Posted by Rob Chace on December 27, 2007 at 1:22 PM
Hi all & merry xmas.
I am going to change my Sigma 500mm f4.5 during the next year for a 500 or 600mm stabilised lens. What i would like to know is if any one has any regrets about going for a 600mm over a 500? Has anyone changed?
Regards Rob.
No, I had a 600mm (nicked), bought a 500mm (cause it was lighter), then moved back to a 600mm because I wanted the range back. I shoot FF
Pros = Range, stability, which for small birds in the UK is helpful
Cons = Bigger, heavier, which means traveling (air) is problematic. Its additional weight is not an issue for me.
But then I have a 300mm F2.8 which I will use witha 1.4 if I need to get higher mags for less weight. I do wish Canon would bring out a 1.7 converter
T
T
Posted by Brian McGeough on December 27, 2007 at 2:01 PM
I switched from the Sigma 500 to the canon 600mm non IS, only cons for me size and weight but don't regret it one second. See here for real world size difference.
http://www.pbase.com/bmcgeough/image/70207600
Brian
Posted by Alan Bryant on December 27, 2007 at 2:09 PM
I thought my 500 was big, but that 600 must be HUGE
Brian nice cloning
Posted by Paul Ashton on December 27, 2007 at 2:40 PM
I have a 500mm. It's very sharp and it's very heavy if you're carrying it around all day.
Assuming that to get a reasonable close-up of a garden bird with a 500mm you need to be within 20ft then you would need to get within 24ft with a 600mm. In my opinion if you can get within 24ft you can get within 20ft. I will definitely be sticking to a 500mm
To pick up on Pauls point. The min focusing distance for the 600mm is 5.5m which it produces a mag of 0.12, the minmum focus of the 500mm is 4.5m and the same mag of 0.12. Hence you have to close a further meter, which may not sound far, to get the subject the same size - this can, at times, be problematic. Beyond 5.5m the subject will always be 20% bigger in the frame with a 600mm. Its all about the risk of disturbance verses getting the shot correct in camera - but that said its also about what you are used to.. I always had a 600mm hence in my mind I always 'set up' for it so when I moved back to a FF camera with the 500mm I was always to far away, so I switched back as soon as a reasonable opportunity arose.
If you intend travelling abroad - buy the 500mm
Posted by Rob Howard on December 27, 2007 at 4:18 PM
Hi Rob,
I own the older non IS 600mm, this is a fair "lump" of glass, that once you are used to using is easily manageable. I have had a play with a 500mm IS and to me is a LOT lighter, but as said above not as much reach, either way you go I don't think you will be dissapointed getting either of these quality bits of glass.
Regards
Rob
Posted by Elliott Neep on December 27, 2007 at 4:58 PM
Hi Rob,
The 500 is the industry standard wildlife lens. After a lot of deliberation between the 500 & 600, I recently invested in a Canon 600 IS.
Yes it is a big lens. When I first saw the case I really wondered what I had bought. Getting it out of the box was like lifting out an AmSAT missile launcher! I took it to Kenya this September and shot 90% of my images with it. It was brilliant. With a prol SLR on the end, it is surprisingly well-balanced for hand-holding (although you can't do it for more than a couple of mins). The size was not an issue for travelling. I store it in a LowePro LensTrekker 600 which is within the allowed dimensions for a bag. The lens hood is so big and conspicuous that tourists in the Mara were photographing me instead of a pack of lions in front of them!
It is arm-numbingly heavy and attached to a tripod and slung over the shoulder it is quite crippling. Would I change it for a 500? Never! The lens is brilliantly sharp and I happily bare the weight for the extra reach. You get used to the weight and shear size quite quickly. Most of my photography is from the car or other hide and for this king of work it is perfect. You definitely want a fluide or gimbal head for it.
Hi
I had a 600 mm f4 before, it was a cracking lens...I got rid of it because it is TO HEAVY TO CARRY.....I know have a 500mm....I would NEVER go back to the 600mm
Frederic
Posted by Rob Chace on December 28, 2007 at 5:40 AM
Thanks to all for your replies.
Tom, interesting to hear you went back to a 600mm. I did have a feeling that there would not be too many regrets. Frederic, the only reason you changed was the weight issue? otherwise loved it?
