Original 600mm F4 (non-IS)

After transitoning from Nikon i'm now reviewing my options for long-tele's (have a 300mm ISii) in the 500-600mm range.
A well priced original 600mm non-IS has popped up and wondered how this lens stacks up vs its more modern bretheren.
I'm aware its heavy (I only cart it from the carpark to sidelines and take the 300mm if weight is an issue) and that parts may not be available should i need to repair it.
Dont need IS as primarily shooting fast shutter for sports.
How is AF speed and IQ?
Will be paired with a 1dx/R6 combo

lonewolf1983 wrote:

After transitoning from Nikon i'm now reviewing my options for long-tele's (have a 300mm ISii) in the 500-600mm range.
A well priced original 600mm non-IS has popped up and wondered how this lens stacks up vs its more modern bretheren.
I'm aware its heavy (I only cart it from the carpark to sidelines and take the 300mm if weight is an issue) and that parts may not be available should i need to repair it.
Dont need IS as primarily shooting fast shutter for sports.
How is AF speed and IQ?
Will be paired with a 1dx/R6 combo

I would pass on that lens.  It’s too heavy/large and will sit in your closet most of the time.  I had the IS version and it did not do well with extenders.  I currently have the 600 F4 ll and it’s still a tripod lens and does not work well for flying in smaller jets or prop planes.  If you can afford it, the 600 lll is very light weight.

If you’re looking to buy used, I’d take a good hard look at the 500mm F4 ll.  It was the best lens I ever owned.  It’s easy to transport, still hand holdable with superb IQ.   
Another excellent lens is the 400 DO ll with extender... which gets you further out than you 300mm.

dgumshu wrote:

lonewolf1983 wrote:

After transitoning from Nikon i'm now reviewing my options for long-tele's (have a 300mm ISii) in the 500-600mm range.
A well priced original 600mm non-IS has popped up and wondered how this lens stacks up vs its more modern bretheren.
I'm aware its heavy (I only cart it from the carpark to sidelines and take the 300mm if weight is an issue) and that parts may not be available should i need to repair it.
Dont need IS as primarily shooting fast shutter for sports.
How is AF speed and IQ?
Will be paired with a 1dx/R6 combo

I would pass on that lens. It’s too heavy/large and will sit in your closet most of the time. I had the IS version and it did not do well with extenders. I currently have the 600 F4 ll and it’s still a tripod lens and does not work well for flying in smaller jets or prop planes. If you can afford it, the 600 lll is very light weight.

If you’re looking to buy used, I’d take a good hard look at the 500mm F4 ll. It was the best lens I ever owned. It’s easy to transport, still hand holdable with superb IQ.
Another excellent lens is the 400 DO ll with extender... which gets you further out than you 300mm.

Thanks for the input.
I guess you missed the part where i mentioned im aware of the size/weight - its only 1kg heavier than my nikon 400mm 2.8.
It sits permanently on a monopod for sideline sport, i never shoot planes.
I also wont be using an extender, 600mm reach is enough for my main sports.
The 500mm ISii is out of budget ($8+k AUD vs sub $3k for the lens in question)
DOii also $6k+, and im happy with the 300ii + 1.4x extender which is more versatile and longer.

I have owned Nikon 400/2.8 AI-S, Canon FD 400/2.8 L, FD 800/5.6 L, FD 300/2.8, Canon EF 300/4 L and Canon EF 300/2.8 L.  In my opinion any of the supertelephoto lenses that were the best of their era are still exceptional today, with respect to image quality.

I have no idea about AF on that lens.  The similar era 300/4 L was always very good.  I have been unable to put my 300/2.8 to a true test yet but so far as long as I select the right focus range it is fine.  I suspect focus is more body dependent than lens.

lonewolf1983 wrote:

After transitoning from Nikon i'm now reviewing my options for long-tele's (have a 300mm ISii) in the 500-600mm range.
A well priced original 600mm non-IS has popped up and wondered how this lens stacks up vs its more modern bretheren.
I'm aware its heavy (I only cart it from the carpark to sidelines and take the 300mm if weight is an issue) and that parts may not be available should i need to repair it.
Dont need IS as primarily shooting fast shutter for sports.
How is AF speed and IQ?
Will be paired with a 1dx/R6 combo

I would add an extender to your 300 f/2.8IS II before an antiquated and very heavy 600.

