Sven Jeppesen wrote:
That's good. But if you could have opinons about the 600 II based on your experience with the 600 mk I, I can't see any problem with others doing the same thing.
I haven't seen anyone in here do the same thing. Do you have an example?
The difference is that those who say they prefer the 800mm have yet to produce a logical reason that makes sense.
Well, how about this reason: the 800 with a 2X extender gives you 1600mm. The only way to get that length with the 600 is with stacked extenders, and you will definitely end up with inferior IQ.
3iron wrote:
As one who is just preparing to buy this lense, this is a most useful thread. Obviously it is not going to change the mind of someone who has one or the other lens and they are both great lenses. Both give adequate IQ when used and are at the very tip of the lens choices.
I have decide on the 600II for the same reason I chose the 300 2.8, they are lighter to carry. The 600 is much lighter than the 800 and the 300 is lighter than the 400. I wish I could have all 4, but then the problem would be to decide which one to bring along.
I can not imagine there is a bad choce here, only what is better for your intended uses.
These are all 4 stellar lenses, and to argue that one is better than the other is a difficult thing to do. However when you add, "for my intended use", the argument becomes viable and useful to those who have not already made their descisions.
For that, I thank you Jim for beginning this thread, and to the rest for sharing their opinions.
Best wishes....Show more →
Thank you! I'm glad you found it helpfull and I think you made the best choice.
I have yet to hear of an 'intended use' where the 800mm beats the 600mm. I'm open to hearing about one if it is logical and makes sense.
BluesWest wrote:
Well, how about this reason: the 800 with a 2X extender gives you 1600mm. The only way to get that length with the 600 is with stacked extenders, and you will definitely end up with inferior IQ.
John
I agree that your reason is logical, but I don't think it is a compelling reason to buy an 800mm over a 600mm II. The loss of AF is too big a handicap particularly for the type of photography I do. I thougtht about this too but discounted it because of the loss of AF. This was not the logical reason I was talking about in my previous post though.
I'm also not convinced the IQ of 800mm + 2X would give better IQ than the 600mm II + stacked converters. I've tried the 800mm with 2x and manual and the IQ sucked, but that was with the 2x version II. Perhaps it would do better with the version III 2x.
You can't stack the version III TCs like you could with the version IIs. It may be possible with an extension ring between, but I haven't tried it.
I have done quite a bit of hand held BIF photography using the old 500mm+stacked version II TCs. The stacked TCs produce suprisingly good image quality, in that combination anyway. AF works as well, but very slowly. Here is an example of an image made with the 500mm version I and stacked version II TCs on a 1D2n body:
JimN wrote:
I haven't seen anyone in here do the same thing. Do you have an example?
So you don't belive anybody in this thread except you have any experince with either the 600 mkI or the 600 mkII lenses
Do you have any example? Because it's rather clear than whatever anybody post here, only your opinions and reasons are worth anything
Ok while you lot have a p!$$ing contest over the differences between one £10,000 lens and another £10,000 lens shall the rest of us get away with using of THESE
BluesWest wrote:
Well, how about this reason: the 800 with a 2X extender gives you 1600mm. The only way to get that length with the 600 is with stacked extenders, and you will definitely end up with inferior IQ.
Ian.Dobinson wrote:
Ok while you lot have a p!$$ing contest over the differences between one £10,000 lens and another £10,000 lens shall the rest of us get away with using of THESE
p.4 #10 · Canon 600mm F4 IS II vs Canon 800mm F5.6
Sven Jeppesen wrote:
So you don't belive anybody in this thread except you have any experince with either the 600 mkI or the 600 mkII lenses
Do you have any example? Because it's rather clear than whatever anybody post here, only your opinions and reasons are worth anything
I'm quite open to listening to the opinions of others that are based on fact or personal experience. Without facts or experience, their opinions must be based on other peoples opinions. If you are going to put forth an argument based on someone elses opinion, I think it should be validated in some way like quoting from an experts article, etc. Otherwise it's just something they read or made up or whatever and we don't know if it is a valid opinion or not.
Please point out one or more posts in this thread where contrary opinions were given that you think I should take note of. Most of the contrary opinions I have seen here seemed to be based on wishes rather then facts or experience.
When someone gives an opinion I agree with, I say I agree and why. When someone gives an opinion I disagree with, I say so and why. Thats how discussions like this work. Do you want me to say I agree when I don't or do you just want to insult me?
p.4 #11 · Canon 600mm F4 IS II vs Canon 800mm F5.6
Ian.Dobinson wrote:
Ok while you lot have a p!$$ing contest over the differences between one £10,000 lens and another £10,000 lens shall the rest of us get away with using of THESE
p.4 #13 · Canon 600mm F4 IS II vs Canon 800mm F5.6
JimN wrote:
Great post, Harry! This really helps people who don't have access to these lenses understand their capabilities for image quality. I prefer real world experience to tests like these, but real world tests are a lot more subjective. In this case, the tests seem to match my experience using these lenses in the field. The mouse over comparision method in the links you provided is a great way to compare the test results.
That same site also shows the 300 f/2.8L II + 2x to be better than the 400 f/2.8L II + 1.4x
p.4 #14 · Canon 600mm F4 IS II vs Canon 800mm F5.6
thanks for the feedbacks Jim! Have been wondering about the 600 II w/ 1.4TC vs 800 5.6 for some time now. Traditional argument had always been prime is sharper than prime with TC at comparable FL at wide open. It appears that the latest 600 IS II has changed that. Yours and Speedmaster20d's reviews seem to be saying the same thing. That the 600 IS II with 1.4TC III is at least on par with the 800 5.6 at wide open in terms of IQ! AMAZING to say the least.
p.4 #16 · Canon 600mm F4 IS II vs Canon 800mm F5.6
FWIW, a birder friend is selling his 800L to buy the 600 II. According to him, his main reasons are: closer MFD, a bit lighter weight, f/4 and more flexibility.
p.4 #18 · Canon 600mm F4 IS II vs Canon 800mm F5.6
Doctorbird wrote:
The availability of the 600II is going to suffer by the increased demand that this thread is gonna create. Sigh!
Perhaps we should stifle it?
Db
Yeah, we just have to dig up that spare $13K sitting at the back of the lounge I guess.
p.4 #20 · Canon 600mm F4 IS II vs Canon 800mm F5.6
It seems to me their is very little supply going on from Canon. It's bad enough the new prices are so insane, but at least they could have the decency to produce the freakin' lenses in more than what appears to be 2-3 lenses a month.
