500mm - which one?

[mjmw]

Now that Salty is sorted with his new DSLR kit, I thought I would ask you all to help spend my cash...

I bought a 20D about a month ago, having spent over 4 years digiscoping for bird photography (before that I used to have EOS SLR kit and prior to that learnt the basics on an OM 10). I also bought the 400mm f5.6 to get me started with a view to it being my travel lens and general 'walkabout'. My intention has always been to get a 500+ as my main bird photography lens.

So, which 500mm do I get? I am currently thinking about the Sigma f4.5 and Canon f4. I know that there is a significant price difference, and that is my stumbling point - is the Canon worth the extra money?

My current thoughts:
I will want to use a 1.4x TC (to be purchased, based on this choice) and a Canon 2x TC (already got). I am used to no AF with the 400 + 2x, but really would prefer reasonable AF in good light with the 1.4x (is this possible with the Sigma?).

Weight is less of an issue (to carry), although I may have to upgrade my Manfrotto 055 legs with the Canon (if I spend that much - why risk softer shots because of insufficient support), either way I will get a gimble type head.

I will still be birding, so will often want to take my scope (small Leica). Not worried about the tripod head aspect - have not had the handle on my 128RC head for weeks! However - extra weight and hassle of switching.

I have noticed that some (many?) have gone from the Sigma 500 prime to the branded (Canon or Nikon) 500/600 and I am interested in why (even if for the extra reach with a 600).

I am after a prime lens, although the Sigma 300-800 is tempting...

Another option I have seriously considered is the Canon 400mm f2.8...would give AF with both 1.4 and 2x TCs...less reach but a very quick lens and comparable to the 500 with the 1.4x on...

Cheers Mark.

[Tannin]

I'll be watching this thread with interest.

Like Mark, I've been digiscoping for a few years and bought a 20D about a month ago, though (after the obligatory period of procrastination, dithering, and hair-tearing) I went for the 100-400 as my walkaround lens. (Not so much for the zoom, more for the IS, as I use it hand-held.) I certainly want to go to a longer lens (as soon as the credit card recovers a bit), but have no idea which one.

After hand-holding the 100-400 for a while, I feel OK with hand-holding something a bit longer. The speed offered by hand-holding together with the fast auto-focus makes it possible to get lots of shots I'd miss using a tripod.

For really long work where a tripod is essential (waders, for example), I'll keep on with the Swarovski ATS80-HD and Powershot A95. These work well if you have the time to set them up.

The Canon 600 will be too large, I suspect (and mega dollars), so the 500mm Canon? Or something else? As ever, the things I learn from the fantastic Bird Forum community will be prime decision makers for me.

Tony

[Steve G]

Go for the Canon 500 -the image stabilisation makes a huge difference.
With the 20D it is the camera & not the lens per se that limits AF. Without taping over certain connections the 20D will not autofocus with effective apertures smaller than F5.6 (F4 + 1.4X convertor). Using the Sigma 500 F4.5 + 1.4X TC will result in an aperture a half stop smaller than F5.6 so the AF might not work.
I routinely handhold my Canon 500 IS with a 1.4x TC & generally get good results. I use a Canon 1D mk II & so the AF will function on the central sensor @F8 (500 F4 + 2x TC) -in fact AF will even function(slowly) with stacked 1.4x & 2x TCs which when tripod mounted with the IS function ON can give surpisingly good results.

