short answer is yes! I have owned the v II and sold them and got vIII and there is a marked improvement. Recently I posted photo shot with Canon 1DX and 1.4 and 2.0 vIII Canon teleconverters with Canon 600mm F4 lens and there is no appreciable degradation of sharpness with the vIII teleconverters. I will not post the photos again, but if you want to see them send a PM.

So spend the money for the latest technology - it is worth it.
BTW the vII 600mm f4 is also a significant improvement compared to the 600mm f4 vI; I have owned both.

alanmurphyphotography.com click on purchase, then click on videos; $50 have not yet bought it but I saw some of it and it was excellent. I ran into Alan in NM, he was shooting raptors, and he let me shoot over his shoulder and was very nice. Look at his workshops and some of them have video that is helpful to watch.

alan murphy has a great video on how to make setups that will attract birds go to his website to see it.

Hi everybody,
I am going to join in at the risk of being viewed as a snob or worse. One thing that really bothers me about many comments, is that so many want a 18-600 zoom or something like that. The more zoom the better. There is a love affair with Sigma and other non-OEM brands of lenses.

I am not wealthy, but prior to retiring I had a good income, and so I do have good equipment, like a Canon (I have canon bodies) 600mm f4. Nowhere do I see anyone speak up and mention that prime lenses of excellent quality ALWAYS are sharper than zoom lenses. Not only that with an f4 the focus is also faster or much faster.

If your budget can include a 150 - 600 lens and that is all; you can get some nice pictures and have a lot of fun. But don't think that the sharpness or focusing will match a prime super telephoto. It is just a fact that the optics of a high quality prime will be better than a high quality zoom. The only zoom that I have seen and used (no I don't have one - can't afford it) is the Canon 200-400 with built-in 1.4X which is super, but last I checked it was over $12K.

I am not pushing Canon either over Nikon; I have shot with guys shooting bears in Alaska with Nikon gear, and the the results with the Nikon super telephotos was beyond excellent.

The photo of the bird from Africa was pleasant. however he did not check the download option; and I suspect that enlarged, might be noticeably soft. That said, he brought home a better picture than most visitors to Africa!

A lot of information on this blog is passed on as gospel that is in truth, crap.
150-600 is equal to Canon/Nikon 600mm f4 lenses - thats crap
That you can't handhold a super telephoto - thats crap
That adding a 2x teleconverter degrades the quality - at least for the latest Canon 2x with Canon 600mm f4 is crap
rarely is the fact mentioned that since the 150-600 zooms are f5.6 or higher, they won't autofocus as well as f4 primes; may not autofocus at all.

I do recognize that everyones budget is different. Mine is radically different than 5 years ago. My first decent longer lens was a 100-400 that is no longer made. I was thrilled and got some pretty good photos. But as I got better and could afford larger investments I got better gear. Am I having more fun now? not sure about that, but I am getting better photos.

I will post some photos with my 600mm F4 and then a couple with the same lens with a 2x; most shots were hand held and the body was a 1DX which is 18.1 MB I encourage you to download and check out the "crispness" at more magnification. I attempted to focus on the eye of the bird rather on the body. Check out the last two with the 2x teleconverter, is there degradation of quality? Not significantly anyway. I also need to mention that the newest versions of the Canon 600mm and the teleconverters are very significantly sharper and faster focusing than the version I lens and version ii teleconverter. I owned the older ones and upgraded to the latest versions and noted a significant improvement. Sold the earlier gear for more than I paid, so I am hoping my investments in lenses will not cost me a lot in the long run.

My comments are offered in a good spirit, but I felt that they had to be made. If you think you are taking good bird photos, I would suggest that you visit dougbrownphotography.com, birdsasart.com, and deepgreenphotography.com. When I do that it is very humbling, but inspires me to try harder.
Cheers

(Download)

600 f4 on tripod in fishing boat

(Download)

600 mm f4 on tripon in fishing boat

(Download)

600 f4 handheld - download and check out fibers around bill

(Download)

600mm f4 with 2x handheld from fishing boat

(Download)

600 mm f4 with 2x handheld from fishing boat

(Download)

You can take rental lenses out of the country - I have done that; but you must buy insurance when the lens is high priced.

lovely!!

Well I have expensive tastes; no longer have the budget to match. I would have two suggestions; upgrade the 7D to a 7Dmk2 for better focusing, and then rent a Canon 200-400 with 1.4x built in; fabulous lens, lots of flexibility in reach, no need to take lens off and on for the extender in the commonly dusty environment, just flip a lever. regular is f4, with extender, f5.6 That is not bad.

check out Feisol; about the same as Gitzo and less $$$

Hooray!!!!

