p.2 #1 · Moving from ef 500 f/4 L IS II to RF 600 f/4
OP, the IS II may be Canons sharpest 600 ever but to say the IQ from any of the newer versions is bad would be negligent. The Rf 600 is stellar and still stellar with a 1.4 tc.
It's splitting hairs when comparing any of the big whites. Same goes for Nikon super teles.
The IS III and Rf versions are also considerably easier to handle than the IS II
p.2 #2 · Moving from ef 500 f/4 L IS II to RF 600 f/4
I moved from the EF500 IS to the EF600II and the 600 weighed about the same as the EF500. The 600II is such a beautiful lens that I did not even consider version III.
I am not even considering the RF600 because I am waiting for the RF600II which should be built specifically for the R bodies, hopefully with the 1.4x included and a bit lighter.
I say save your monies and wait for the newer version of the 600 to hit the streets. That is what I am doing.
With that said, I did buy the RF400 2.8 and I will say that this is the most versatile lens in my opinion and very handholdable.
p.2 #3 · Moving from ef 500 f/4 L IS II to RF 600 f/4
rscheffler wrote:
If you can, unbox it in the store and do a full inspection, especially the front element. There was a report from one member a couple years ago of abnormally high amounts of dust behind the front element of a couple copies he received, but I have not heard anything recently.
Also, please be careful with cleaning the front element. As you may know, it has a fluorine coating to repel water and oil, just like your 500/4 v2. This coating is not the most durable (based on some threads here and comments by Roger Cicala from Lens Rentals many years ago). If by chance you nick the front element leaving a pinpoint mark in the coating, resist the urge to 'clean' it off. There was another thread here where a member ended up accidentally removing a significant portion of the fluorine coating off the front element and had to have it replaced (the front element) by Canon. This coating has become fairly common on Canon's higher-end lenses and is a definite tradeoff. From my experience using these lenses in bad weather (snow storms, heavy rain, of course with a rain cover) is that the front element remain surprisingly unaffected (clean). But the tradeoff is they can be sensitive to cleaning. So far I've usually only dry cleaned them because the fluorine coating doesn't hold onto oils and debris the way non-fluorine-coated lenses can. I'd be cautious about using liquids.
p.2 #5 · Moving from ef 500 f/4 L IS II to RF 600 f/4
Methodical wrote:
I moved from the EF500 IS to the EF600II and the 600 weighed about the same as the EF500. The 600II is such a beautiful lens that I did not even consider version III.
I am not even considering the RF600 because I am waiting for the RF600II which should be built specifically for the R bodies, hopefully with the 1.4x included and a bit lighter.
I say save your monies and wait for the newer version of the 600 to hit the streets. That is what I am doing.
With that said, I did buy the RF400 2.8 and I will say that this is the most versatile lens in my opinion and very handholdable....Show more →
Only downside is that will be a $16k lens for sure. Very nice used RF versions can be had for 7-8k.
p.2 #6 · Moving from ef 500 f/4 L IS II to RF 600 f/4
Methodical wrote:
Did Roger suggest what to use and how to clean the lens?
I don’t recall off hand. Lens Rentals have made blog posts about lens cleaning, IIRC. So maybe search there. Or send them an email/message for advice specifically for fluorine coated lenses. If they have some tips, please share here!
My approach has been to touch fluorine coated surfaces as little as possible, just blowing off whatever is loose and occasionally using a dry microfibre cloth. I think I’ve also used Residual Oil Remover liquid with Kimwipes. But I’ve found that almost nothing really sticks to this coating and a dry microfibre cloth is very effective at lifting off finger oils, etc.
The key is probably minimizing putting pressure on the coating whenever cleaning it.
p.2 #7 · Moving from ef 500 f/4 L IS II to RF 600 f/4
I'm still using the 500 f/4L IS II and for the most part I love the lens. The only things I've noticed when using it on the R5/II is that the AF and IS takes a few seconds to "stabilize" resulting in a "clunky" shifting motion. Until I half press the shutter a few times, the lens stops making clunky motion and smooths out. With my RF 100-500L I don't have this. Not sure if there is an issue with my copy or if it's just the effect of adapting an EF lens to RF. Regardless of that, with the right atmospheric conditions it's sharp and I'm happy to use it with both TC's for aviation and moon shots. I've also contemplated moving to a 600mm III or RF 600 but the change is very expensive and I am intrigued to see what this RF 300-600L will bring to the table. The 300-600 being 5.6 on the end is disappointing but the versatility and size may win me over. Travelling on airplanes with the 500mm is doable but definitely inconvenient and the 600mm is even worse.
Here's a photo with the 500 II + 1.4x that wouldn't be possible with my 100-500L.
p.2 #8 · Moving from ef 500 f/4 L IS II to RF 600 f/4
Jan Jasinski wrote:
I'm still using the 500 f/4L IS II and for the most part I love the lens. The only things I've noticed when using it on the R5/II is that the AF and IS takes a few seconds to "stabilize" resulting in a "clunky" shifting motion. Until I half press the shutter a few times, the lens stops making clunky motion and smooths out. With my RF 100-500L I don't have this. Not sure if there is an issue with my copy or if it's just the effect of adapting an EF lens to RF. Regardless of that, with the right atmospheric conditions it's sharp and I'm happy to use it with both TC's for aviation and moon shots. I've also contemplated moving to a 600mm III or RF 600 but the change is very expensive and I am intrigued to see what this RF 300-600L will bring to the table. The 300-600 being 5.6 on the end is disappointing but the versatility and size may win me over. Travelling on airplanes with the 500mm is doable but definitely inconvenient and the 600mm is even worse....Show more →
I see the same IS behaviour with my 200-400 and think it was also like that on DSLRs. My feeling is it’s just how that era of IS operates. IS in RF lenses seems better in this regard, at least if it’s an RF-specific design. I recently used an RF 600/4 and noticed it still benefited from a couple seconds for IS to settle down.
p.2 #9 · Moving from ef 500 f/4 L IS II to RF 600 f/4
IQ wise you cannot really go wrong with any of these lenses, it is good enough in all situations once you understand what they excel at.