[SeanKP]

Go for the Canon 500 -the image stabilisation makes a huge difference.
With the 20D it is the camera & not the lens per se that limits AF. Without taping over certain connections the 20D will not autofocus with effective apertures smaller than F5.6 (F4 + 1.4X convertor). Using the Sigma 500 F4.5 + 1.4X TC will result in an aperture a half stop smaller than F5.6 so the AF might not work.
I routinely handhold my Canon 500 IS with a 1.4x TC & generally get good results. I use a Canon 1D mk II & so the AF will function on the central sensor @F8 (500 F4 + 2x TC) -in fact AF will even function(slowly) with stacked 1.4x & 2x TCs which when tripod mounted with the IS function ON can give surpisingly good results.
Interesting thread. I've got the Sigma 500mm and although I've had some reasonably good results I have started to wonder whether I'd not have been happier with the Canon. I do lust after the IS and the slightly bigger aperture but the Canon is quite a bit heavier and bigger than the Sigma and as the Sigma is just about at the limit of what I'm prepared to lug about for a day I've wondered whether that extra chunkiness would negate the advantages.

I can hand-hold the Sigma in decent light and occasionally get surprisingly good results. Some recent examples in my gallery of hand-held shots are the Kestrel (http://www.birdforum.net/pp_gallery/showphoto.php/photo/67198/sort/1/cat/500/page/1), the sparrow (http://www.birdforum.net/pp_gallery/showphoto.php/photo/65676/sort/1/cat/500/page/1) and the blue jays (http://www.birdforum.net/pp_gallery/showphoto.php/photo/65593/sort/1/cat/500/page/2). I even managed to get a reasonable shot of a chaffinch (http://www.birdforum.net/pp_gallery/showphoto.php/photo/65593/sort/1/cat/500/page/2) at 1/100 sec although I know that would be a blurred smudge on 99 occasions out of 100.

The only TC that I know of that allows me any kind of auto-focus on my 350D with the Sigma is the Kenko 1.4. However, occasionally it stops working for no apparent reason requiring the lens to be dismounted and re-attached to fix it and the auto-exposure seems to under-expose all shots by one stop, so not an ideal solution. The Canon lens would give me proper AF with the TC on but so would buying a 1D Mark II. I can't afford to upgrade both camera and lens so, if you were me which would you upgrade, the camera or the lens?

Cheers.

Sean

PS: Steve, do you have any shots with stacked TCs you'd care to show us? I've never had any sort of results using the 2.0x TC with my lens, let alone stacked.

[postcardcv]

Personally I use the Sigma 500 f4.5 on my 350D - for me it wasn't really a choice, there's no way I could have afforded the Canon, I could only afford a secondhand Sigma. I've been really happy with the results that the lens has given, I nearly always use it on a tripod so am not really worried about the lack of IS. I've tried the lens with a Sigma 1.4x tc and it will not auto focus, I've yet to get my hands on a Kenko 1.4x to try.

Even if I could have afforded the Canon I doubt I'd have gone for it, at that price I would have seriously considered the Sigma 300-800. There are some users of this lens on BF who get excellent results, the extra reach seems very appealling. I guess the best thing to do would be to try the lenses for yourself and see what you think of the results. A trawl through the gallery on here should show you photos taken with all of the lenses you're considering.

[Tannin]

I'm not convinced that looking at BF shots is much help, actually. So much depends on the photographer, the light, the bird ... on a million other things. My best-ever shot was taken with the least-capable of my three cameras, and before I even half-way learned to use it. (Sometimes, you just get lucky.)

And formal test shots leave me feeling like they are ... well .. test shots. But they can help. In the end, I guess you just have to try things out for yourself - but at AU$14,000 a pop, it's a hell of a try-out!

I guess I'm leaning in the Canon 500mm direction. There is no way I'll have enough spare dosh to get one this year, but maybe it's better to go straight to the top model and be sure it's right, rather than buy a cheaper one and always be left wondering if you should have spent the extra. I did that when I bought my first Swarovski scope - went with the ATS80-HD rather than a cheaper Swaro or a Leica, even though I'd never even looked through] a spotting scope of any kind until then - and have never regretted it for one moment. But these lenses make the Swarovskis look like small change.