Elliot, I have a 1548 Gitzo already & will be swapping the ball head & sidekick for a full gimbal. I dont think the weight will be too much of an issue with me, as i am a bit of a lump myself!
Just for the record i will be buying a Nikon lens, not Canon & nailing a D2x to it. Does any one know if the 600mm Nikkor will fit into a lens trekker 600 with the body attached?
Hi Rob
Yes the weight is just too much! I have been on top of cairngorm with mine severall time and it is a B....d to carry arround! When you travel it is also a big problem.... otherwise it is a very good lens or and I almost forgot....hand holding the mother is very difficult and you will end up like popeye!
Regards
Frederic
Posted by Colin Pickett on December 28, 2007 at 6:12 AM
Hi Rob
I have the Nikon 600mm + a D3 and it fits fine in the LT600. Have you considered the 400 F2.8 with the 1.4, 1.7 and 2x converters it could be more versatile as both lenses are about the same size, you would then have a 400 F2.8, 560 F4, 680 F5 and a 800 F5.6. I recently tried the newer VR 400 when I picked up my D3 and very nearly walked out with it. You might want to hire one for a week also before you commit.
Regards
Posted by Mike Smith on December 28, 2007 at 6:45 AM
Another consideration for you to ponder and throw into the equation - moving from 500mm to 600mm on a full size system is actually quite a big step up in size and weight and will probably also require you to beef up your existing tripod system, so potentially even more weight to carry around.
You need to take some time and think over precisiely what you want from your system going forward, Yes the big CaNikon 600mm and Sigmonster 800mm lenses are optically superb performers, but at the price of total kit weight - you cannot neglect the tripod aspect otherwise you are wasting your time and money.
I reached the same decision point a couple of years ago when considering upgrading my 500 f4.5 to a 500 F4 which meant buying a larger and heavier lens. As most of my nature photography centres around small bird photography, I really hankered for the 600mm reach as well ie an even bigger and heavier lens and bigger heavier tripod and head, but I did not want to carry such a huge system about - Personally I was finding my existing Pro spec Canon gear was becoming a chore to use never mind upping the size and weight - exactly like Frederic.
There is a smaller lighter alternative in the Oly E- 4/3rds system, but it does come at a price, no 10 Frames Per Second (FPS) bodies, reduced AF points and ISO performance is limiting at times. That said the two new bodies, the E-510 and E-3, are now serious contenders to Canon and Nikon in most other performance respects as they bring/ introduce image stabilisation to the Oly lens range and their ISO performance is vastly improved over the older E-system bodies.
Just to give you the alternative view, I reckon my Oly E 300mm system (600mm equivelence) has saved me carting around somewhere between 7 and 12 lbs in weight to an equivelent full kit 600mm system because the sum of parts needed for the entire system is smaller and lighter.
But that comes at a price: 4FPS in CAF mode and 9 AF points on the E-3 body or 3 FPS in CAF mode and 3 AF points on the E-510 compared to 5 to 10 FPS and 45 AF points on the pro spec Canon bodies depending on whether you are a D or Ds series user
Personally shedding kit weight has become my over riding factor compared to FPS and number of AF points. I have now got to a 600mm equivelence system that I wanted for small bird photography, but not in a way most people would have considered.
Posted by Rob Chace on December 28, 2007 at 10:31 AM
Hi Mike,
I already own a tripod capable of taking the 600mm in the Gitzo 1548 as already mentioned in my last answer. I also have already got a Nikon D2x & various other lenses, so swapping systems even if i wanted to is a no go. I am more than happy staying with Nikon & only wanted to know if people regretted the fact that they had bought a 600mm over a 500. (I have more or less made up my mind on the 600 but just wanted a bit of reassurance). Incidently, with a 1.5x crop factor of the D2x, i have the equivalent angle of view of a 900mm f4 lens. Weight is not really an issue as i have been carrying far more weight before now. I will have to make up my mind what i want to take before hand, instead of taking it all just in case.
Regards Rob.
Posted by Paul Everett on December 28, 2007 at 11:23 AM
All this blokey argument over minutiae always makes me smile . Both are great lenses, the 500 is a little more easily portable, so if thats important go for that one. If it was my decision I would take the 500 for that reason and that I could use t/c's if I needed more reach.
