PetKal wrote:
Pareng Romy, knowing a bit about what you like to photograph, I think you should have ordered 600 II and the set of MkIII TCs now, for maximum reach at maximum IQ, and still only moderately heavy.
I do not believe 600 f/4 DO will materialize soon at all, and instead we should see an early 800 f/5.6 DO which I'd expect to be quite pricey.
For those times when you do not feel like lugging anything heavy, why not get 100-400 II ?
Interesting theory about the 800 DO. Why would Canon show a working 600 DO and a mockup of the final casing last month if they were planning on releasing an 800 DO first?? I would assume we would see the 600 DO before any possible 800DO just because Canon has now show us that they are going to make it sometime. Anyways, Joe Todd has me down for the first one no matter what
Liquidstone wrote:
One more question (hope you don't mind ):
With a series II f/4 big white + 1.4x TC III, is the following ranking in AI servo speed correct?
1Dx >7D MII>1DMIV/5D3
Romy
Correct except for I am not sure how the 7D2 compares with the 1D4, I have long sold all of my 1D4 bodies and I am not inclined to speculate about something that I don't have in my hands to measure.
If you really want to excel in flight photography my suggestion is to get a 1DX and a 600 II.
speedmaster20d wrote:
Correct except for I am not sure how the 7D2 compares with the 1D4, I have long sold all of my 1D4 bodies and I am not inclined to comment about something that I don't own and have in my hands to check.
If you really want to excel in flight photography my suggestion is to get a 1DX and a 600 II.
best
Thanks again for your thoughts, Arash. While the 1Dx might be the best BIF body on the planet currently, I'm a bigger fan of the 5D3/7D2 body design and UI. Before the 1Dx, excellent (enlargeable to as big as 24"x36") BIFs were being captured by countless folks, you included, using the 1DIV and its earlier iterations. While the 7D2's AF might not be as good as the 1Dx, I have first hand experience that it is better than my 1D4/5D3.
PetKal wrote:
Pareng Romy, knowing a bit about what you like to photograph, I think you should have ordered 600 II and the set of MkIII TCs now, for maximum reach at maximum IQ, and still only moderately heavy.
Pete, that might be true for me about a decade ago, when I was so gung-ho on maximum reach that I tried to make the Sigmonster (sans stabilizer) work as my main birding lens. Amazing how getting older changes one's perspective. I've used the 600 II and it's challenging to handle when shooting from inside a vehicle, plus its bulk is a nightmare when flying short haul in medium sized planes with economy seats.
Schlotkins wrote:
A 300 2.8 IS is about 2.2 times the weight of the 300 f4 IS. So, using that ratio, a 800 4 would be 2.2 times the weight of the 800 5.6. Let's say Canon could make that 9lbs using traditional elements, that would mean a f4 800mm would be just about 20 pounds.
Using DO technology, I'm guessing it would still be 14-15 lbs.
Chris
For me, a 14 - 15 lb 800 f4 DO is still reasonably transportable, especially in situations when one doesn't have to hike very far (or if shooting from a vehicle), unlike the impossibly heavy Sigma 200-500 f/2.8.
I'm already salivating about the amazing 1120 f/5.6 and 1600 f/8 reach, with IS and AF. That would make the 1200 f/5.6 less legendary.
Liquidstone wrote:
Amazing how getting older changes one's perspective..
Does "getting older" mean being 50 years of age ?
I am way ahead of you in years, also physically handicapped in a few ways, and I still use lenses such as 600 II and 400 II handheld 3-5 hours every day because I can......no rest for the wicked..
Be that as it may, I hope your new gear acquisition works out to your full satisfaction.
Thorough, informative review. I love my 400mm DO II but have limited it to the 1.4x III extender. I'll have to give it a try with the 2x III on the 1DMk IV and 7D II.
As much as I love my 400DOii I'm headed to Costa Rica in a months time and the 300 2.8 IS II is going in its stead. Right or wrong my thinking is that 2.8 will pay dividend in the shadows. Also taking the 100-400ii for incidentals along the way.
Just contributing more data points to this thread (after shooting over 4T images of wild birds, mostly in flight, with the lens ):
1. Optics - even with the tiny pixels of the 7D MII, the 400 DO II is critically sharp wide open at 400 mm and 560 mm (with a 1.4x III). At 800 mm (with a 2x III) it's still very decent wide open, and I don't see a need to stop down except if I want a broader DOF. When bare, my 400 DO II is as sharp or very nearly as sharp as my excellent 400 2.8 IS; the same comparison holds true if a 1.4x III is mounted on either lens.
2. AF (with the 7D MII) - insanely fast at 400 mm, and still very fast at 560 mm (with a 1.4x III). I've shot a series of 27 frames at a raptor diving for fish (posted in this thread) and I got a 100% in-focus rate. However, AF speed slows down with a 2x III and for me it's tough to use at fast BIFs at that length and Av (f/8). For static birds, or BIFs with plain BGs, the AF speed at 800 mm is fast enough.
