This is my first post on this forum, so be gentle ;)
I'm a bird photog (amongst other things) based in New Zealand, and I'm currently using a Canon 50D mainly with a 400 DO, although I do have a 300 f4 IS and 70-200 f4 also. I'm currently looking at purchasing an 800 f5.6 and would like a little advice.
For much of my work the 300 and 400 are great - I do a lot of seabird photography from boats and the recently acquired 400 has proven itself on more than one occasion. They are pretty good for a lot of forest bird situations here in NZ where often things can be relatively confiding. However, the move to something bigger has been prompted by the need to capture more waterfowl, shorebirds, and less approachable subjects. So I initially looked at the 600 f4 which would be a great lens without question. However, the weight, age and first gen IS are all things that have made me seriously consider the 800 f5.6.
Of course apart from the extra cost of the 800, I would also be currently unable to use a 1.4x extender with it on my 50D (but would I really need to anyway with the 1.6x crop factor?), which could be a good excuse to move to a 1 series Canon! However, I'm just wondering if the 25mm extension tube would work with the 800 and 50D, I suspect it would also render the setup MF, but maybe not? Anyone able to comment or try for me?
I'd appreciate some feedback on this, I'm sure I'm not the only person considering the 800 vs 600, and hoping the thread might be of use to others.
Unless weight is the primary concern, I would get the 600mm. With a 1.4xTC you have an 840mm F5.6. So you can use it as a 600mm F4 or an 840mm F5.6. The 800mm costs way more money and you only get the 800mm F5.6 option. If you plan to hand hold it all the time, then the 800mm makes more sense.
Thanks for the quick response. Quite surprisingly the difference in price in NZ is actually pretty small (due to constantly changing exchange rates, demand, and local dealers?). I can get an 800 for approximately NZ$1500 (around US$1000) more than a 600. Based on prices in the US this doesn't make sense, but hey I'm not going to argue. I have a really good local dealer here in NZ who is looking after me (Photo & Video Int in Christchurch). So the extra cost, when already spending the price of a small car, is not really my main consideration.
I do tend to hand hold a lot - not having had a lens of this size before - and so will probably try to do that with the 800 for as long as my arms let me and as long as I'm getting sharp images (newer IS should help). Moreover, I suspect that stalking with a monopod may be one of my primary methods to start with, but will be learning the techniques of big lens work with a tripod and Wimberley II head. So weight is a consideration, I think at around 2 pounds difference this isn't an insignificant amount, but interested to hear from those who have used both the 600 and 800 on this one.
Any comments on the use of the 25mm extension tube with the 50D?
your going to handhold the 800? I have never used one but unless your a bodybuilder I dont think you will be doing that :) its not only the weight but its also the size / clumsiness of it
any of the extension tubes will work, its just a matter of using the proper one for the distance, they will work with AF as long as you buy one that does AF, the canon one does and so does the kenko
I'd go for the 800. To get comparable sharpness to the 800 with the 600 and 1.4 you will want to stop it down a stop giving you 840 f8. In addition the tc's will have a negative impact on focussing performance. The 800 is couple of pounds lighter than the 600 too. If I had the financial resources I would trade in my 600 for a 800 tomorrow without question, but then I'm almost always using my 600 with a 1.4 or 2 TC.
Regards
JohnS
Last edited by John Swift; 08-02-2009 at 07:31 AM.
I own the 500 and 600, and I'm thinking about adding the 800 (I have some experience with this lens, having used Artie Morris' copy last year). I hand hold all 3 lenses. The 800 is noticeably lighter than the 600. It also has the ability to get you over 1000mm with only a 1.4x. However the 600 is a full stop faster, and sometimes that makes a big difference. It's also very flexible with regard to the use of TCs. And the price is much better than the 800. I would have to agree with Jim's assessment.
Thanks for the comments. I'm pretty hooked on the 800 and with the price being only a small jump for me here in NZ (as mentioned in my earlier post) I think it worth going for. With my 300 f4, 400 DO, and 800 f5.6 plus 1.4x extender I'd cover the range right through (300 f4, 420 f5.6, 400 f4, 560 f5.6, 800 f5.6). I like the thought of using the 800 without extenders over using the 600 almost constantly with extenders, which seems to be what many people are doing (inc NZ with NZ birds). As John says this needs to have stopped down a bit to get the best results. The review of the big lenses on www.juzaphoto.com although pixel peeping, was quite compelling, and I just keep coming back to Artie's very successful use of the 800 with the 50D.