[madmike]

Hi mw_aurora,
Go CANON go PRIME everytime if you can!
I have a Sigma 170-500 which is not bad, but not in the same ball park as the real McCoy!
Canon 100-400 IS Zoom is also very good

madmike

[formula4speed]

An excellent comparison of these two lenses was written up on a Photography forum I frequent, you can read it here
Canon Vs Sigma (http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=69791)

[postcardcv]

An excellent comparison of these two lenses was written up on a Photography forum I frequent, you can read it here
Canon Vs Sigma (http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=69791)

A very interesting comparison - thanks for the link.

[Andy Bright]

An excellent comparison of these two lenses was written up on a Photography forum I frequent, you can read it here
Canon Vs Sigma (http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=69791)
Good review... although i'd dispute that the m/f switches on the Sigma are easily moved, as it didn't happen once in all my time with the lens, I presume they were using a tightfitting bag for it?

The AF question with teleconverters is interesting... as I know a number of people who have great AF with the 10d,20d + Kenko pro 300 1.4x teleconverters, yep Sigma tc's and Canon tc's are not a good partnership here.

Although I'm an intruding Nikon user... my upgrade from 500/4.5 to 600/4 was for the extra reach (this extra over 500mm is even more with tc's) but what has struck me is the amazing separation of subject from background with a longer f4... and that's with an aps sized sensor that doesn't favour this aspect.

cheers,
Andy

cheers,
Andy

[mjmw]

Thanks everyone for the comments so far. Keep them coming!

My gut reaction is to hold on, save a bit more, and go for the Canon - but I am really struggling to justify the extra dosh. However, if I buy a new Sigma, I am going to loose out if I decide to trade up in a year or so...or I could convince one of you lot to upgrade and I can take your Sigma off your hands :D

With regards to the 1.4x TC, I haven't bought one yet because of the 20D + 500mm f4.5 AF issue. I had read that the Kenco Pro does provide AF on the 20D without taping the pins - was waiting to see if anyone was using this combo. If I get the Canon, then I will get a Canon 1.4x.

Handholding - I am not the most steady handed person (you should see some of my welding efforts!), so I have resigned myself to mainly tripod work. So does the IS provide much assistance on a tripod? I guess with 2x or stacked TCs it will definately help remove minor vibration (e.g. wind)?

I have played with the Sigma 500mm, on a 350D, but not yet the Canon. I will have to con one of the local guys to let me have a play.

[Tannin]

Just don't try welding the 500mm lens to your tripod! :)

[Leo S]

I went for the Nikon 600/4 EDIF + 1.4x TC option. Picked up the lens on its own in perfect optical condition, but a little bit of a non-snappy aperture ring, for just over 2K(seen em go for less on ebay after). The Gitzo 1325, Wimberly, and QR plates(Kirk) cost another 600 or 700 on top of that(all new) if I remember correctly.

Just remember, if you do go for big glass, theres no point in getting a pod/head that does not do the glass justice... yes it's expensive, but if you then descide you don't want it, you can sell any of your quality gear and pretty well be sure to get most, if not all your money back(especially if you buy 2nd hand, choosing carefully, and take good care of your gear).

Anyway, it's a great setup IMO, with lots of reach when used with my D70(1280mm equivelent IIRC), and not having auto focus doesn't bother me too much, although there are times when I wouldn't mind having it!

[Steve G]

................

I can hand-hold the Sigma in decent light and occasionally get surprisingly good results. Some recent examples in my gallery of hand-held shots are the Kestrel (http://www.birdforum.net/pp_gallery/showphoto.php/photo/67198/sort/1/cat/500/page/1), the sparrow (http://www.birdforum.net/pp_gallery/showphoto.php/photo/65676/sort/1/cat/500/page/1) and the blue jays (http://www.birdforum.net/pp_gallery/showphoto.php/photo/65593/sort/1/cat/500/page/2). I even managed to get a reasonable shot of a chaffinch (http://www.birdforum.net/pp_gallery/showphoto.php/photo/65593/sort/1/cat/500/page/2) at 1/100 sec although I know that would be a blurred smudge on 99 occasions out of 100.

