400/2.8 VR or 600/4 VR ??

[Thonnaksar NOP]

Hi,
I exclusively shoot birds and mainly use my trusty 200-400 VR, sometimes with TCx1.4 and TCx1.7.
When I need more reach and use the combo Zoom+TCx1.7, I often (not to say always) have to crank up the ISO to keep speed fast enough. Even I'm quite happy with my D2Hs performances at high ISO (3200 & 6400), most of time f/6.7 is way too slow.
I plan to buy a 600/4 VR in the next few months but I'm not sure if the 400/2.8 VR is a better choice to work with my TCs (and I still have a very fast telephoto lens).
I will appreciate very much if someone can share similar experience here.

[Steve Ashton]

The 400mm F2.8 is a very heavy lens not much to choose between it and the 600mm. you say you shoot only birds then the simple answer for me is go 600mm.

I used the D2H for press work good camera but you should look at the new bodies. On long lenses the D300 has amazed me. For the money its a fantastic body. I am a canon shooter At present but think the 200-400 and 600mm combo is the ideal for bird photography.

[Sabyasachi Patra]

Hi, I am a canon shooter. However, I thought I would like to comments as I use a 400mm f2.8 L IS USM lens.

I am passionate about tigers and most of my shots are in very low light. I shoot other mammals and carnivores as well. Bird photography is very less and I do it when I am not chasing tigers.

For me the decision was very clear. I decided that I can use my skills to sneak closer to the tiger and other subjects. However, I can't do anything to light. So I decided to buy the 400mm f2.8 L IS. I can use both my 1.4 and 2x converters with this. When shooting birds I mostly use it with the 2x. It gives me 800mm f5.6. However, for bird photography, even this is also less. I would suggest you to go for a longer focal length for bird photography.

Well I use a 1D Mark II. So the factor is 1.3. For you the factor would be 1.5. So probably, you will be slightly better off. But still, 600 mm should be better for you.

[Alfred Forns]

For shooting birds there is no comparison Get the 600 Just got he VR version a few weeks ago Very good lens

The 400 2.8 is a specialized lens A great example is the tiger application ..... btw if you had a 200-400 you probably wouldn't consider using anything else !!!! too bad Canon doesn't make one !!!

[William Clausen]

I have a 80-400mm 4.5-5.6. I cannot afford the 2.8, but if I could it would be the 2.8 and extenders. the 600mm is so big and unwealdy its limits are great. You have to carry 2 camers and 2 lenses in most cases if you go with the 600.

William Clausen

[Alfred Forns]

William they are about the same size? Only one pound extra weight !!!!

[Thonnaksar NOP]

The 400mm F2.8 is a very heavy lens not much to choose between it and the 600mm. you say you shoot only birds then the simple answer for me is go 600mm.

I used the D2H for press work good camera but you should look at the new bodies. On long lenses the D300 has amazed me. For the money its a fantastic body. I am a canon shooter At present but think the 200-400 and 600mm combo is the ideal for bird photography.

For shooting birds there is no comparison Get the 600 Just got he VR version a few weeks ago Very good lens

The 400 2.8 is a specialized lens A great example is the tiger application ..... btw if you had a 200-400 you probably wouldn't consider using anything else !!!! too bad Canon doesn't make one !!!

Do you think it's worth to get a D300 or D3, considering their AF capability and high ISO performances, and stick to my 200-400+TCx1.4&1.7 ?

[Bob Reimer]

I suspect you'd be pretty happy with the performance of the D300 with the grip as long as you were satisfied with the 12-bit NEF. The 14-bit NEF slows the D300 down to 2.5fps. The better AF and DX crop for the telephoto shots would likely suit better than the D3 which is going to cost twice as much at least. *Much* cheaper to get the D300 body than either the 400 f/2.8 or the 600 f/4 and likely more bang for your buck.