Diferences in autofocus performance on 600mm f4 versions

Hey there folks, I wanna hear your experience with 600mm f4 af lenses regarding autofocus on newer bodies (R6 and R7).

I´m a wildlife photographer and I´ve always wanted a 600mm f4 but I´m unable to afford a new one so I´m scouring ebay for the 600 f/4L IS USM and f/4L IS II USM versions. I know the weight differences and will probably decide for the IS II version, but also wanted to know your experiece with the aufotocus with these cameras.

Also if you have advice on what to check for before buying a used version.

Thanks!

tetsumo wrote:

Hey there folks, I wanna hear your experience with 600mm f4 af lenses regarding autofocus on newer bodies (R6 and R7).

I´m a wildlife photographer and I´ve always wanted a 600mm f4 but I´m unable to afford a new one so I´m scouring ebay for the 600 f/4L IS USM and f/4L IS II USM versions. I know the weight differences and will probably decide for the IS II version, but also wanted to know your experiece with the aufotocus with these cameras.

Also if you have advice on what to check for before buying a used version.

Thanks!

Just beware if it breaks down - unlikely the version 1 will be able to have any spare parts for repair... Also suspect just like in the 500 Ls - the version 2 sharper and snappier.

Would also suggest a 2nd hand dealer with a warranty rather than ebay - you may pay 10% but no more normally and much better peace of mind and if something goes wrong post purchase in first 6 months.

The 500 f/4 II - which is very similar technology to the 600 mark II - performs incredibly well on the R10 and R5, including with 1.4X TC.

tetsumo wrote:

Hey there folks, I wanna hear your experience with 600mm f4 af lenses regarding autofocus on newer bodies (R6 and R7).

I´m a wildlife photographer and I´ve always wanted a 600mm f4 but I´m unable to afford a new one so I´m scouring ebay for the 600 f/4L IS USM and f/4L IS II USM versions. I know the weight differences and will probably decide for the IS II version, but also wanted to know your experiece with the aufotocus with these cameras.

Also if you have advice on what to check for before buying a used version.

KEH Camera has a 7-Day Return & a 6-Month warranty on used camera gear.

https://www.keh.com/shop/canon-600mm-f-4-l-usm-ef-mount-lens-gel-canon-600mm-f-4-l-usm-ef-mount-lens-gel.html

Thanks!

Canon 600mm F/4 at an Aussie football Game, scroll down to the excellent photo.

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/4574916?page=3

Auto focus was good enough to get this photo, I'm sure it will be fine for wildlife.

It will also be great with an EF to RF adapter.

My hiking staff functions as a monopod.

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/65838986

KevinRA wrote:

tetsumo wrote:

Hey there folks, I wanna hear your experience with 600mm f4 af lenses regarding autofocus on newer bodies (R6 and R7).

I´m a wildlife photographer and I´ve always wanted a 600mm f4 but I´m unable to afford a new one so I´m scouring ebay for the 600 f/4L IS USM and f/4L IS II USM versions. I know the weight differences and will probably decide for the IS II version, but also wanted to know your experiece with the aufotocus with these cameras.

Also if you have advice on what to check for before buying a used version.

Thanks!

Just beware if it breaks down - unlikely the version 1 will be able to have any spare parts for repair... Also suspect just like in the 500 Ls - the version 2 sharper and snappier.

Would also suggest a 2nd hand dealer with a warranty rather than ebay - you may pay 10% but no more normally and much better peace of mind and if something goes wrong post purchase in first 6 months.

The 500 f/4 II - which is very similar technology to the 600 mark II - performs incredibly well on the R10 and R5, including with 1.4X TC.

Thanks for your answer, care to share where you recommend buying it from?

thanks!

Thanks!

I have a 600mm f/4 III. You may have noticed that the previous versions are listed as f/4.0 lenses and this one is f/4. Now why might that be? Maybe it's because it's actually f/4.2, which rounds to f/4. Also Exiftool shows that the focal length is 584mm rather than 600mm. Maybe these are additional reasons why it's lighter than the Mark II version. I've not used previous versions to compare, and I'm still relatively new to this lens. I have used it for handholding photos at a couple parks. It's doable without getting completely worn out. With a decent shoulder mount it should be even more doable.
This lens has had a couple of firmware upgrades to address AF issues. I've read that there is a design flaw that will prevent the problem from being completely resolved by firmware upgrades. I don't have enough data yet to verify that, but I'm generally happy with the lens. I've not had anything comparable before. Closest is a 300mm f/2.8 lens I rented, and I also own a 200mm f/1.8 lens.
Interestingly the 600mm f/4 Mark III is only about an ounce or two heavier than the 200mm f/1.8 lens.

i have the original non-IS with the R6
AF is slightly faster i feel on my 1DX, but obviously miss out on a lot of AF functionality.
Speed wise its very good, slightly behind my mk1 IS 400mm 2.8.
Panning side on or angle, no problem.
Subjects at a distance towards you no problem - you may encounter issues at closer distance but i cant say if the mk1 and mk2 are better but I would assume so.