The only TC that I know of that allows me any kind of auto-focus on my 350D with the Sigma is the Kenko 1.4. However, occasionally it stops working for no apparent reason requiring the lens to be dismounted and re-attached to fix it and the auto-exposure seems to under-expose all shots by one stop, so not an ideal solution. The Canon lens would give me proper AF with the TC on but so would buying a 1D Mark II. I can't afford to upgrade both camera and lens so, if you were me which would you upgrade, the camera or the lens?

Cheers.

Sean

PS: Steve, do you have any shots with stacked TCs you'd care to show us? I've never had any sort of results using the 2.0x TC with my lens, let alone stacked.
Hi Sean,
Check out post no:6 of this thread (the final image was taken with stacked convertors, the others were handheld using a 500 IS lens + 1.4x convertor). :- www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?t=43020
cheers,
Steve

[MikeB.]

My tuppence worth: I have had the Canon 500mm for 3 months now and it is everything I thought it would be. If you can wait and save up for it, you will never regret it. It's a heavy piece of kit and hand holding is not really an option, esp if you are waiting for your target to turn around!

I've just invested (bad word) in the new Manfrotto Neotec 685B monopod with removable hex plate (code 625, I think it is) for more flexibility on the move with my 1DS Mk2 with 500mm, when a tripod is too unwieldy / slow. These Neotecs are amazingly fast. Once you use one it is difficult to go back to ordinary types.

The sharpness of the 500mm still takes my breath away when I sit and marvel at the results afterwards. Light it isn't. My 100-400mm gets little used at the moment, and usually only for tracking and photographing airborne birds.

The Canon L series lenses seem to hold their value should you want to sell it on even some years later.

Mike

[Robert_Scanlon]

Mark, have you considered the 800 5.6 Sigma? It is a decent lens, reasonably lightweight, you could use your existing tripod with it and you wouldn't need to use a tc on it all the time, as you would with a 500. I used mine as a walk around lens, and its light enough to be able to carry a scope as well.

It is also much cheaper than the Canon, though it does't have IS.

It's well worth considering. You can never have too much reach if you are photographing small birds.

I traded mine in against a 600mm f4 canon, and that required an upgrade of tripod and head, now my camera gear is so heavy that I don't carry a scope.

[postcardcv]

Mark, have you considered the 800 5.6 Sigma? It is a decent lens, reasonably lightweight, you could use your existing tripod with it and you wouldn't need to use a tc on it all the time, as you would with a 500. I used mine as a walk around lens, and its light enough to be able to carry a scope as well.

I've read a couple of reviews of this lens that suggest that it is not as sharp as the Sigma 500 f4.5, how did you find it? Is the reduced sharpness a trade off for extra reach?

[Andy Bright]

The EX version of the 800/5.6 was a lot better than previous version. When you're dealing with 800mm +crop factors, stability is a big issue and confuses the issue of sharpness.
I have seen some amazingly sharp images from the 800/5/6 EX

[postcardcv]

The EX version of the 800/5.6 was a lot better than previous version. When you're dealing with 800mm +crop factors, stability is a big issue and confuses the issue of sharpness.
I have seen some amazingly sharp images from the 800/5/6 EX

It's probably reviews of the older version that I've seen then.

I hadn't realised that Sue was using this lens (I thought she used the 300-800 zoom) - she's a great advert for the lens as she produces some excellent photos.

[Andy Bright]

It's probably reviews of the older version that I've seen then.

I hadn't realised that Sue was using this lens (I thought she used the 300-800 zoom) - she's a great advert for the lens as she produces some excellent photos.
Sue had the 800/f5.6 before. I think (not 100%) Nigel's review of the 800/5.6 in our review section was of the older non EX version.
I still think an 800mm +1.5/1.6 cropping requires serious support and exceptional technique.

cheers,
Andy

[Andy Bright]

It would be nice if a 800/f5.6 user could add a review ..there are satisfied users out there ;)
I'll stick to a 600/4 though.

