Canon 600mm f/4L IS III: I was considering rounding out my Canon L lens collection by spending my kids inheritance on this bad boy. Initially I read that this was one of the sharpest...

raymondh Loc: Walker, MI

I was considering rounding out my Canon L lens collection by spending my kids inheritance on this bad boy. Initially I read that this was one of the sharpest in the Canon family but I have since read some reviews from those that have it that it produces unusable images at slow shutter speeds. And Canon doesn't have it listed on their web site.
Any guesses on chances that Canon will correct the problem?

BassmanBruce Loc: Middle of the Mitten

A “sharp” lens that has issues at slow shutter speeds is a reflection on the user/reviewers not the lens.

robertjerl Loc: Corona, California

raymondh wrote:

I was considering rounding out my Canon L lens collection by spending my kids inheritance on this bad boy. Initially I read that this was one of the sharpest in the Canon family but I have since read some reviews from those that have it that it produces unusable images at slow shutter speeds. And Canon doesn't have it listed on their web site.
Any guesses on chances that Canon will correct the problem?

Long lens and slow shutter speed do not go together unless you can embed your gear in concrete to prevent even the tiniest movement. And then you had better hope a truck doesn't drive by or a minor tremor you don't even feel. There will be blur.

That is why my keeper rate is low when using flash* with my 600 when the light is poor but I am stubborn enough to keep shooting. Motion blur, even the vibration of the mirror slap can do it at distance.

* sync speed is 1/250.

raymondh Loc: Walker, MI

BassmanBruce wrote:

A “sharp” lens that has issues at slow shutter speeds is a reflection on the user/reviewers not the lens.

I suppose there is some truth in that but I do find it interesting that it is not a lens currently listed on Canon’s website.

SeamusMac Loc: Walla Walla, WA

Screw the kids, buy the lens.

raymondh Loc: Walker, MI

robertjerl wrote:

Long lens and slow shutter speed do not go together unless you can embed your gear in concrete to prevent even the tiniest movement. And then you had better hope a truck doesn't drive by or a minor tremor you don't even feel. There will be blur.

That is why my keeper rate is low when using flash* with my 600 when the light is poor but I am stubborn enough to keep shooting. Motion blur, even the vibration of the mirror slap can do it at distance.

* sync speed is 1/250.

Hadn’t occurred to me that slower sp’s would be an issue with the super telephotos. I think I recall that the early hype on ver III was that it was equal to ver II in image quality but significantly lighter & with improved, additional stops of stabilization.

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

So, let's consider a few ideas.

1. Canon creates and implements IS across the range of their Great White L-series lenses that can detect a stable tripod.

2. The 500L II can shoot an image like the spider below, with an 1.4x and from a tripod, with the IS active at 1/10 sec.

3. Canon releases an update to the EF 600mm f/4L IS II that should reflect the pinnacle of Canon's EF and IS technology, given they're stopping production going forward.

4. Canon, with their 30 year history of EOS technology, releases the apex design of their premier 600mm L-series lens with a problem that is discovered by the internet. Something not even the ever vigilant sleuths at UHH have yet to discover.

5. Canon publishes 5-stops support / shake correction with the IS implementation of the 600L III, say to the 1/15 sec range for a 600mm lens. Even 1/60 second would be phenomenal.

If you still trust the internet more, go with the slightly cheaper ver II.

Madagascar Golden Orb Spider by Paul Sager, on Flickr

Bill_de Loc: US

raymondh wrote:

I suppose there is some truth in that but I do find it interesting that it is not a lens currently listed on Canon’s website.

It is listed as out of stock.

https://www.usa.canon.com/internet/portal/us/home/products/wheretobuy?sku=US_5125B002&model=EF%20600mm%20f/4L%20IS%20II%20USM&type=ITCG_WTB

Not uncommon this past year. I've been waiting for a while for a Nikon 500mm.

As mentioned above, long lenses are more prone to poor images at slow shutter speeds because people don't know how to use them. The slower the shutter speed the steadier that camera/lens needs to be held.

---

robertjerl Loc: Corona, California

raymondh wrote:

Hadn’t occurred to me that slower sp’s would be an issue with the super telephotos. I think I recall that the early hype on ver III was that it was equal to ver II in image quality but significantly lighter & with improved, additional stops of stabilization.