Paul
Posted by Mike Smith on December 28, 2007 at 3:33 PM
Rob
Don't forget to factor in a decent tripod leveller to go with the full wimberley, the Gitzo ball leveller is now discontinued and weighed 1.2Kgs or something, Acratech now make a lighter unit which is supposed to be very good.
The levellers are a godsend for setting up a level for the panning function needed with the Gimbal systems
Posted by Rob Chace on December 28, 2007 at 4:56 PM
Hi again Mike,
Must admit.... hadnt thought of one of those!
Posted by eric weight on December 29, 2007 at 2:17 AM
I know nothing about either of these lenses, but I am making notes, because one day.......
Paul Everett makes a point there, any thread about kit gets a much greater response than a picture does; are we missing the point a bit? Boys and their toys, eh!
Mind you it's something to keep the enthusiasm up when you can't get out and I'm just the same myself, I always make a beeline for these threads.
Discussion
17 repliesI am going to change my Sigma 500mm f4.5 during the next year for a 500 or 600mm stabilised lens. What i would like to know is if any one has any regrets about going for a 600mm over a 500? Has anyone changed?
Regards Rob.
Pros = Range, stability, which for small birds in the UK is helpful
Cons = Bigger, heavier, which means traveling (air) is problematic. Its additional weight is not an issue for me.
But then I have a 300mm F2.8 which I will use witha 1.4 if I need to get higher mags for less weight. I do wish Canon would bring out a 1.7 converter
T
T
http://www.pbase.com/bmcgeough/image/70207600
Brian
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Images/Other/Canon-500mm-600mm-Super-Telephoto-Lenses.jpg
and here
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Images/Other/Canon-500mm-600mm-Lens-Comparison.jpg
I thought my 500 was big, but that 600 must be HUGE
Brian nice cloning
Assuming that to get a reasonable close-up of a garden bird with a 500mm you need to be within 20ft then you would need to get within 24ft with a 600mm. In my opinion if you can get within 24ft you can get within 20ft. I will definitely be sticking to a 500mm
To pick up on Pauls point. The min focusing distance for the 600mm is 5.5m which it produces a mag of 0.12, the minmum focus of the 500mm is 4.5m and the same mag of 0.12. Hence you have to close a further meter, which may not sound far, to get the subject the same size - this can, at times, be problematic. Beyond 5.5m the subject will always be 20% bigger in the frame with a 600mm. Its all about the risk of disturbance verses getting the shot correct in camera - but that said its also about what you are used to.. I always had a 600mm hence in my mind I always 'set up' for it so when I moved back to a FF camera with the 500mm I was always to far away, so I switched back as soon as a reasonable opportunity arose.
If you intend travelling abroad - buy the 500mm
I own the older non IS 600mm, this is a fair "lump" of glass, that once you are used to using is easily manageable. I have had a play with a 500mm IS and to me is a LOT lighter, but as said above not as much reach, either way you go I don't think you will be dissapointed getting either of these quality bits of glass.
Regards
Rob
The 500 is the industry standard wildlife lens. After a lot of deliberation between the 500 & 600, I recently invested in a Canon 600 IS.
Yes it is a big lens. When I first saw the case I really wondered what I had bought. Getting it out of the box was like lifting out an AmSAT missile launcher! I took it to Kenya this September and shot 90% of my images with it. It was brilliant. With a prol SLR on the end, it is surprisingly well-balanced for hand-holding (although you can't do it for more than a couple of mins). The size was not an issue for travelling. I store it in a LowePro LensTrekker 600 which is within the allowed dimensions for a bag. The lens hood is so big and conspicuous that tourists in the Mara were photographing me instead of a pack of lions in front of them!
It is arm-numbingly heavy and attached to a tripod and slung over the shoulder it is quite crippling. Would I change it for a 500? Never! The lens is brilliantly sharp and I happily bare the weight for the extra reach. You get used to the weight and shear size quite quickly. Most of my photography is from the car or other hide and for this king of work it is perfect. You definitely want a fluide or gimbal head for it.
I had a 600 mm f4 before, it was a cracking lens...I got rid of it because it is TO HEAVY TO CARRY.....I know have a 500mm....I would NEVER go back to the 600mm
Frederic
Tom, interesting to hear you went back to a 600mm. I did have a feeling that there would not be too many regrets. Frederic, the only reason you changed was the weight issue? otherwise loved it?
