Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in
  • Hey all, just changed over the backend after 15 years I figured time to give it a bit of an update, its probably gonna be a bit weird for most of you and i am sure there is a few bugs to work out but it should kinda work the same as before... hopefully :)

Canon 50 - 1000mm for Wildlife

AndreasOberg

AndreasOberg

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 30, 2011
Messages
1,671
Reaction score
31
Points
48
Location
Leicestershire, United Kingdom
Website
www.obergwildlife.com
Hi everyone.

I was just wondering if anyone has any first hand experience with the Canon 50 1000mm, or CN20x50. Plan is to use it for wildlife, especially birds and jungle animals.
http://www.visuals.co.uk/3972207-cn20x50-ias-h-p1.html?gclid=CjwKCAiAlfnUBRBQEiwAWpPA6QeQxsaNZlvGQRPXf730ltPHVg8t4WC_X5YdqsHOO_22An1As24hexoCwU4QAvD_BwE

Currently we use Canon 100-400 IS II and Canon 600 F4 IS II.
The 600 has an amazing image, but its a big handicap that we cannot reframe quickly.
I wonder though if the zoom really has a similar image to the 600mm. Also how good it will deal with 8k resolution since its made for "4k".
We currently use our Epic MX, but will probably upgrade to Helium. Probably not monstro because it cannot work with lenses like this.

If we would pick one I think we would pick the EF Mount because I like using Canon glass. They are so light, they have image stabilization and I have so many different types to pick from.

/Andreas
 
Last edited:
No experience with this lens but I know a lot of members of this forum use the Sigma 150-600 Sport and are satisfied with it. Seems like a very good value for price/quality.
 
Dominic Boudreault said:
No experience with this lens but I know a lot of members of this forum use the Sigma 150-600 Sport and are satisfied with it. Seems like a very good value for price/quality.
Click to expand...

Hi Dominic. I think the Sigma 150-600 is ok, but its really in a different ballpark. but you are right its a fantastic value.
I have compared it with the 600mm F4 and the quality difference is very big, also most of the material we film is at 1200mm F8 to get as close as possible to especially birds.
As a zoom I generally use the Canon 100-400 with a 1.4x extender currently. The main limitations I have is that 1) it cannot reach that long 2) its not parafocal so everytime you zoom you must cut lin editing 3) it has focus breathing 4) quality just isn't not comparable to the 600mm.

Cheers!
/Andreas
 
I have used it several times. It is really sharp but really slow. You need to consider if you can work with those stops... It also requires a very big fluid head and long dovetail I use it on my 2575 and even with that it is susceptible to vibrations especially if windy. I would say beyond that it is a really good lens for wildlife as you can frame up quickly on the wide end then punch in for your shot. Pretty spendy so for me its a rental when I need those type of shots. If I were you I would rent first before considering buying one.
 
AndreasOberg said:
Hi Dominic. I think the Sigma 150-600 is ok, but its really in a different ballpark. but you are right its a fantastic value.
I have compared it with the 600mm F4 and the quality difference is very big, also most of the material we film is at 1200mm F8 to get as close as possible to especially birds.
As a zoom I generally use the Canon 100-400 with a 1.4x extender currently. The main limitations I have is that 1) it cannot reach that long 2) its not parafocal so everytime you zoom you must cut lin editing 3) it has focus breathing 4) quality just isn't not comparable to the 600mm.

Cheers!
/Andreas
Click to expand...

Good points. Are you using the Canon 2X extender on the 600mm F4 to get to 1200mm?

Have you considered the Sigma 300-800mm? Not a lot of options for wildlife zooms.
 
Andreas, have you considered the Canon 200-400 mm f/4 with x2 extender?
Is it parfocal and what about breathing? Somebody?
Thanks.
 
Mike McEntire said:
I have used it several times. It is really sharp but really slow. You need to consider if you can work with those stops... It also requires a very big fluid head and long dovetail I use it on my 2575 and even with that it is susceptible to vibrations especially if windy. I would say beyond that it is a really good lens for wildlife as you can frame up quickly on the wide end then punch in for your shot. Pretty spendy so for me its a rental when I need those type of shots. If I were you I would rent first before considering buying one.
Click to expand...

