2005
Total Posts: 223
Country: United States

Great write up. The big questions are when and where can I get one. Seem the deliveries are a trickle at best.



fotographiq
Registered: Feb 11, 2006
Total Posts: 808
Country: United States

$13,000, good lord.

Enjoy it.



Breitling65
Registered: May 31, 2006
Total Posts: 5221
Country: United States

fotographiq wrote:
$13,000, good lord.

Enjoy it.




Maybe made in Malaysia version will cost twice less? Lets dream ...



vachss
Registered: Oct 09, 2003
Total Posts: 1381
Country: United States

As glowing reviews like this one start to come in I expect the already steady stream of 800L's on the Buy and Sell page to increase. Who knows, maybe the $11K barrier will crack soon...



AJSJones
Registered: Jan 22, 2002
Total Posts: 1675
Country: United States

Breitling65 wrote:
fotographiq wrote:
$13,000, good lord.

Enjoy it.




Maybe made in Malaysia version will cost twice less? Lets dream ...


You mean they give us $13K and the lens?
Nice dream

Or do you mean 1/2 as much?
Cheaper than the original, without accounting for progress, inflation and exchange rate differences?
Almost as nice a dream...



Gary Irwin
Registered: Jan 06, 2009
Total Posts: 513
Country: Canada

Excellent review Arash - that required effort which we all appreciate.

The only thing is, considering you never took the 1.4x off the lens, maybe you should have just gone with the 800L!



speedmaster20d
Registered: Oct 20, 2009
Total Posts: 1542
Country: United States

Gary Irwin wrote:
Excellent review Arash - that required effort which we all appreciate.

The only thing is, considering you never took the 1.4x off the lens, maybe you should have just gone with the 800L!


Thanks

I never liked the 800 for handholding. Too much FL for some birds too.



charlespan
Registered: Mar 17, 2010
Total Posts: 245
Country: United States

Thanks for the review; exactly what I need to hear, I am going to use it mostly hand held.



kevindar
Registered: May 06, 2006
Total Posts: 2343
Country: United States

charlespan wrote:
Thanks for the review; exactly what I need to hear, I am going to use it mostly hand held.

Charles, once you get it, maybe I give your 400 5.6 a new home.



splathrop
Registered: Feb 27, 2006
Total Posts: 527
Country: United States

Presumably, bird photography is extremely lucrative.

Snark aside, do BIF photographers make money from their images, or is this all done for the love of the art? The images in the review would engender quite a bit of love, it seems to me.



kaycephoto
Registered: Aug 13, 2011
Total Posts: 924
Country: Canada

splathrop wrote:
Presumably, bird photography is extremely lucrative.

Snark aside, do BIF photographers make money from their images, or is this all done for the love of the art? The images in the review would engender quite a bit of love, it seems to me.


i would love to someday make even 1/10th of my photography-related income from birding.. but at this point, i can't see how i could make any $ shooting BIF even if i put 100% of my time into birding, especially working out of a metropolis like Toronto where i highly doubt there are any rare or exotic species left to discover..

maybe someone can correct me & guide me on my way to profitable birding =D

personally though, i find birding to be challenging & peaceful at the same time.. it's one of my favourite "sanity-preserving" photographic subjects atm..



R. Eisenberg
Registered: Jan 21, 2003
Total Posts: 862
Country: France

Fred is right, this is a very fine review.



speedmaster20d
Registered: Oct 20, 2009
Total Posts: 1542
Country: United States

thank you for viewing. Looks like my bandwidth was saturated! It will be fixed in a few hours, sorry for inconvenience.

EDIT: bandwidth issue fixed now



kaycephoto
Registered: Aug 13, 2011
Total Posts: 924
Country: Canada

my assistant: "you can train yourself to get used to a heavier lens, but you can't train the 500mm to be a longer focal length.."

=D this is why i keep her around... 600mkII it is, though i'm sure i'll change my mind a few hundred more times..



Fred Miranda
Registered: Dec 31, 2001
Total Posts: 17712
Country: United States

kaycephoto wrote:
my assistant: "you can train yourself to get used to a heavier lens, but you can't train the 500mm to be a longer focal length.."

=D this is why i keep her around... 600mkII it is, though i'm sure i'll change my mind a few hundred more times..


If I remember correctly, all photos from the review were shot at 1092mm. And let's not forget that the 600 II with the 1.4x III extender increases the weight to over 9 pounds! (approaching the 800mm f/5.6L's weight)
Therefore, those who prefer handholding their super-teles all the time should really consider the 500 II and perhaps a lighter body like the 7D.



rscheffler
Registered: Aug 23, 2005
Total Posts: 4866
Country: Canada

Breitling65 wrote:
fotographiq wrote:
$13,000, good lord.

Enjoy it.

Maybe made in Malaysia version will cost twice less? Lets dream ...


Well, not half the price, but $11,400 CAD from Vistek in Canada... though there *might* be a 2.3% US import duty: http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1136059

I don't believe the price increase is strictly inflationary. There will be less demand for these lenses in part because there are so many of the IS v.1 out in use already. Lower volume = higher unit cost. And the 'pro' end of this market is in stagnation/decline, to the point where it's not uncommon that paying clients haven't changed their rates since 1999 when the IS v.1 was introduced. Also consider the steady decline of stock photo rates. So, if one is being paid in 1999 dollars... but must buy gear in 2012 dollars... makes it a bit difficult.

Nice review BTW! My takeaway from it is I won't bother to update my 600 IS, especially if the only noticeable difference is with the 2x TC, which for my use primarily shooting field sports, is way too long. Actually, I'll probably sell it instead to fund the zoom.



netexpress
Registered: Oct 20, 2004
Total Posts: 2140
Country: United States

Arash, based on all the comments here I think you've just lightened the bank account of many enthusiasts on the FM Canon forum.



Pixel Perfect
Registered: Aug 16, 2004
Total Posts: 19801
Country: Australia

Fred Miranda wrote:
Therefore, those who prefer hand holding their super-teles all the time should really consider the 500 II and perhaps a lighter body like the 7D.

The really have to put the 5D III AF in a crop body and if so that would sway me back to the 500 II. I'll hold off until I find out what's instore on the body front before deciding. 600 II is a must have for the low pixel density cameras like the 1D X and 5D III. On these bodies 600 is the new 500.



1      
2
       3       4       end