( 5 reviews )
-
( 1 of 1 found this review helpful ) Posted: 05-29-2009
I've owned this lens for most of a year now, and I am completely satisfied with it. Downsides - it's heavy at almost 12 pounds, and it costs half as much as a small car. It's like adopting a 12 pound child - if you're on a photo shoot, you have to take it everywhere. You can't let it out of your sight. It's a lot to carry, you certainly don't want to bang it around, and it's always in the back of your mind that somebody might like to snatch it when you're not looking. But all that said, this is one incredible lens! After a year of shooting a competitor's 500mm f6.4 zoom - and agonizing over whether it would be worth the cost, I upgraded to the Canon 600mm. The improvement in image quality is stark. Bokeh is superb. The f4 combined with the IS allows me to get images that were out of reach with the other lens. And the extra 100mm in focal length - especially when combined with Canon's matched 1.4X extender really fills the frame with whatever it is you're shooting. I've shot it in temperature extremes from -3F to +90F and in over 20K images, it has never given me the slightest problem. The autofocus is FAST and the dual-mode IS works extremely well. Invest in a decent tripod and gimbal head (Manfrotto's works very nicely at a fraction of the cost of the Wimberly) and you'll be happy. Try to hand-hold this beast and you won't. But if you're thinking about moving up to this lens, take it from an avid bird & wildlife photographer - you will NOT regret it!
-
( 1 of 1 found this review helpful ) Posted: 12-20-2008
The good news is that this lens is capable of producing some very sharp, quality images. The bad news is that it depends on your copy (thus 4 stars instead of 5). Don't necessarily believe those who tell you that you have "bad technique". I went through 3 lenses before finally getting one that performed as one would expect for a $7,000+ lens. The first copy had obvious defects, produced soft images lacking detail, and was returned to the seller. The 2nd copy had something resembling bad chromatic aberration (also with soft images lacking detail once again), and went in to the California Factory Service Center twice. Both times, the FSC returned it to me in worst shape than when it went in. After contacting a Canon executive, my lens went to Canon's engineers and I was issued a loaner within 24 hours (something the head of the California FSC never offered). Canon's executives obviously care; I'm not so sure about their FSC. Canon eventually told me they were going to use the lens to find ways to improve their manufacturing process. They offered to let me keep the loaner they had sent me, but I declined due to visible metal casting flakes on the outermost element. Canon ended up sending me a copy that was first inspected by their engineers. I've had that copy for 5 months now and it has performed superbly - sharp, good contrast, etc. So if/when you buy this lens, buy from a seller you trust, and a seller that you know will work with you. I bought from Canoga Camera in southern California. With the first lens, they were supportive. With the second lens, they told me I could not return it, and then had their Canon sales rep call me. The sales rep insulted me (literally), told me I did not know what I was talking about, stated, "Are we done here?", and then essentially hung up on me. I was on my own when I contacted Canon executives in NY. Fortunately, they were extremely professional and responsive, but it was a long ordeal that was quite stressful considering how much money was at stake. Using live view at 10x, the visible shake of 840mm (600mm + 1.4x TC) is evident, even when the lens appears to be steady. Yet with IS, the results can be impressively sharp. In addition to a very sturdy tripod and good tripod head, I have gotten excellent results using the molar bean bag filled with 20+ pounds of pinto beans. This lens produces much better images than my Canon 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 L IS lens. Even with a 2x TC, the results from this lens are superior to my 100-400mm. For reference, I own Canon's 24-70mm f/2.8 L, 70-200 mm f/2.8 L IS, and 100-400 mm f/4.5-5.6 L IS. The 600mm is my only prime, so it should come as no surprise that it performs the best of all the lenses in my collection. The 70-200 is a close second in terms of performance.