Canon has apparently suspended production of a lot of lenses in the EF & EF-S lines without actually calling them discontinued. Some think this is part of their sales department wanting to more or less force everyone into the RF world.

raymondh Loc: Walker, MI

Bill_de wrote:

It is listed as out of stock.

https://www.usa.canon.com/internet/portal/us/home/products/wheretobuy?sku=US_5125B002&model=EF%20600mm%20f/4L%20IS%20II%20USM&type=ITCG_WTB

Not uncommon this past year. I've been waiting for a while for a Nikon 500mm.

As mentioned above, long lenses are more prone to poor images at slow shutter speeds because people don't know how to use them. The slower the shutter speed the steadier that camera/lens needs to be held.

---

The link refers to the II model, not the III.

Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)

robertjerl wrote:

Long lens and slow shutter speed do not go together unless you can embed your gear in concrete to prevent even the tiniest movement. And then you had better hope a truck doesn't drive by or a minor tremor you don't even feel. There will be blur.

That is why my keeper rate is low when using flash* with my 600 when the light is poor but I am stubborn enough to keep shooting. Motion blur, even the vibration of the mirror slap can do it at distance.

* sync speed is 1/250.

This was a feral cat - taken at 1/25 sec, hand held, using a 150-600mm Sigma Sport - I did not have to hire a mason to pour the concrete to minimize even the tiniest movement. I did switch on the optical stabilization, though. I just breathed normally and gently squeezed the shutter at the end of an exhale, assuming a shooter with a long gun with my left shoulder leading towards the cat. I was at or near the minimum focus distance of around 16 ft, where any movement (cat or me) would have resulted in obvious blur -the only softness you see is from the extreme cropping. Ferals are known to be skittish, but since I had been feeding her and providing shelter for the past 3 years, she put up with me.

FWIW, I often shoot in the "forbidden" range of shutter speeds with that lens. The stabilization is good enough to provide me with good images from 1/160 on up. The Sigma literature says its stabilization is good for up to 4 stops. I can't disagree. I haven't used a tripod with this lens. In contrast, I used a tripod 100% of the time with my 600mmF4 which weighed 10.5 lbs and had no stabilization.

(Download)

tcthome Loc: NJ

robertjerl wrote:

Long lens and slow shutter speed do not go together unless you can embed your gear in concrete to prevent even the tiniest movement. And then you had better hope a truck doesn't drive by or a minor tremor you don't even feel. There will be blur.

That is why my keeper rate is low when using flash* with my 600 when the light is poor but I am stubborn enough to keep shooting. Motion blur, even the vibration of the mirror slap can do it at distance.

* sync speed is 1/250.

billnikon Loc: Pennsylvania/Ohio/Florida/Maui/Oregon/Vermont

raymondh wrote:

I suppose there is some truth in that but I do find it interesting that it is not a lens currently listed on Canon’s website.

If it was me, and it isn't, I would call Canon and or call several large camera stores and ask them why?

Notorious T.O.D. Loc: Harrisburg, North Carolina

Or buy an R5 and RF100-500 and probably save some money...maybe enough to get an R6 and some other new RF lenses...and with an adapter you can use your existing L lenses...

goldstar46 Loc: Tampa, Fl

raymondh wrote:

I was considering rounding out my Canon L lens collection by spending my kids inheritance on this bad boy. Initially I read that this was one of the sharpest in the Canon family but I have since read some reviews from those that have it that it produces unusable images at slow shutter speeds. And Canon doesn't have it listed on their web site.
Any guesses on chances that Canon will correct the problem?

========================================================
Ray....... If you are staying in the 'EF' series

.. Of all the Research I have seen, the Canon 300mm f/2.8 is the absolutely 'sharpest' lense in the EF series
.... even sharper than the 600mm f/4... I currently have 5 canons... with 1 being the R5 and will slowly change over to R series and RF lenses... BUT, I now do have 7 of the EF and think the world of the 300mm

If it were me, I would buy the 300mm f/2.8 and have the flexibility of also using a 1.4 or 2.0 Extender
....... You would save 'boat-loads of money and have more flexibility..

..... I would invite you to look at the Canon MTF Charts below for the 300mm

https://www.usa.canon.com/internet/portal/us/home/products/details/lenses/ef/telephoto/ef-300mm-f-2-8l-is-ii-usm

Also, go over to DXOMark and look at the review for sharpness for that lens... As I said, when you compare it, with all other Canon Lenses, it ranks at the very top... See the below for DxoMark

https://www.dxomark.com/Lenses/Canon/Canon-EF-300mm-F28L-IS-II-USM-mounted-on-Canon-EOS-5DS-R__1009

Hope this helps you a little........

Cheers
George Veazey
####