3. Weight - definitely handholdable for me for extended BIF shooting sessions. Very convenient to handle as well when shooting from a vehicle because of its compact size.
Having lugged 13+ lbs behemoths (Sigmonster and 400 2.8 IS) while birding, the 400 DO II is a dream-come-true, all-around birding lens for me - very light, compact, long enough, very sharp and insanely fast focusing.
Here are some images in my gallery taken with the 7D MII, 400 DO II and 1.4x or 2x III TCs:
Liquidstone wrote:
Just contributing more data points to this thread (after shooting over 4T images of wild birds, mostly in flight, with the lens ):
1. Optics - even with the tiny pixels of the 7D MII, the 400 DO II is critically sharp wide open at 400 mm and 560 mm (with a 1.4x III). At 800 mm (with a 2x III) it's still very decent wide open, and I don't see a need to stop down except if I want a broader DOF. When bare, my 400 DO II is as sharp or very nearly as sharp as my excellent 400 2.8 IS; the same comparison holds true if a 1.4x III is mounted on either lens.
2. AF (with the 7D MII) - insanely fast at 400 mm, and still very fast at 560 mm (with a 1.4x III). I've shot a series of 27 frames at a raptor diving for fish (posted in this thread) and I got a 100% in-focus rate. However, AF speed slows down with a 2x III and for me it's tough to use at fast BIFs at that length and Av (f/8). For static birds, or BIFs with plain BGs, the AF speed at 800 mm is fast enough.
3. Weight - definitely handholdable for me for extended BIF shooting sessions. Very convenient to handle as well when shooting from a vehicle because of its compact size.
Having lugged 13+ lbs behemoths (Sigmonster and 400 2.8 IS) while birding, the 400 DO II is a dream-come-true, all-around birding lens for me - very light, compact, long enough, very sharp and insanely fast focusing.
Here are some images in my gallery taken with the 7D MII, 400 DO II and 1.4x or 2x III TCs:
I agree with you. I think your points hit the nail on the head perfectly as far as the 400 is concerned. I do have one question. "4T images"? Four Trillion images?
Iwas joeking wrote:
I agree with you. I think your points hit the nail on the head perfectly as far as the 400 is concerned. I do have one question. "4T images"? Four Trillion images?
Lol... I should have written "4K".
IIRC, the 7DII's shutter is rated at 200K, while my old 7D is at 150K. I've only worn out a shutter twice - my 300D's and my 1DII's (which prematurely gave way at 10K clicks and was replaced under warranty). I'd think wearing out a shutter is no longer a big concern these days (except perhaps for high volume shooters who take thousands of frames per session, many sessions a week). GAS for new DSLRs almost always prevails before an old body's shutter is due to retire.
I picked up a copy of the 400mm DO II lens a few months ago. I have used it everyday for the last few months.
Sharp as a tack even with T.C.'s. Amazing IS. It is so light and easy to use. For BIF it is really good.
But, I have put it aside at this point, much preferring the heaver 500MM II lens.
The OOF background on the DO can rear it ugly head and is very hard to fix.
Color fringing is much worse than my 500mm lens.
The all around image quality I get withe the 500mm lens is worth the extra weight IMO.
speedmaster20d wrote:
I am curios, where did you see he compare the two and say they were equal in servo drive speed?
The main factor that determines servo drive speed is the voltage of the battery pack, which is higher for 1D (11.2V) vs. 7D/5D series (7V). Actually Chuck also pointed out this fact in one of my interviews several years ago : http://www.arihazeghiphotography.com/AH_CW_interview/
If you own a 1DX and a 7D2 it is also easy to compare them side by side and come to the same conclusion.
Would a battery grip added to the 7DII increase the voltage
gkinard1952 wrote:
I picked up a copy of the 400mm DO II lens a few months ago. I have used it everyday for the last few months.
Sharp as a tack even with T.C.'s. Amazing IS. It is so light and easy to use. For BIF it is really good.
But, I have put it aside at this point, much preferring the heaver 500MM II lens.
The OOF background on the DO can rear it ugly head and is very hard to fix.
Color fringing is much worse than my 500mm lens.
The all around image quality I get withe the 500mm lens is worth the extra weight IMO.
My lens doesn't have color fringing or BG issues, it performs exactly as my 600 II and 500 II. I suggest you send your lens and TC's to Canon for evaluation. either the lens or your TC's could be defective.
Note that the pronounced specular highlights in the old lens came from the air gap between the DO elements that causes scattering, with the MKII lens the DO elements are bonded so this issue doesn't exist anymore.
speedmaster20d wrote:
My lens doesn't have color fringing or BG issues, it performs exactly as my 600 II and 500 II. I suggest you send your lens and TC's to Canon for evaluation. either the lens or your TC's could be defective.
Note that the pronounced specular highlights in the old lens came from the air gap between the DO elements that causes scattering, with the MKII lens the DO elements are bonded so this issue doesn't exist anymore.
I just happen to be close to a Canon repair center. I will take it too them and see what they say?
But, I do not have any problems with my 300 II or my 500II, only with the new DO II lens. So I have my doubts.
):