I have over half the money saved for a Canon 500mm

Maestro

Someone talk me out of this purchase. Really, I would love this lens. I am primarily a little bird photographer, but feel I need just a bit more reach (which I understand will always be the case.) I already have the 100-400mm F4-5.6L zoom lens and I love it, but there are times when I miss shots because I was simply too far away. So, the way I look at it, I would have the 100-500mm focal lengths covered and I probably could squeeze a bit more out of it with an extender.

Oh man, I am bad. I have such a bad case of lens lust. :huh

gus

Maestro wrote:

Someone talk me out of this purchase. Really, I would love this lens. I am primarily a little bird photographer, but feel I need just a bit more reach (which I understand will always be the case.) I already have the 100-400mm F4-5.6L zoom lens and I love it, but there are times when I miss shots because I was simply too far away. So, the way I look at it, I would the 100-500mm focal lengths covered and I probably could squeeze a bit more out of it with an extender.

Oh man, I am bad. I have such a bad case of lens lust.

An L prime is going to be a good deal sharper than a zoom with a TC & thats what birders need to highlight the feathers etc. Remember to add a good deal more for a tripod & head to take advantage of a lens that size if you dont already have them.

David_S85

Gus, you were supposed to talk him out of it.

Maestro

gus wrote:

An L prime is going to be a good deal sharper than a zoom with a TC & thats what birders need to highlight the feathers etc. Remember to add a good deal more for a tripod & head to take advantage of a lens that size if you dont already have them.

Tripod is already purchased, but I need to buy the gimbal head. Frankly, I am a bit overwhelmed with all these plates, heads, etc...

I had thought about buying the siggy 50-500mm zoom but I just don't feel good about that purchase because it doesn't have the IS and my 100-400 Canon covers most of that focal length admirably. You are correct on the sharpness factor!

Maestro

David_S85 wrote:

Gus, you were supposed to talk him out of it.

Tell me about it. He didn't do a good job, did he?

RogersDA

Maestro wrote:

Tell me about it. He didn't do a good job, did he?

Maybe some subliminal messaging will help:

You don't need it. You don't need it. You don't need it. You don't need it. You don't need it. Send me the money and I'll buy the lens. You don't need it. You don't need it. You don't need it.You don't need it. You don't need it. You don't need it. You don't need it. You don't need it. You don't need it. You don't need it. You don't need it.You don't need it. Send me the money and I'll buy the lens. You don't need it. You don't need it. You don't need it. You don't need it. You don't need it. You don't need it. You don't need it. Send me the money and I'll buy the lens. You don't need it. You don't need it. You don't need it. You don't need it. You don't need it. Send me the money and I'll buy the lens. You don't need it. You don't need it. You don't need it.You don't need it. You don't need it. You don't need it. Send me the money and I'll buy the lens. You don't need it. You don't need it. You don't need it. You don't need it. You don't need it.You don't need it. You don't need it. You don't need it. Send me the money and I'll buy the lens. You don't need it. Send me the money and I'll buy the lens. You don't need it. You don't need it. You don't need it. Send me the money and I'll buy the lens. You don't need it.

gus

David_S85 wrote:

Gus, you were supposed to talk him out of it.

Its against international law to do so.

Maestro

RogersDA wrote:

Maybe some subliminal messaging will help:

You don't need it. You don't need it. You don't need it. You don't need it. You don't need it. Send me the money and I'll buy the lens. You don't need it. You don't need it. You don't need it.You don't need it. You don't need it. You don't need it. You don't need it. You don't need it. You don't need it. You don't need it. You don't need it.You don't need it. Send me the money and I'll buy the lens. You don't need it. You don't need it. You don't need it. You don't need it. You don't need it. You don't need it. You don't need it. Send me the money and I'll buy the lens. You don't need it. You don't need it. You don't need it. You don't need it. You don't need it. Send me the money and I'll buy the lens. You don't need it. You don't need it. You don't need it.You don't need it. You don't need it. You don't need it. Send me the money and I'll buy the lens. You don't need it. You don't need it. You don't need it. You don't need it. You don't need it.You don't need it. You don't need it. You don't need it. Send me the money and I'll buy the lens. You don't need it. Send me the money and I'll buy the lens. You don't need it. You don't need it. You don't need it. Send me the money and I'll buy the lens. You don't need it.