[postcardcv]

I'd certainly be interested to read a review of the current model.

For those of you who aren't familiar with Sue Tranter's work heres a link to her website, well worth a visit. http://www.suesbirdphotos.co.uk/

[Adey Baker]

I still think an 800mm +1.5/1.6 cropping requires serious support and exceptional technique.

cheers,
Andy

One trick that sports photographers used to use (don't know whether they still do) is to have the lens on a tripod and the camera on a monopod

[Robert_Scanlon]

My EX version of the 800 5.6 was capable of very sharp photos, especially if stopped down a little. It's not bad compared with the Canon 600 f4 L, though the latter gives nicer bokeh and is very sharp wide open, even with the 1.4 tc.

Technique is a big issue, but usually resting your left hand on the far end of the lens with a bit of downward pressure, holding your breath as you gently squeeze (not press) the shutter is adequate. I have taken reasonably sharp shots with this lens and a 10D down to about 1/45 sec.

The Manfrotto 55 was the first tripod I used with mine, and it is fine, though I found things often came loose on it and needed tightening whenever I happened not to have the allen key with me. I also used the manfrotto 503 (?) video head, and found that to be an excellent and cheap and stable option, one which is often overlooked in these days of gimbal heads.

I took this lens on a birding trip with me to Panama a couple of years ago... some photos are here: http://www.pbase.com/rsscanlon/birds_of_panama

[Andy Bright]

One trick that sports photographers used to use (don't know whether they still do) is to have the lens on a tripod and the camera on a monopod
Manfrotto do make a camera support that comes off the main tripod... never seen it and I expect it's not ideal for active birds.

As Robert says, a frim hand on top of the lens is a good idea (a heavy beanbag atop is another one)... bounce from the shutter coming down isn't a huge problem with a sensible shutter-speed, bounce from the mirror going up is more serious... mirror lock-up is great but isn't always practical.

cheers,
Andy

[Romy Ocon]

I am after a prime lens, although the Sigma 300-800 is tempting...

Cheers Mark.

Hi Mark,

I use the Sigmonster (Sigma 300-800 DG) on my 20D/350D, and its size and weight are backbreaking. But once I'm able to lug it to to the shooting area, the extreme reach, near-prime sharpness (sharper wide open than my 400 5.6L) and framing flexibility are every useful at shy Philippine birds.

Here's a link to one of my galleries - most of my recent bird pics are taken with the 300-800.

http://www.pbase.com/liquidstone/bird_galleries_by_location

Regards,

Romy

[mjmw]

Thanks everyone...though my thoughts are still bouncing around...

Another thing that sways me towards the Canon is the seeming number of people who buy one and stick with it, compared to the number of people who had a Sigma and changed it (e.g. 800 to 300-800, 500 to the branded 500/600) - this must be for a reason, if only kudos. I guess owning a Canon or Nikon 500/600 doesn't leave many upgrade options.

A question that I have pondered a little bit and a point that Andy has recently mentioned - does vibration really make more difference with a smaller recording surface? Wouldn't a vibration that causes 0.1mm movement on a full frame (at the recording surface) still only be 0.1mm on a 'cropped' frame? or am I missing something?

[Andy Bright]

A question that I have pondered a little bit and a point that Andy has recently mentioned - does vibration really make more difference with a smaller recording surface? Wouldn't a vibration that causes 0.1mm movement on a full frame (at the recording surface) still only be 0.1mm on a 'cropped' frame? or am I missing something?
I may well be wrong but the far higher pixel density of the aps sized sensors may have an effect.

cheers,
Andy

[mjmw]

I may well be wrong but the far higher pixel density of the aps sized sensors may have an effect.

cheers,
Andy

I guess it could be more apparent on an image viewed at the same size and res (e.g. printed), becasue the primary subject would appear larger from a smaller sensor...if someone can just lend me a 1Ds mkII and a Sigma 800 I will do some test shots |:d|

[ApusApus]

Hi Mark

Interesting thread, I currently use a 20D with a Canon 70-200mm F2.8 coupled with a 2x TC, which seems an uncommon combination, and am looking to step up .... you never seem to have enough magnification!