Walt,
As a Canon guy it is almost more than I can do to restrain myself about suggesting different brand of gear. OK; I do shoot a lot of BIF, and if your camera body will do it pick a setting that uses the central spot plus the 9 or so spots nearest that center focus spot. That's how I set my 1DX for BIF; when I only used the center spot, I would miss a lot, but by adding the adjoining spots I got a lot more in focus photos. I have alternated between back button and normal focusing mechanisms and don't see a lot of difference.

Another thing? what is the f stop of the lens you are using when wide open? Will the focus points of your body focus at that f stop? If so are you shooting wide open? Most bodies get bad about focusing around f8. If that doesn't work add more focus points, but then you start focusing on non-bird items.

Learn to move the chosen focus spots quickly around your screen, so that you can frame the birds nicely. But most of all keep shooting; BIF is a skill that can be acquired or improved upon. Before I go on a trip, I'll sit in my back yard and fire away at anything that moves, just to get better at tracking the birds.

I met a guy that was excellent at "hitting" the BIF with his focus, and found out he was a competitive skeet shooter. He said the skill transferred to BIF photography.

I know you don't want to hear it, but the vast, vast majority of the serious BIF photographers use long prime super telephotos, at about F4. I am so sorry to tell you but your zoom does not compare to a 600mm F4 prime of either Canon or Nikon, no matter what the other "hoggers" say. I will also say that the newer 600mm from Canon is very significantly better than the first version, both in terms of sharpness and rapidity of focus. I have owned both.

My last suggestion is to take a BIF workshop. I think Doug Brown's workshops at Bosque del Apache are fantastic, and he may be the best BIF photographer in the country. Look at his website, check out how many of his shots are in the online bird books. He can be a big help.
Bill

I am amazed at how much trouble you are going through to try to convince me that the mirrorless are as good for BIF. "Frame rate is 10fps" Oh BTW you can't use the viewfinder when doing that! Are you kidding me? so you use a gun sight? I really don't care what you use to take photographs, and Yes I have spent a fortune (that many don't have available in their budgets) to achieve success in bird photography. If you have budgetary restraints then do the best you can with what you can afford.

I have one more suggestion. I plan on going back to Bosque del Apache in NM again in early December, which is a fab place for BIF. Plan to meet me there and let's shoot together. I know where to stay and where to shoot and at what time of day. Maybe you can show me that I am wrong and you get great photos; I'll guarantee that I'll get hundreds of great shots. Maybe we'll both learn something. BTW, no charge for showing you around, and maybe some of the other hoggers would like to join us, and learn the ropes at a really neat place.
That way we get rid of all the opinions that have been shared and see some results. If you are interested in this send me a PM and we'll figure out dates, etc.

Or you can join Doug Brown for his Bosque workshop for about $800 (worth it for sure) or join Art Morris's workshop for a lot more. Bill

Man after my own heart! I run two 32" 4K Dells and a mac Pro; I love having the big monitors and room to put "pages" everywhere. Yeah, mine is not neat either.

I always travel with a MeFoto Travel tripod except on a real photo shoot I take two more bigger ones. About 3 lbs for the carbon model and it works well. However, I have done three Alaska cruises with out a tripod (didn't own one then) and did not really need it.

Lately I have been enjoying shots at dusk or after dark, hence the tripod.
Have fun

All with the 1DX; most at ISO 1250 and shutter speeds of 1/1000 +/- a little; the warbler shot was on a tripod and shutter speed of 1/400

It took me a while to learn to squeeze off shots and to hold steady when handholding. I only handhold because I can't get the camera on the bird fast enough most of the time when on a tripod, even with a good Wimberly head. I'll use a monopod when I can, but again it slows me down. I don't handhold because I am "macho" but because I am in a situation where that is the only way I can get the shot.

Well, where does the 30% loss in quality when using a 2x teleconverter? I don't know, and don't believe it, at least for my gear.

I have shot thousands of frames with 300 f2.8 with both 1.4x and 2x as well as 600mm f4 with 1.4 and 2x. I will confess that all gear is Canon and these are the the latest versions of both lenses and teleconverters (version iii) I used to have the older versions and they were noticeably worse. So the latest stuff is pretty good. Even out to the edge of the photo, if it is in the focal plane, it is sharp. (at least to me) I am curious what you think?

I'll post some examples of the 600 with 2X all handheld shots (except the warbler) that are uncropped. Download them and tell me if they have a loss in quality. I think that the belief that there is a significant loss in quality comes from either poor or older gear.

handheld sitting in a boat - 600+2x

(Download)

handheld sitting in a boat - 600+2x

(Download)

600+2X handheld

(Download)

600 + 2X handheld

(Download)

600 + 2X on tripod

(Download)

600 + 2X handheld

(Download)