Galah on approach, about a 50% crop of frame, run through LR+Topaz (r6+600mm

lonewolf1983 wrote:

i have the original non-IS with the R6
AF is slightly faster i feel on my 1DX, but obviously miss out on a lot of AF functionality.
Speed wise its very good, slightly behind my mk1 IS 400mm 2.8.
Panning side on or angle, no problem.
Subjects at a distance towards you no problem - you may encounter issues at closer distance but i cant say if the mk1 and mk2 are better but I would assume so.

Galah on approach, about a 50% crop of frame, run through LR+Topaz (r6+600mm

Nice capture   And nice to see a fine old optic still working well.

Guessing from the outer part of one wing, electronic shutter used?

KevinRA wrote:

lonewolf1983 wrote:

i have the original non-IS with the R6
AF is slightly faster i feel on my 1DX, but obviously miss out on a lot of AF functionality.
Speed wise its very good, slightly behind my mk1 IS 400mm 2.8.
Panning side on or angle, no problem.
Subjects at a distance towards you no problem - you may encounter issues at closer distance but i cant say if the mk1 and mk2 are better but I would assume so.

Galah on approach, about a 50% crop of frame, run through LR+Topaz (r6+600mm

Nice capture And nice to see a fine old optic still working well.

Guessing from the outer part of one wing, electronic shutter used?

Yep, mechanical shutter at 6.7fps not cutting it for me

KevinRA wrote:

lonewolf1983 wrote:

i have the original non-IS with the R6
AF is slightly faster i feel on my 1DX, but obviously miss out on a lot of AF functionality.
Speed wise its very good, slightly behind my mk1 IS 400mm 2.8.
Panning side on or angle, no problem.
Subjects at a distance towards you no problem - you may encounter issues at closer distance but i cant say if the mk1 and mk2 are better but I would assume so.

Galah on approach, about a 50% crop of frame, run through LR+Topaz (r6+600mm

Nice capture And nice to see a fine old optic still working well.

Guessing from the outer part of one wing, electronic shutter used?

What are you getting at with the wing comment?

Victor Engel wrote:

KevinRA wrote:

lonewolf1983 wrote:

i have the original non-IS with the R6
AF is slightly faster i feel on my 1DX, but obviously miss out on a lot of AF functionality.
Speed wise its very good, slightly behind my mk1 IS 400mm 2.8.
Panning side on or angle, no problem.
Subjects at a distance towards you no problem - you may encounter issues at closer distance but i cant say if the mk1 and mk2 are better but I would assume so.

Galah on approach, about a 50% crop of frame, run through LR+Topaz (r6+600mm

Nice capture And nice to see a fine old optic still working well.

Guessing from the outer part of one wing, electronic shutter used?

What are you getting at with the wing comment?

Zoom in on the birds left wing (right hand side of picture) - look at the outer 20% for artefacts/distortion.   It is also longer appearing than the birds right wing.

A lovely shot, just similar effect to what I have got and I have attributed to rolling shutter in electronic shutter on my R5 and R10.

KevinRA wrote:

Victor Engel wrote:

KevinRA wrote:

lonewolf1983 wrote:

i have the original non-IS with the R6
AF is slightly faster i feel on my 1DX, but obviously miss out on a lot of AF functionality.
Speed wise its very good, slightly behind my mk1 IS 400mm 2.8.
Panning side on or angle, no problem.
Subjects at a distance towards you no problem - you may encounter issues at closer distance but i cant say if the mk1 and mk2 are better but I would assume so.

Galah on approach, about a 50% crop of frame, run through LR+Topaz (r6+600mm

Nice capture And nice to see a fine old optic still working well.

Guessing from the outer part of one wing, electronic shutter used?

What are you getting at with the wing comment?

Zoom in on the birds left wing (right hand side of picture) - look at the outer 20% for artefacts/distortion.

Now that's interesting. I guess the readout is done several rows of pixels at a time to produce that feature?

It is also longer appearing than the birds right wing.

Maybe significant and maybe not. The bird is in asymmetrical flight at this stroke anyway. It is also presenting at an angle to the camera (note the tail is to the side compared to the head).

A lovely shot, just similar effect to what I have got and I have attributed to rolling shutter in electronic shutter on my R5 and R10.

I'll keep my eye out for similar artefacts. Maybe I'll browse through my barn swallow shots to see if I find something similar.