I am seriously thinking about the Canon 400mm F2.8 as I could still use it with my 2x TC giving F5.6 for an 800mm, get good magnification and very fast AF but it weighs a ton (as much as the 600mm F4) and I tend to hand hold or bean bag most of the time!

The Canon 500mm F4 seems the most popular choice and is significantly lighter which is probably why! Saw the 600mm F4 the other week and it's a monster and only gives 40mm more mag when retaining AF and a TC!

Let me know what you decide as I will be taking the plunge next year?

Shane

[mjmw]

Hi Mark

Interesting thread, I currently use a 20D with a Canon 70-200mm F2.8 coupled with a 2x TC, which seems an uncommon combination, and am looking to step up .... you never seem to have enough magnification!

I am seriously thinking about the Canon 400mm F2.8 as I could still use it with my 2x TC giving F5.6 for an 800mm, get good magnification and very fast AF but it weighs a ton (as much as the 600mm F4) and I tend to hand hold or bean bag most of the time!

The Canon 500mm F4 seems the most popular choice and is significantly lighter which is probably why! Saw the 600mm F4 the other week and it's a monster and only gives 40mm more mag when retaining AF and a TC!

Let me know what you decide as I will be taking the plunge next year?

Shane

Hi Shane, if I could only have one lens it would be the 400 f2.8 - fantastic on its own and into super-telephoto range with the TCs. The weight does put me off - if I was going to carry that much glass, it would have to be the 600 for the extra reach 'out of the box'. Just as you mention, I am considering the 500mm for the balance of weight and reach.

BTW, how do you like the 70-200? It is on my short-list to cover that range (after my finance recovers!).

Cheers Mark.

[rwhillman]

I went through a similar process, starting with the Canon 400mm f5.6 and with much reluctance eventually moving to the Canon 500mm IS. The 400 is a nice lens; the 500 is a great lens. It is heavy, and a little tiring to carry around, but it can be handheld when needed and produces fabulous results. If you do get this lens, put aside the unwieldy cap provided by Canon and get the Corning dish covers to cover both the hood when attached and the lens with the hood reversed. Bob

[birder]

Hi there.

Please can you give some more info on the Corning dish covers. What are they? Is there a web site?

Thanks

Kevin

I went through a similar process, starting with the Canon 400mm f5.6 and with much reluctance eventually moving to the Canon 500mm IS. The 400 is a nice lens; the 500 is a great lens. It is heavy, and a little tiring to carry around, but it can be handheld when needed and produces fabulous results. If you do get this lens, put aside the unwieldy cap provided by Canon and get the Corning dish covers to cover both the hood when attached and the lens with the hood reversed. Bob

[rwhillman]

Kevin, I am not sure about England, but in the US Corning has outlet stores in malls, and they cost about $1 each. They are also available on EBAY for about $6 plus shipping. The sellers are kitchen supply stores, some of which target their listings to Canon owners. Hope this helps. Bob

[rwhillman]

Kevin, just to add to the above post -- Corningware lid F-24-PC for the hood and lid F-16-PC for the lens. Bob

[ApusApus]

Hi Mark

All I can say is I have found it a superb lens, ultra fast auto focus even with a 2x TC fitted, better weatherproofing (had an old push-pull Canon Zoom lens and got sand in it) but the down side is that it is a heavier combination than the Canon 100-400! But from the people I've spoken to who have both they prefer the 70-200 combination!

Still inclined on the 400mm F2.8 though!