Check is in the mail. I realize I don't need it. You are nuts! Check is in the mail. I realize I don't need it. You are nuts. Check is in the mail. I realize I don't need it. You are nuts! Check is in the mail. I realize I don't need it. Check is in the mail. I realize I don't need it. You are nuts! Check is in the mail. I realize I don't need it. Check is in the mail. You are nuts! I realize I don't need it. You are nuts! Check is in the mail. I realize I don't need it. You are nuts! Check is in the mail. I realize I don't need it. You are nuts! Check is in the mail. I realize I don't need it. You are nuts! Check is in the mail. I realize I don't need it. You are nuts! Check is in the mail. I realize I don't need it. You are nuts! Check is in the mail. I realize I don't need it. You are nuts! Check is in the mail. I realize I don't need it. You are nuts! Check is in the mail. I realize I don't need it. You are nuts! Check is in the mail. I realize I don't need it. You are nuts! Check is in the mail. I realize I don't need it.

gryphonslair99

Buy the D#&* thing and be happy. I am 3/4 of the way to the 400mm f2.8. Sports and wild life. I know, it is at the bottom end of the desired wild life focal length, but I shoot a lot of sports. Besides with an f2.8 I can shoot on into dusk.

Hopefully the 400 will be a christmas present to my self this year.

howard

OK you asked the wrong guy 'cos I've got one on order.

I've been using the 400/5.6, nothing wrong with it, it does stuff like this


really well - when you can get close enough. The trouble is I usually can't get close enough. Anyway I managed to get the use of a 500/4 for a few weekends and I'm hooked, committed and it's due in about 2 weeks. Can't wait. For me it's not just the fact that it's 500/4 but that it's also 700/5.6 with IS and retains AF even on a crop body. I don't have a gimbal head, I mainly used a monopod and I'm going to continue that way unless I find I really have a need to spend the extra dosh. For small birds on the monopod the IS makes shots at slow(ish) SS possible this is at 700mm 1/60th f11 on the monopod.

When you get close with small birds DOF becomes an issue as you know.

The reach is great this is at 700mm f5.6 and with the 400 and 1.4x I just wouldn't have been close enough.

So BUY IT you'll it

kdog

Happy to oblige. Forget the 500. It's only 25% longer than your 400. You really think you're going to notice that? Sure, you can get 700 F5.6 from it as Howard pointed out. However, you can get 560mm with AF from your present lens with AF if you tape the TC pins, and it does a respectable job. You're going to spend $5500 for an extra 100mm? Are you nuts?

Now, what you really need is the 600mm F4. Now we're cooking with gas here. 840mm at F5.6, or an amazing 1200mm with a 2X. That's serious reach. Plus, it's cheaper too. Yup, it's only $3500 per extra 100mm over your 400. That's a savings of $2,000 per 100mm versus the 500mm. Times two, that's a savings of $4,000! Can you afford to leave that kind of money on the table? And guess what. There's not a 500mm owner who doesn't secretly lust after the 600mm, and for good reason. 500mm is not long enough for birds. Size-wise, you're going to need a tripod for either lens, so don't fall into the trap of thinking that you can't handle the 600. There's no difference once it's on the gimbal mount. So forget the 500mm, go right to the lens you'll eventually buy anyway, and save a heap of money in the process.

How'd I do?
-joel

GREAPER

My buddy Steve has the lens you are looking at and he says he should have bought the 600 every time we go out...

Maestro

howard wrote:

OK you asked the wrong guy 'cos I've got one on order.