If you can tolerate f/5.6 with the 300 plus x2.0. AF is very good if you start in the ballpark of the focal length of your subject. The 300 plus x1.4 is as good as the bare lens.

lonewolf1983 wrote:

It sits permanently on a monopod for sideline sport,

My hiking staff supports my lens and also myself

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/35185358

The bolt in the picture is a hanger bolt. Use a 3/8 16 for a tripod head.

I have this head with the indexable option. Makes it easy if you want to mount a camera or a long lens.

https://www.acratech.net/tripod-heads/long-lens-heads/long-lens-head/

Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q_HWWa-fyow

If you ever do stitched panoramas using a tripod this head might be a better Option.

Acratech Panoramic Head can be used like a Long Lens Head

Blake Cook wrote:

lonewolf1983 wrote:

After transitoning from Nikon i'm now reviewing my options for long-tele's (have a 300mm ISii) in the 500-600mm range.
A well priced original 600mm non-IS has popped up and wondered how this lens stacks up vs its more modern bretheren.
I'm aware its heavy (I only cart it from the carpark to sidelines and take the 300mm if weight is an issue) and that parts may not be available should i need to repair it.
Dont need IS as primarily shooting fast shutter for sports.
How is AF speed and IQ?
Will be paired with a 1dx/R6 combo

I would add an extender to your 300 f/2.8IS II before an antiquated and very heavy 600.

If you can tolerate f/5.6 with the 300 plus x2.0. AF is very good if you start in the ballpark of the focal length of your subject. The 300 plus x1.4 is as good as the bare lens.

Already have the 2x and while its not bad it lacks the look of a proper native long telephoto (i shot back to back with my Sigma 500mm F4 and can clearly tell the difference between the two)

lonewolf1983 wrote:

Blake Cook wrote:

lonewolf1983 wrote:

After transitoning from Nikon i'm now reviewing my options for long-tele's (have a 300mm ISii) in the 500-600mm range.
A well priced original 600mm non-IS has popped up and wondered how this lens stacks up vs its more modern bretheren.
I'm aware its heavy (I only cart it from the carpark to sidelines and take the 300mm if weight is an issue) and that parts may not be available should i need to repair it.
Dont need IS as primarily shooting fast shutter for sports.
How is AF speed and IQ?
Will be paired with a 1dx/R6 combo

I would add an extender to your 300 f/2.8IS II before an antiquated and very heavy 600.

If you can tolerate f/5.6 with the 300 plus x2.0. AF is very good if you start in the ballpark of the focal length of your subject. The 300 plus x1.4 is as good as the bare lens.

Already have the 2x and while its not bad it lacks the look of a proper native long telephoto (i shot back to back with my Sigma 500mm F4 and can clearly tell the difference between the two)

There you go then, why not just buy a sigma 500mm f4 in canon mount?

dgumshu wrote:

I would pass on that lens. It’s too heavy/large and will sit in your closet most of the time.

+1

It's a beast Max. Diameter x Length, Weight 6.6 x 18.0, 11.8 lbs

The mark ii 8.64 lbs

The mark iii 6.73 lbs.

My original is dedicated to its own tripod.

In my opinion any lens over 5 pounds should be on a monopod or tripod, so whether it is 6 lbs or 12 lbs becomes mute.  I'd rather have the best lens that I can afford and put up with the weight.  Supertelephoto lenses are not typically lenses that one uses the most from their arsenal and are used on a more strategic basis, taking size and weight into account.

Blake Cook wrote:

I would add an extender to your 300 f/2.8IS II before an antiquated and very heavy 600.

+1

The 300 on a 1Dx and 2x extender.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dwIQyiEV4Z0

All of my shots are with the Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II USM + 2x Extender III with the 5DIII or 1D X.

Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II USM + 2x Extender (II or III) | Canon Rumors - Your best source for Canon rumors, leaks and gossip

John Crowe wrote:

In my opinion any lens over 5 pounds should be on a monopod or tripod, so whether it is 6 lbs or 12 lbs becomes mute.

Except when you’re transporting or traveling with it.  Weight/size then becomes very relevant.

5lbs may be your limit, but a 6.5lb lens is still very hand holdable.  All depends on your personal preference.

I'd rather have the best lens that I can afford and put up with the weight.

best wishes with your selection and budget is certainly a deciding factor.

Supertelephoto lenses are not typically lenses that one uses the most from their arsenal and are used on a more strategic basis, taking size and weight into account.

That depends on your interests.  For the average landscape/portrait shooter, that may be true.  Not so much for the Wildlife shooter.  Super tele’s are what I use most... 400 F4 to 600 F4; 500 F4 being the most used and all with extenders.