Shane

[Jeremy]

I have the Sigma 500mm, which I use with a Canon 20D, and sometimes with a Kenko Pro 1.4x converter. It definitely will not autofocus using the converter. Is it possible to get autofocus to work with the converter by taping some pins, etc.?
The Sigma is good and sharp, but, if I could afford it, would lean towards the Canon 500mm, if only for the ability to autofocus with converters. No doubt the I.S. helps, too!

[mjmw]

Just to let you all know which way I jumped...

...a Canon 500mm f4.0 IS arrived for me today :bounce:

Cheers Mark.

[QuantumTiger]

...a Canon 500mm f4.0 IS arrived for me today :bounce:
Congratulations. You have my deepest, um, envy... ;)

Did you get a chance to put it through its paces in today's marvellous sunshine? (Finally a weekend with some decent light!)

Look forward to seeing the results...

[Tannin]

Good for you, Mark. That's the same way I have decided to go, but I need to get a few more sheckels stacked away first. Around mid-year, I think, sooner if I can.

[compa]

Just to let you all know which way I jumped...

...a Canon 500mm f4.0 IS arrived for me today :bounce:

Cheers Mark.

Congrats! I hope you have spent your time wisely while waiting ... by working out your muscles - you'll need them!

[SeanKP]

Just to let you all know which way I jumped...

...a Canon 500mm f4.0 IS arrived for me today :bounce:

Cheers Mark.
Congratulations Mark. :t: I'll be very interested to hear how you get on with it.

I've just about bankrupted myself on a 1DS Mark II so I'll not be upgrading my Sigma anytime soon but I do find I'm missing the extra reach the 350D's crop factor gives you. It's amazing how 'short' 500mm looks on a full frame! I've been resorting to the Kenko 1.4x TC which does AF on my f4.5 but it seems to be hunting a lot, more than it used to on the 350D for some reason. I'm guessing that a Canon lens at f4 plus a Canon converter should give significantly better performance.

The main worry I have with upgrading (apart from the obvious fiscal one) is weight. I like to be able to wander from place to place with the camera on the tripod, ready for any unexpected shot that may present itself. Lugging the Sigma about was never easy but the addition of the 1DS seems to have made it quite a chore. I suspect that any more weight and that would no longer be an option. I'd be interested to hear your thoughts on this.

Can't wait to see some of your shots.

Sean

[psilo]

Lugging the Sigma about was never easy but the addition of the 1DS seems to have made it quite a chore. I suspect that any more weight and that would no longer be an option. I'd be interested to hear your thoughts on this.
Sean

Goodness me all these wimpy Guys lugging 500mm lenses! time u chaps got down the gym methinks :P
I carry my 500mm lens around for up to 7 hours a day no problem and by now probably have the muscles to prove it ;)

btw congratulations mark!! sadly I can only dream on......

[mjmw]

Thanks everyone. I managed to get out a bit at the weekend, but wasted the only sun I saw on too distant Short-eared Owls (my 1.4x TC still hadn't turned up - Canon UK seem to have really let down retailers over Christmas!).

I haven't had a chance to do the lens justice yet, so looking forward to the weekend. Oh, whilst typing this, my 1.4x has just arrived, horray!

Weight - it is not as bad as I thought carrying around (so far). I have an Optech strap on it for longer distance, and that works pretty well. On the tripod - I have added a Mk1 Wimberley head to my Manfrotto 055 legs - it is pretty hard work to carry. I still need to find a technique I find comfortable - the lens 'hooked' around the back of my neck seems best so far. I'll keep you all posted.

Congrats Sean on your new purchase. Hope you are getting to grips with it! Of interest, why the 1Ds over the 1D?

Cheers

Mark.

[SeanKP]

Thanks everyone. I managed to get out a bit at the weekend, but wasted the only sun I saw on too distant Short-eared Owls (my 1.4x TC still hadn't turned up - Canon UK seem to have really let down retailers over Christmas!).

I haven't had a chance to do the lens justice yet, so looking forward to the weekend. Oh, whilst typing this, my 1.4x has just arrived, horray!

