Hi everyone, I have been shooting with a 400 5.6 for the past 7 years. I shoot mainly small song birds, and sometimes medium sized birds (egrets, heron, vulture, hawks, water fowls, etc), I do find the 400 a tad too short and the 5.6 a bit slow, the lack of IS is not a huge problem but at times I do wish I could have had it, especially at dawn or dusk where the shutter speed was ~400 to 200th of a second, I could barely get sharp image hand held with 1/200 of a second. I walk around quite a lot, and I don't really like to carry a tripod when shooting birds. The body I use is a full frame 1ds mark ii and it produces great images at a moderate file size (i only shoot raw and each file is ~8 to 12MB). I have been doing a lot of research for the 500 f4 and 600 f4 ii. I know they both had weight reduction yet much heavier than the 400 5.6.
I am debating if the 500mm is really that much better in terms of reach over the 400, or should I go with 600 instead.
Anyone here that went from 400 5.6 to the longer lens, what's your opinion?
Best,
J
I am debating if the 500mm is really that much better in terms of reach over the 400, or should I go with 600 instead.
Anyone here that went from 400 5.6 to the longer lens, what's your opinion?
Best,
J