It comes down to what FL you want and ergonomics. I had the 500II, trade it for RF400 2.8, and miss the 500 often enough. It did remarkable at 700 5.6 and plenty good at 1000 f8; IMO the best flexibility option for really long range glass. Plus having ability to use adapter w/ drop in filters made it even more appealing to reuse CPL/ND across multiple EF glass.
If you need 600mm F4 & 840 F5.6, get the 600. 1200 is a bit too long in all situations that I deal with,, but I do miss having 1000mm vs 800 that I have now.
p.2 #10 · Moving from ef 500 f/4 L IS II to RF 600 f/4
rscheffler wrote:
I don’t recall off hand. Lens Rentals have made blog posts about lens cleaning, IIRC. So maybe search there. Or send them an email/message for advice specifically for fluorine coated lenses. If they have some tips, please share here!
My approach has been to touch fluorine coated surfaces as little as possible, just blowing off whatever is loose and occasionally using a dry microfibre cloth. I think I’ve also used Residual Oil Remover liquid with Kimwipes. But I’ve found that almost nothing really sticks to this coating and a dry microfibre cloth is very effective at lifting off finger oils, etc.
The key is probably minimizing putting pressure on the coating whenever cleaning it. ...Show more →
I was just curious if Roger made any suggestions, but I won't be researching it though because I have my own cleaning method that has worked and never caused any issues as detailed below.
I also use ROR, but I never use a dry cloth to avoid any potential micro scratches from dust that may be on the lens. I always use ROR to lift and hold any potential dust off the lens before I wipe with microfiber clothes. I've tried those wipes but they always leave residue so those are a no go for me; ROR and one of my car detailing microfibers made for glass.
p.2 #12 · Moving from ef 500 f/4 L IS II to RF 600 f/4
David83 wrote:
Only downside is that will be a $16k lens for sure. Very nice used RF versions can be had for 7-8k.
I am not interested in a used RF600.
If the new RF600 is built from the ground up, specific for the R series, has the 1.4x, sharp and lighter (sure it will be lighter than my 600II), I am ready. That's why I am not wasting my coins on any other piece of equipment. That will be my next big lens purchase and if it meets my expectations, I may get rid of the 600II.
p.2 #13 · Moving from ef 500 f/4 L IS II to RF 600 f/4
Methodical wrote:
I am not interested in a used RF600.
If the new RF600 is built from the ground up, specific for the R series, has the 1.4x, sharp and lighter (sure it will be lighter than my 600II), I am ready. That's why I am not wasting my coins on any other piece of equipment. That will be my next big lens purchase and if it meets my expectations, I may get rid of the 600II.
I hear ya! I have both the RF400/600 and both of Nikons 400/600 TC lenses. I also had the 600 II back in the day. There's so little difference in quality between them all. The Nikon 1.4 TC lenes though, are easily the best super teles ever made from a versatility standpoint. Nikon hit back to back homers with them. I have no doubts Canons new ones will be just as good in both size and weight as well. The Z600 TC is a modern marvel. It's considerably shorter than the Canon and just about the same weight! I spend almost all of the spring Shad run wading the river shooting Ospreys, so I'm also anxious for a RF 600 TC lens.
p.2 #14 · Moving from ef 500 f/4 L IS II to RF 600 f/4
David83 wrote:
I hear ya! I have both the RF400/600 and both of Nikons 400/600 TC lenses. I also had the 600 II back in the day. There's so little difference in quality between them all. The Nikon 1.4 TC lenes though, are easily the best super teles ever made from a versatility standpoint. Nikon hit back to back homers with them. I have no doubts Canons new ones will be just as good in both size and weight as well. The Z600 TC is a modern marvel. It's considerably shorter than the Canon and just about the same weight! I spend almost all of the spring Shad run wading the river shooting Ospreys, so I'm also anxious for a RF 600 TC lens. ...Show more →
p.2 #15 · Moving from ef 500 f/4 L IS II to RF 600 f/4
Methodical wrote:
I moved from the EF500 IS to the EF600II and the 600 weighed about the same as the EF500. The 600II is such a beautiful lens that I did not even consider version III.
I am not even considering the RF600 because I am waiting for the RF600II which should be built specifically for the R bodies, hopefully with the 1.4x included and a bit lighter.
I say save your monies and wait for the newer version of the 600 to hit the streets. That is what I am doing.
With that said, I did buy the RF400 2.8 and I will say that this is the most versatile lens in my opinion and very handholdable....Show more →
Same here but I went from the EF500 IS to the EF 500 II. I just stopped buying when they stopped innovating. If they hit it out of the ballpark again I may bite. But, as of now no money goes to Canon. Only reason I have not moved to Nikon is because the 500II is such a gem. If it dies then I may move on if Canon cannot keep up.
