EF 500 f/4.5 L Vs EF 500 f/4 L IS

[micheleberti]

How they compare?

[skipper34]

Well, optically I would say they are about the same for sharpness, one is about 1/2 stop faster, and has IS. The IS lens is considerably more expensive. If I could find a f4.5 on the used market I would buy it today, but they are very hard to come by. I think the IS version is a little heavier also. This comes from someone who has used neither lens, but I've had an opportunity to handle each one.

[steve_dunn2]

<p>IIRC, the IS superteles, in general, are lighter than the non-IS versions they replaced. But I'm not sure about the 500; the lighter weight from construction advances may well be offset by the greater weight of making it faster. If you care about the dimensions and weight, you can look them both up in the Canon Camera Museum (on the main www.canon.com site).</p>

 

<p>One thing to keep in mind is that the 500/4 is more functional with a teleconverter than the 500/4.5 is. Most EOS bodies' autofocus systems only work with lenses f/5.6 or faster. With a 1.4x, the 500/4 is fast enough; the 500/4.5 is not. Some bodies have one AF point which works with lenses f/8 or faster, and with a 2x, you get the same sort of situation in which the 500/4 would AF and the 500/4.5 would not.</p>

[bobatkins]

The 500/4.5L (which I own) is smaller, lighter, cheaper and equally sharp.

 

It does lack IS of course and it's 1/3 stop (not 1/2 stop) slower. The major consequence of this is that it won't AF with a Canon 2x TC. Other wise 1/3 stop isn't a big deal.

[skipper34]

Bob, not to change the subject too much, but do you know of any source other than EBay where I may find a 4.5 version? Thanks in advance.

[bobatkins]

Any camera store dealing in used gear. It's just a matter of luck. Try KEH, Adorama, B&H, Ebay and even the photo.net classifieds. They show up from time to time.

[micheleberti]

since this lens will be used mainly on a tripod is the IS still valuable on such circumstances?

[oceanphysics]

Yes, IS works and is valuable on a tripod for long lenses.

[eos 10 fan]

Steve Dunn wrote: <i>"IIRC, the IS superteles, in general, are lighter than the non-IS versions they replaced."</i><p>

 

In general, you are right (as usual). The change in speed from f/4.5 to f/4 is probably why the 500/4L IS weighs more than the 500/4.5L it replaced.<p>

 

300mm f/2.8L USM = 2,855<i>g</i><br>

300mm f/2.8L <b>IS</b> USM = 2,550<i>g</i><p>

 

400mm f/2.8L USM = 6,100<i>g</i><br>

400mm f/2.8L II USM = 5,910<i>g</i><br>

400mm f/2.8L <b>IS</b> USM = 5,370<i>g</i><p>

 

500mm f/4L <b>IS</b> USM = 3,870<i>g</i><br>

500mm f/4.5L USM = 3,000<i>g</i><p>

 

600mm f/4L USM = 6,000<i>g</i><br>

600mm f/4L <b>IS</b> USM = 5,360<i>g</i><p>

 

--

[eos 10 fan]

The other exception is<p>

 

300mm f/4L <b>IS</b> USM = 1,190<i>g</i><br>

300mm f/4L USM = 1,165<i>g</i><p>

 

--

[bill_atwood]

Bruce, I'm considering selling my 500/4.5 if you are interested.