Hi Mike, good to hear from you! Yes, we realized that our Sachtler Video 20 S1 is not strong enough for our Canon 600mm F4 with 2x extender. Would you recommend a 2575 or a 2560? I'm almost leaning towards a 2575 even though its heavy!
I think we would mostly use it for 300-1000mm. Surely up to 1500 sometimes. Then the stops are not bad compared to our 600. at 1200 it has F8 which is similar to the cine lens. One thing I'm a bit concerned about is the lack of image stabiliser. The 600mm stabiliser really helps. And yes, its pretty expensive!
I think my main concerns are:
- does it give a similar image to the 600
- will it have too many vibrations.

/Andreas
 
Marc Pilato said:
Andreas, have you considered the Canon 200-400 mm f/4 with x2 extender?
Is it parfocal and what about breathing? Somebody?
Thanks.
Click to expand...

Hi Marc. I dont think its parafocal and it probably breathes a bit, but have no first hand experience. I'm always a bit hesitant to put 2x extenders on since the quality takes a hit. Works on the 600mm since it has such a fantastic image to begin with. Would be interesting to try.
 
Dominic Boudreault said:
Good points. Are you using the Canon 2X extender on the 600mm F4 to get to 1200mm?

Have you considered the Sigma 300-800mm? Not a lot of options for wildlife zooms.
Click to expand...

Yes, the 2x extender. It works surprisingly well. The image is really breathtaking.
I have not tested the Sigma 300-800. But the image quality is a compromise in it. Wildlife zooms are tricky! The canon 100-400 works quite well, but yes the focus breathing and not being parafocal is really tricky. The worst is that its not parafocal. Imagine you are filming some animals, you zoom out and then you need to hunt and find the focus, which can take a while to hit.
/Andreas
 
Hey Andreas. I think either head you mentioned would be fine but if you can handle carrying the 2575 it is better for super long lens work. It is pretty hard core to carry if you don't have help of course. I think you will be happy with the image from the 50-1000. The lack of stabilization is a factor. I shot it in pretty windy condtions for a big wave scenario and it was a challenge even with the 2575. If it was me I might go for the still lens option with IS. Lighter and can shoot with a lighter tripod. Way easier to access the wildlife. Carrying the big tripod and lens is fun for about 10 steps...
Cheers,
Mike
 
I used the 50-1000 on a HELIUM a few times, a very very good lens...some CA but generally for it's incredibly focal lengths it's a short, lightweight & CINE ready lens.

Have any of you tried the FD 150 - 600 f5.6? I believe it's the best digital long lens I've used, zero CA.

it's FD 2X doubler & 1.4X extenders are very very good on the MONSTRO & HELIUM sensors...the NIKON 1.7X extender I found to be slightly sharper though.

I'm having an FD one re-housed & made PL along with the three extenders mentioned above too.

I'll post some pix when it's done.

S
 
Yes I agree with Stuart.
+ 1 for the Canon FD 150-600mm. Also the FD 300mm and FD 800mm all on Universal PL with 2X extenders. I have used them for years. Brillant lenses but heavy. Personally, I always use a 150mm tripod as I find the 100mm too light for real moves.

Today the 50-1000mm is standard issue for high-end wildlife films (along with the 30-300mm). It is particularly good for hide work, stationary rigs, even cineflex. But at more than 6kgs you don't want to be running around with it too much.

I think my 150-600 weighs in at 4kg and I have always found it heavy - but worth it.
Indeed, I like this lens so much that I recently sent it off for a complete refurbishment!
 
Interesting information guys. Interesting about the CA as well. When does this happen? At longer or shorter ranges?
I guess the 50-1000 together with a shorter range is a pretty perfect combination. Is it a good mix with the 30-300. The 30 is not that wide after all.
I like the idea of mixing it with canon still lenses. Gives so much option and of course is cheaper as well.
/Andreas
 
William Long said:
Yes I agree with Stuart.
Personally, I always use a 150mm tripod as I find the 100mm too light for real moves.
Click to expand...
What 150mm tripod do you use William?