Size/weight makes a big difference when traveling with gear.... especially when you’re forced to remove gear from a carry-on in order to meet (small plane) weight limitations.  Or having to remove gear as your carry-on will be gate checked and tossed 6 feet crashing down onto a conveyor... ouch.  A recent experience.

If I travel I guess I will leave the 800/5.6 at home.  At least 'til I get a travel case for it!  When we open up again I will use the 300/2.8 with 2x when I don't want to deal with the size and weight.

I can hanhold 6 or 7 pounds or more too, but not all day.

Norm Neely wrote:

Blake Cook wrote:

I would add an extender to your 300 f/2.8IS II before an antiquated and very heavy 600.

+1

The 300 on a 1Dx and 2x extender.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dwIQyiEV4Z0

All of my shots are with the Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II USM + 2x Extender III with the 5DIII or 1D X.

Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II USM + 2x Extender (II or III) | Canon Rumors - Your best source for Canon rumors, leaks and gossip

already have the 300mm, 1dx and extender.
RE the weight, as mentioned this will live on a monopod and only get carried 50m from the carpark to the sideline.

Colin46 wrote:

lonewolf1983 wrote:

Blake Cook wrote:

lonewolf1983 wrote:

After transitoning from Nikon i'm now reviewing my options for long-tele's (have a 300mm ISii) in the 500-600mm range.
A well priced original 600mm non-IS has popped up and wondered how this lens stacks up vs its more modern bretheren.
I'm aware its heavy (I only cart it from the carpark to sidelines and take the 300mm if weight is an issue) and that parts may not be available should i need to repair it.
Dont need IS as primarily shooting fast shutter for sports.
How is AF speed and IQ?
Will be paired with a 1dx/R6 combo

I would add an extender to your 300 f/2.8IS II before an antiquated and very heavy 600.

If you can tolerate f/5.6 with the 300 plus x2.0. AF is very good if you start in the ballpark of the focal length of your subject. The 300 plus x1.4 is as good as the bare lens.

Already have the 2x and while its not bad it lacks the look of a proper native long telephoto (i shot back to back with my Sigma 500mm F4 and can clearly tell the difference between the two)

There you go then, why not just buy a sigma 500mm f4 in canon mount?

Not much on the 2nd hand market and there is an unresolved issue with this lens and the R6 AF system (waiting on firmware update)
Purchasing one new, even on special would be 3x the price of the old 600mm
Will give it a shot, worst case i can on-sell it and probably get my money back

1Dx4me wrote:

lonewolf1983 wrote:

Norm Neely wrote:

Blake Cook wrote:

I would add an extender to your 300 f/2.8IS II before an antiquated and very heavy 600.

+1

The 300 on a 1Dx and 2x extender.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dwIQyiEV4Z0

All of my shots are with the Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II USM + 2x Extender III with the 5DIII or 1D X.

Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II USM + 2x Extender (II or III) | Canon Rumors - Your best source for Canon rumors, leaks and gossip

already have the 300mm, 1dx and extender.
RE the weight, as mentioned this will live on a monopod and only get carried 50m from the carpark to the sideline.

it depends on the condition of your arm muscles, a 300 f2.8+2.0 III can be carried by hand all day without having muscle spasm. i hand carried mine all day visiting SF zoo with minimum painful consequences.

Yes i went with it for a hike and had no issues, only slightly more than any of the consumer 150-600 zooms

lonewolf1983 wrote:

A well priced original 600mm non-IS has popped up and wondered how this lens stacks up vs its more modern bretheren.

Maybe a good price on a mark ii might pop up?

This is a good comparison of the 600mm mark ii vs 800mm. I think it's a very good read even if the mark ii isn't in your budget.

http://www.birdsasart-blog.com/2013/01/15/canon-ef-600mm-f4l-is-ii-vs-canon-ef-800mm-f5-6l-is-and-the-winner-is-2/

Norm Neely wrote:

lonewolf1983 wrote:

A well priced original 600mm non-IS has popped up and wondered how this lens stacks up vs its more modern bretheren.

Maybe a good price on a mark ii might pop up?

This is a good comparison of the 600mm mark ii vs 800mm. I think it's a very good read even if the mark ii isn't in your budget.

http://www.birdsasart-blog.com/2013/01/15/canon-ef-600mm-f4l-is-ii-vs-canon-ef-800mm-f5-6l-is-and-the-winner-is-2/

Doubtful, few 500mm F4 mkII's available 2nd hand for about $8k
600's attract more dollars
Comparison is the original non-IS i'm picking up for $2.8k