What to replace 500 with

[nellyleelephant]

With a heavy heart, I'm flogging my Canon 500 to free up some cash due to a 4 month old son.

I will want to replace it with something reasonably long to use with a 1D3 and 5D3 for birds and other wildlife plus the odd trip to Silverstone.
I've had a 100-400 and 300 f4 before, but never tried a 400 5.6.

I'm torn between which of the 3 to go for, they all have their pluses and minuses, anyone got experience with them all?

Thanks

[DibblyDobbler]

Well I have a couple of 100-400s and not got on with either of them (virtually always shot at 400 as well rendering the zoom pointless), now have a 400 5.6 which is really nice and sharp and quite wieldy also



Sparrow by Dibbly Dobbler, on Flickr

[nellyleelephant]

Thanks, did you miss IS? Most of time it will be mounted to a now comically sized tripod, so I suppose it's a non issue.

[DibblyDobbler]

nellyleelephant said:

Thanks, did you miss IS? Most of time it will be mounted to a now comically sized tripod, so I suppose it's a non issue.

Not at all - I always try and keep up a decent shutter speed (as the birdy might move never mind me) so no big deal.

Just as a flanker - how about the Tamron 150-600? Reviews really well and can get one for under a grand I think

[nellyleelephant]

It doesn't appeal, don't know why!

I'm a bit of a snob and like to buy canon, although I do have a 14mm samyang.

Other option is 300 f4 with a 7d, similar reach to my 5d3 and 500

[DibblyDobbler]

Hmm - 300 f4 v 400 f5.6 is a tricky one! Both very good - maybe try and have a quick loaner of each to help make up your mind?

Pop up to Edinburgh and you can try my 400

[nellyleelephant]

Thanks for the offer, bit of a trek though!

Used to have a 300, worked well with a teleconverter. Hmmmm.

[RobDickinson]

200-400 f4?

I like the 400/5.6 easy hand holding just keep shutter speeds up which us mostly needed for theses subjects regardless of tripod anyhow

The 150-600 is quite good though

[mrdemon]

I went for the 300F4 nice bit of kit

400mm too long for Motor racing on a crop and that stop loss.

70D is miles better than the 7D also, 7Dmk2 out very soon.

[nellyleelephant]

RobDickinson said:

200-400 f4?

Would love to, but I'm not sure that would save me any money!

Have you tried a 150-600 Rob?

[RobDickinson]

Only a quick play, just going on accounts, its as good as the 100-400L or better in the same zoom range plus 200mm. 500-600 isnt the best but its effectively free, and usable.

[nellyleelephant]

I don't suppose you know at what focal length the f6.3 kicks in do you?

[RobDickinson]

The maximum aperture is f5 between 150mm and about 230mm, f5.6 between about 230mm and about 410mm, and f6.3 between about 410mm and 600mm. AF speed varied with focal length. Measured AF speed on the test bench in bright light on an EOS 7D from infinity to close focus (2.7m) was 0.3s at 150mm, 0.33s at 250mm and 400mm, and 0.41s at 600mm. There is a focus limiter which restricts focus to 15m. Focus time for 15m to infinity at 600mm is 0.23s. Focus slowed in very dim light and at 600mm, it takes 1.5 seconds to rack focus from infinity to close focus (2.7m) in essentially zero light. AF operation was silent, which prevents disturbing wildlife or drawing attention to the lens.

http://photo.net/reviews/tamron-150-600/

[nellyleelephant]

RobDickinson said:

The maximum aperture is f5 between 150mm and about 230mm, f5.6 between about 230mm and about 410mm, and f6.3 between about 410mm and 600mm. AF speed varied with focal length. Measured AF speed on the test bench in bright light on an EOS 7D from infinity to close focus (2.7m) was 0.3s at 150mm, 0.33s at 250mm and 400mm, and 0.41s at 600mm. There is a focus limiter which restricts focus to 15m. Focus time for 15m to infinity at 600mm is 0.23s. Focus slowed in very dim light and at 600mm, it takes 1.5 seconds to rack focus from infinity to close focus (2.7m) in essentially zero light. AF operation was silent, which prevents disturbing wildlife or drawing attention to the lens.

http://photo.net/reviews/tamron-150-600/

Thanks for that, I'll have a good read.

[nellyleelephant]

mrdemon said:

70D is miles better than the 7D also, 7Dmk2 out very soon.

Not having used either, what is better about the 70D?

[tim-b]

If you're happy with 300mm, have you considered the Sigma 120-300 f2.8? It's a bit pricier than some of the other options but seems to have good reviews. I think it will be my next purchase.....and will probably be locked to 300mm @ f2.8

eta; sample images here.

Edited by tim-b on Tuesday 19th August 13:28

[nellyleelephant]

Thanks for the help and suggestions.....but it's looking like I can keep the 500, which is a result!

[ExPat2B]

I have just gone to a 500 f4, and looked at all of the options in between ( 100-400, 400 5.6, 150-600 and have spent whole days with those lenses) and I can tell you with some conviction that nothing comes close to the exotic telephotos. The sharpness, and the speed is just on another planet - and none of the other options are sharp wide open, they need to be at f8. And the amount of contrast and colour that the lens picks up, like the iris details of birds is just unmatched by the consumer options.

[nellyleelephant]

ExPat2B said:

I have just gone to a 500 f4, and looked at all of the options in between ( 100-400, 400 5.6, 150-600 and have spent whole days with those lenses) and I can tell you with some conviction that nothing comes close to the exotic telephotos. The sharpness, and the speed is just on another planet - and none of the other options are sharp wide open, they need to be at f8. And the amount of contrast and colour that the lens picks up, like the iris details of birds is just unmatched by the consumer options.

....which is why I'm having to keep mine!

[DibblyDobbler]

ExPat2B said:

none of the other options are sharp wide open, they need to be at f8.

I don't doubt the 500 f4 is magnificent but this is not true - the other primes (ie 300 + 400) are plenty sharp wide open.