Elliot, I have a 1548 Gitzo already & will be swapping the ball head & sidekick for a full gimbal. I dont think the weight will be too much of an issue with me, as i am a bit of a lump myself!
Just for the record i will be buying a Nikon lens, not Canon & nailing a D2x to it. Does any one know if the 600mm Nikkor will fit into a lens trekker 600 with the body attached?
Yes the weight is just too much! I have been on top of cairngorm with mine severall time and it is a B....d to carry arround! When you travel it is also a big problem.... otherwise it is a very good lens or and I almost forgot....hand holding the mother is very difficult and you will end up like popeye!
Regards
Frederic
I have the Nikon 600mm + a D3 and it fits fine in the LT600. Have you considered the 400 F2.8 with the 1.4, 1.7 and 2x converters it could be more versatile as both lenses are about the same size, you would then have a 400 F2.8, 560 F4, 680 F5 and a 800 F5.6. I recently tried the newer VR 400 when I picked up my D3 and very nearly walked out with it. You might want to hire one for a week also before you commit.
Regards
You need to take some time and think over precisiely what you want from your system going forward, Yes the big CaNikon 600mm and Sigmonster 800mm lenses are optically superb performers, but at the price of total kit weight - you cannot neglect the tripod aspect otherwise you are wasting your time and money.
I reached the same decision point a couple of years ago when considering upgrading my 500 f4.5 to a 500 F4 which meant buying a larger and heavier lens. As most of my nature photography centres around small bird photography, I really hankered for the 600mm reach as well ie an even bigger and heavier lens and bigger heavier tripod and head, but I did not want to carry such a huge system about - Personally I was finding my existing Pro spec Canon gear was becoming a chore to use never mind upping the size and weight - exactly like Frederic.
There is a smaller lighter alternative in the Oly E- 4/3rds system, but it does come at a price, no 10 Frames Per Second (FPS) bodies, reduced AF points and ISO performance is limiting at times. That said the two new bodies, the E-510 and E-3, are now serious contenders to Canon and Nikon in most other performance respects as they bring/ introduce image stabilisation to the Oly lens range and their ISO performance is vastly improved over the older E-system bodies.
Just to give you the alternative view, I reckon my Oly E 300mm system (600mm equivelence) has saved me carting around somewhere between 7 and 12 lbs in weight to an equivelent full kit 600mm system because the sum of parts needed for the entire system is smaller and lighter.
But that comes at a price: 4FPS in CAF mode and 9 AF points on the E-3 body or 3 FPS in CAF mode and 3 AF points on the E-510 compared to 5 to 10 FPS and 45 AF points on the pro spec Canon bodies depending on whether you are a D or Ds series user
Personally shedding kit weight has become my over riding factor compared to FPS and number of AF points. I have now got to a 600mm equivelence system that I wanted for small bird photography, but not in a way most people would have considered.
I already own a tripod capable of taking the 600mm in the Gitzo 1548 as already mentioned in my last answer. I also have already got a Nikon D2x & various other lenses, so swapping systems even if i wanted to is a no go. I am more than happy staying with Nikon & only wanted to know if people regretted the fact that they had bought a 600mm over a 500. (I have more or less made up my mind on the 600 but just wanted a bit of reassurance). Incidently, with a 1.5x crop factor of the D2x, i have the equivalent angle of view of a 900mm f4 lens. Weight is not really an issue as i have been carrying far more weight before now. I will have to make up my mind what i want to take before hand, instead of taking it all just in case.
Regards Rob.
Paul
Don't forget to factor in a decent tripod leveller to go with the full wimberley, the Gitzo ball leveller is now discontinued and weighed 1.2Kgs or something, Acratech now make a lighter unit which is supposed to be very good.
The levellers are a godsend for setting up a level for the panning function needed with the Gimbal systems
Must admit.... hadnt thought of one of those!
Paul Everett makes a point there, any thread about kit gets a much greater response than a picture does; are we missing the point a bit? Boys and their toys, eh!
Mind you it's something to keep the enthusiasm up when you can't get out and I'm just the same myself, I always make a beeline for these threads.