Weight - it is not as bad as I thought carrying around (so far). I have an Optech strap on it for longer distance, and that works pretty well. On the tripod - I have added a Mk1 Wimberley head to my Manfrotto 055 legs - it is pretty hard work to carry. I still need to find a technique I find comfortable - the lens 'hooked' around the back of my neck seems best so far. I'll keep you all posted.

Congrats Sean on your new purchase. Hope you are getting to grips with it! Of interest, why the 1Ds over the 1D?

Cheers

Mark.

Hi Mark

Congrats on the converter.

The next purchase (after the bank manager has recovered from the shock the 1DS has given him) will probably be either the Sigma 300-800 or the Canon 500mm plus TC so I'll be following your pogress with interest.

With the Sigma I find the most comfortable way of carrying it is on the tripod with the centre column fully extended. The centre column rests on my shoulder with the lens behind my neck, as you are doing. I then hold the legs so that they are pointing straight out in front of me and rest one hand on them. If you've got the centre of gravity right, it isn't too bad although it isn't the most practical method of entering a hide, lol.

I went for the 1DS due to the extra pixels and the fact that I rarely used more than 3 or 4 shots on the 350D so I couldn't see me needing the ultra burst speeds of the 1D. I also really enjoyed taking landscapes in Norway and I'd like to do more of that and the 1DS is really the camera for that.

Sean

PS: Looks like you were right all along about camera shake not being highlighted by a smaller sensor...

[mjmw]

After a weekend of use in Norfolk, some more thoughts...

Size - this lens is quite big...it can be a handfull, especially when using the car as a hide - just getting it on the beanbag is an art in itself! For those who don't know or have forgotten, I have attached a pic of the 500 f4 alongside the 400 f5.6.

Weight - it was hard work carrying around for an afternoon on the tripod (forgot to put the lens strap in my pocket). Thanks for the tip Sean, I have a very short center column with the Wimberley attached, so not really possible. I did find resting the bottom of the QR plate on the back of my shoulder spread the load a little.

IS - still can't get used to this. It was very useful when I tried handholding, but found it also ruined shots if I handheld with a prop (e.g. tree or post).
However, the House Sparrow below (not cropped) was shot in awful light at ISO800, f5.6, 1/250...handheld...with the 1.4x TC on.

Tripod - my old 055 legs are not good enough. The combined weight of body, lens and wimberley is right on the limit. I think I am going to order Gitzo 1325 legs (unless anyone knows better?) - more expense...deep joy |;|

First conclusions - 2 weeks in and this lens is fantastic...well worth every arm and leg I gave for it - I am still grinning.

Cheers

Mark.

[Andy Bright]

I think I am going to order Gitzo 1325 legs (unless anyone knows better?) - more expense...deep joy |;|
Cheers

Mark.The Gitzo 1548 http://www.digiscoped.com/Gitzo.html (http://www.digiscoped.com/Gitzo.html) is better but maybe over the top for a 500mm with I.S.

The sparrow shot looks like the quality you'd expect from your lens, despite the far from ideal conditions.

cheers,
Andy

[mjmw]

The Gitzo 1548 http://www.digiscoped.com/Gitzo.html (http://www.digiscoped.com/Gitzo.html) is better but maybe over the top for a 500mm with I.S.

The sparrow shot looks like the quality you'd expect from your lens, despite the far from ideal conditions.

cheers,
Andy

Thanks Andy. I had read your review and a few people seem to have 1548. I am not sure I want that extra kilo of weight to hump around, unless the 1325 were not up to the job! I remember reading somewhere that the 1325 legs were a good match for the Wimberley and 500mm f4 IS. Think I'll start a new thread for this...

... which is here (http://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?p=512426#post512426)

[Bill Atwood]

I use the G1325 legs for the 500/4.5. They provide a very solid platform. They should do the same for the 500/4.