I've been using the 400/5.6, nothing wrong with it, it does stuff like this


really well - when you can get close enough. The trouble is I usually can't get close enough. Anyway I managed to get the use of a 500/4 for a few weekends and I'm hooked, committed and it's due in about 2 weeks. Can't wait. For me it's not just the fact that it's 500/4 but that it's also 700/5.6 with IS and retains AF even on a crop body. I don't have a gimbal head, I mainly used a monopod and I'm going to continue that way unless I find I really have a need to spend the extra dosh. For small birds on the monopod the IS makes shots at slow(ish) SS possible this is at 700mm 1/60th f11 on the monopod.

When you get close with small birds DOF becomes an issue as you know.

The reach is great this is at 700mm f5.6 and with the 400 and 1.4x I just wouldn't have been close enough.

So BUY IT you'll it

Crap. You are soooooo bad. Quite excellent shots with the 500 and on monopod to boot. You must lift weights! My kids will stil have their college funds if I buy this. I will be able to continue to pay all payments for my bills, but no new car in the near future (at least two years away) and no new computer to put these pretty pics on, but WOW! What awesome shots!

Maestro

kdog wrote:

Happy to oblige. Forget the 500. It's only 25% longer than your 400. You really think you're going to notice that? Sure, you can get 700 F5.6 from it as Howard pointed out. However, you can get 560mm with AF from your present lens with AF if you tape the TC pins, and it does a respectable job. You're going to spend $5500 for an extra 100mm? Are you nuts?

Now, what you really need is the 600mm F4. Now we're cooking with gas here. 840mm at F5.6, or an amazing 1200mm with a 2X. That's serious reach. Plus, it's cheaper too. Yup, it's only $3500 per extra 100mm over your 400. That's a savings of $2,000 per 100mm versus the 500mm. Times two, that's a savings of $4,000! Can you afford to leave that kind of money on the table? And guess what. There's not a 500mm owner who doesn't secretly lust after the 600mm, and for good reason. 500mm is not long enough for birds. Size-wise, you're going to need a tripod for either lens, so don't fall into the trap of thinking that you can't handle the 600. There's no difference once it's on the gimbal mount. So forget the 500mm, go right to the lens you'll eventually buy anyway, and save a heap of money in the process.

How'd I do?
-joel

Kdog! You started out well but now you have me thinking in another direction. You argument is very logical. I think I will present this to the wife. :hide Or perhaps I could just go with the Bigma which goes out to 800mm!

Manfr3d

Maestro wrote:

Someone talk me out of this purchase. Really, I would love this lens. I am primarily a little bird photographer, but feel I need just a bit more reach (which I understand will always be the case.) I already have the 100-400mm F4-5.6L zoom lens and I love it, but there are times when I miss shots because I was simply too far away. So, the way I look at it, I would have the 100-500mm focal lengths covered and I probably could squeeze a bit more out of it with an extender.

Oh man, I am bad. I have such a bad case of lens lust.

Oh Thats easy. I heard the 600mm is such an incredible lens for birding ...

BigAl

I've taken a couple of pics with this lens with a 1.4x
http://bigal-sa.smugmug.com/gallery/556774#82615191
Same bird with my Bigma
http://bigal-sa.smugmug.com/gallery/556774#82615189
Both taken with a monopod with belt mounted support
http://bigal-sa.smugmug.com/photos/71489988-M.jpg

Is the difference in IQ worth $4500?




PS: I'd rather go with the 600

gus

BigAl wrote:

I've taken a couple of pics with this lens with a 1.4x
http://bigal-sa.smugmug.com/gallery/556774#82615191
Same bird with my Bigma
http://bigal-sa.smugmug.com/gallery/556774#82615189
Both taken with a monopod with belt mounted support
http://bigal-sa.smugmug.com/photos/71489988-M.jpg

Is the difference in IQ worth $4500?

Can you produce your %'s of keepers to throw-aways though re Canon 500 L to bigma ?

BigAl

gus wrote:

Can you produce your %'s of 'keepers to throw-aways' though re Canon 500 L to bigma ?

Unfortuntely, I only had a few shots with the 500, but at the mo, I'm getting a pretty solid keeper rate in the 90s with the Bigma :poke

It's all about technique

:lol4