500 vs 800

[Lex Franks]

Being in the very fotunate position of owning both a 500 f/4 and 800 f/5.6 I was wondering whether the more experienced members of the forum thought that the 500 was now redundant. We all seek extra length most of the time but does the 800 get you too close at times thus justifying the shorter reach of the 500? Not being a professional I can't see myself lugging two heavy bits of glass around wherever I go.

[Axel Hildebrandt]

Welcome to BPN, Lex! I think it's great to have both lenses. The 500 is handholdable for birds in flight whereas the 800 is great if you can't easily get close to the subject. Depending on where you live, some birds can be quite tame or simply too large for the 800. I think I would keep both lenses.

[Lex Franks]

Thanks for the promt reply Axel. That was what I was hoping to hear. The only problem is trying to convince my wife that they are both the same lens.

Kind Regards
Lex

[Alfred Forns]

Lex I think even the 500 and 600 are complementing lenses not competing !!! With the 800 is even more so !!

Having both is ideal and if I only one could be had would pick the 500 !!! Imagine you could use the 800 with three bodies ... full frame, 1.3X and 1.6X ... then you reach for a TC :)

...............Big Warm Welcome !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Robert Amoruso]

Artie has already mentioned (I believe in his bulletin and recently when I talked to him) that he felt the 500mm and 800mm are complimentary to each other which I agree with. Using a 600mm now, I do find instances that the 500mm would be better suited as well as the 800mm. If I had the $$$$ I would sell the 600mm and get the 500mm and the 800mm.

I think you are just right where your at.

[Doug Brown]

I think the 500 and 800 are complimentary. Both are hand holdable. With regard to the 800 it's nice to get that amount of reach without a TC, and to be able to get over 1000mm with only a 1.4x. I own the 500 and 600, and have used the 800 a couple of times. The nice thing about the 600 is that it's an f/4 lens, and that extra stop matters in certain shooting situations. I'll pick up the 800 at some point and probably keep the other 2 lenses as well.

[David Smith]

Lex:

Look at it this way.. If you have a Canon 40D or 50D with the 1.6X crop factor and you have a 500 f4 lens, you already have an 800 f4. Now if you add a 1.4 teleconverter you will end up with a 1120 f5,6 that will still autofocus..
IMHO I would stay with the 500 f4.. The 800 f5.6 is longer and heavier and much more expensive..

Dave

[Doug Brown]

Dave, he already owns both lenses. He's asking if he should get rid of the 500 now that he owns the 800.

[mikeojohnson]

The 800 is a very sharp lens. The new image stabilizer seems to be significantly better than the older model.
800 and 500 go well together.
I used an 800 and 400DO at Yellowstone last week with both 1dm3 and 1dsm3 bodies and found the flexibility in focal length (and weight) to be a good combo.
Mike

[Joseph Kurkjian]

Being in the very fotunate position of owning both a 500 f/4 and 800 f/5.6 I was wondering whether the more experienced members of the forum thought that the 500 was now redundant. We all seek extra length most of the time but does the 800 get you too close at times thus justifying the shorter reach of the 500? Not being a professional I can't see myself lugging two heavy bits of glass around wherever I go.

In the field I'd much rather carry the 800 and swap between bodies (1.6X and 1.26X) versus carrying two lenses/bodies. AFAIC carrying a 500/camera plus 800/camera is too much ... guess it all depends on how strong you are (or if you have a willing spouse/friend to carry one or the other).

If you are willing to carry two lens/body kits then IMO the 800/body and 400-f/5.6/body makes much more sense than a 500/body plus 800/body, YMMV.

Regards,

Joe Kurkjian