I bought the 400 DO because I travel a lot (working on cruise ships), so the 400 is perfect for travel and everyday use from zodiacs etc. Absolutely love that lens. Not sure I'll take the 800 much, but the option is there and being a few pounds lighter makes it a little more feasible. I take the point of hand-holding the 800 - I'm not puny but certainly not a body-builder, but with the IS and slightly lesser weight of the 800 feel I could hand-hold at a pinch and certainly use with moderate success on a monopod which I probably couldn't with the 600?
I've had some feedback from other users on the autofocus of the 800 being a little off/slow. However, looking at Artie's stuff online I'd say the lens is tack sharp and giving great results in the autofocus stakes. Any comments on this?
Good to hear the extension tubes work with AF - I'd probably go for the 25mm Canon.
As you can see I'm really heading towards the 800 at the moment, but any comments gratefully received.
Brent, I own all 3 lenses and have just sold the 500 mm and 600 mm to buy a second 800 mm. The 800 mm is a better balanced lens than the 600 mm and what it loses out in one f/stop it makes up for with the newer IS that claims is 4 stops.
Apart from avian I shoot motorsports specifically MotoGP and the IQ between the 800 mm and 600 mm + 1.4 ext is visible. Juza's detailed pixel peeping comparos convinced me to get the 800 mm in the first place.
Selling the 600 mm and 500 mm was obvious as they hardly see much time outside the dry box with the 800 mm being the first choice. The weight of the 800 mm is slightly higher than the 500mm.
Brent, I'm seriously looking at buying this lens so could you point me to where the 800 focus is described as slow please?
Phil, I'd be very interested in your opinion on the focus performance of the 800 against the 600.
To quote the review -
"Somewhat hurt by the narrow f/5.6 max aperture is low light AF. I find this lens hunting for focus much more frequently than the f/4 and faster super telephotos in low light conditions even on a Canon EOS 1Ds Mark III camera body. Otherwise, the Canon EF 800mm f/5.6 L IS USM Lens' Ring USM (Ultrasonic Motor) driven AF is extremely fast and very accurate. AI Servo tracking accuracy of in-motion subjects is very good. This internal-focusing lens does not extend, FTM (Full Time Manual) focusing is enabled."
In talking to another person who owns the lens he mentioned he hadn't had good success with the AF, but prefaced that by saying he hadn't really tested it and thought it may have been something to do with the body, than the lens. He felt he still needed to spend some more time with it.
As far as I can see from Artie's results this lens is tack sharp and must have a pretty darn good AF system otherwise Artie would have said something to the contrary. He's now been using it for a while.
Phil, I too would be keen on your thoughts on speed of AF and which body are you using it with?
Thanks for the comments so far.
Brent, I interpreted the review as saying it hunted more than the 600 in low light by virtue of it being f5.6 as opposed to the f4 of the 600 but perhaps I'm just reading it wrong? I suppose it would've been clearer to me had they compared the focussing performance to 600 stopped down to f5.6 because to my mind all things being equal I would fully expect the AF to perform better with more light hitting the sensors from the f4 lens.
Well I bit the bullet and bought the 800 f5.6! I've used it mainly over two days last weekend and WOW is the only word to describe it. That's not to say I wouldn't have been impressed with the 600 f4, but I'm just blown away by the focus and tack sharp appearance of the images straight out of the camera! The autofocus is fast and precise and is just spot on. I shot probably 4000 images with my 50D through the lens and consistently superb results. Being my first super-tele I'm just astounded at the opportunities it brings, even compared to my 400 DO. I reckon I now have a pretty formidable kit with the 400 DO being perfect for hand-holding all day, flight shots, using on boats at sea, and then whacking the 1.4x extender on when need be, and the 800 as a serious bit of kit for tripod work.
I've posted a bunch of shots on my blog - www.eco-vista.com/brentsblog.htm - and will post more there over the next couple of days.
Thanks for the help received here on the forum. John, you are correct, the indication on the review was that the lens hunted a bit more in low light. I haven't assessed that, but otherwise can't fault the autofocus even on flight shots.
Questions on use/choice of Canon 800 f5.6
Reply With Quote