Btw I have a good tip on how to carry more things.
I use an Ospray Zenith 105L backpack.
https://www.ellis-brigham.com/products/osprey-mens-xenith-105l-rucksack/292352?itemid=90096&FT20Feed=00002763&FT20Prod=292352900_MED&utm_source=google&utm_medium=cpc&adpos=1o1&scid=scplp292352900_MED&sc_intid=292352900_MED&gclid=CjwKCAiA24PVBRBvEiwAyBxf-dH47MMtC1P9UPuea7Iy0R5prMXQ8jbYPespsjGchfIv0H1F3dgc5xoCH9UQAvD_BwE

I can put down the Epic, Rails, 600mm and Zoom F8 with a shotgun directly in the backpack fully setup. I can even fit in a gitzo 5 tripod legs with it, but the head can be tricky to fit in a good way.
Makes a huge difference for how far I can carry things.
I found that I can carry 22-32kg for a whole day in it with breaks of course. Surely could do more if I was in better shape.

/Andreas
 
Andreas,
I use a Sachtler Studio II (150mm bowl) for the really big lenses, otherwise a smaller 100mm bowl Sachtler for more ordinary work.
In terms of carrying heavy equipment, my tip would be a backpack attached to an assistant!
That would be wonderful. :))
 
For wildlife I use the Canon 150-600 OPTEX cine converted lens with a Canon 1.4x TC - PL Mount.
I use it with Epic Dragon and with Miller Arrow 55 head on Two stage legs... I do need a heavier tripod to make it just that much better.
Lens is hard to get... lighter and super compact. ..

Mauricio -
 

Attachments

  • IMG_0540.jpg
    IMG_0540.jpg
    31.6 KB · Views: 0
AndreasOberg said:
Interesting information guys. Interesting about the CA as well. When does this happen? At longer or shorter ranges?
/Andreas
Click to expand...

Hi,
Generally if it exists within the lens then it 'exists' at all focal lengths but it is often very difficult to see in a wide shot, unless you use the 'Magnify Toggle' function on your RED PRO for a closer inspection at capture or in your post workflow zoom in on the image.
A hot sky & a wintery tree branch often shows this aberration very quickly, basically anything dark against a light background...the Celere's suffer CA very quickly IMO....but I'm going off topic here.

Lousy for run & gun, nature or any photography where you need to be mobile but...
If you get chance try a TV BOX lens like a FUJINON 101 (8.7mm - 1800mm with the built in extender / doubler)
They're massive (55lbs / 25kg's) it's a case of putting the camera on the lens ha ha...but for football games & the like it's great tool & even although they're designed primarily as 2/3" sensor coverage lens they do cover far more.
At almost $250K they are designed to a high standard & delivery a very sharp image with generally little to no CA at all. I've tested a few box lenses on the DRAGON & HELIUM & most stand up very well, occasionally a bad one will exhibit quite strong CA so a test day is essential...oh & very strong head & legs too :)

S
 
Thanks for all the input everyone.

One thing that I have been pondering the last week is Helium vs Monstro , especially when it comes to lenses but also slow motion. Would be nice to have some second thoughts.
When filming animals if we are in any way expecting action we will film in 5.1k 96fps almost exclusively. 80% of the time we us Canon 600mm mostly at 840mm f5.6 or 1200mm f8.
The sensor size is 27.7mm wide for Epic at this resolution.

If we use Helium the sensor is around 18.5mm.
With Monstro its a whopping 25.5mm at 5k.

Here are some mixed thoughts for wildlife
1) Benefits with Helium vs our aging MX are many
+ MUCH better in the dark. Not sure how much but probably at least 2 stops
+ Much better colors
+ Higher resolution and sharpness at least in 6-8k, downside is that we only have 60fps. Lots better than 30fps
+ Much better dynamic range especially in the highlights. I rarely have a problem with this though
+ less loud fan
+ lighter body
+ or - . A higher crop at 5k. For our case this would mostly be a good thing since the higher slow motion is mainly needed with a long lens

2) Benefits with Monstro
+ 1.3 or more stops of light. More light is always fantastic when filming in the jungle. This also means we could use longer depth of field
+ A bit sharper. Not so much from what I have seen but a bit.
+ 5k would have a sensor size of roughly 25mm on the width so this is not as aggressive crop. The main benefit is that we get less noise.
+ DSLR lenses would work reasonably well, probably up to 7k at least. I would think some would work at 8k as well. Would be great to hear if anyone tested more DSLR lenses.
- Question how cine lenses would work. The 50-1000 I'm sure would not cover. However I'm sure it would cover 6k at least. Since we film mostly in slow motion this may be less of a problem. Then when you need full 8k you would have to switch to different lenses, not sure what. I saw the Canon Cine lenses cover 8k Monstro.
- PRICE! ouch.

/Andreas
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top