500L vs. 600 SSC

[dan_k2]

I have the choice between the origional breech mount 500 4.5L and the

breech mount 600 4.5. In the debate of trading off between focal

length, weight, and specialized glass, I figured I'd ask someone

who's used both. Assuming that the subject is kept the same size in

frame, which has better sharpness, contrast, clarity etc.? Also,

which holds up better with extenders (at most a 2x-a)?

 

Thanks

Dan

[14mm 2.8l]

I have not owned either, but I would buy the 500L over the 600. Why? The 500mm is "L" glass whereas the 600mm is the only white paint lense Canon made with no "L" optics.

 

<p>Lindy

[rog21]

I agree with Lindy. The 600 is bulky (3800+ grams) and of normal glass where the 500 is much more manageable at 2610 grams and has one UD (Ultra Low Dispersion) and one Fluorite element producing stunning results. I own this lens and it is simply awesome.

 

 

While I have occasionally used the 2X-A with this lens, it does produce somewhat softer images, but if you need the reach, you need the reach.... If you're going to take either lens anywhere on foot to use (and you probably will), the 500 wins any fatigue tests. I have a custom Domke bag for mine and transport is reasonable. Forget the case these things came in, except for shipping or storage, they are useless (IMO).

[pensacolaphoto]

I have the 500mm/4.5L lens. It is an amazingly sharp lens. It is not too heavy, and snaps into focus. I recall in the past reading about Nikon users buying the Canon 500 lens and have the mount custom adapted for Nikon bodies. It is that good of a lens. I have never used the 600/4.5 lens, but I don't recall reading as good stuff on it as the 500 lens.

[14mm 2.8l]

What are the odds???

 

I just dropped by my local camera store and they have on consignment a 600mm f4.5 SSC: the earlier breechmount version. Not there yesterday, but todays a new day. Now you know why I shop my locals so much.

 

I've never handled any 600mm in person. I found it surprisingly light. Maybe 6 pounds.

 

Problems I see with this one today is it does not take the 1.4x since the light baffle is still rectangular.

 

Overall a 8+++ with some id engravings but super nice glass, sharp focus with both knobs present and lock out hood functions perfect and paint overall is likely a 9 except at tripod foot. ID Engravings tend to turn me off. Complete with 48 drop in and trunk case and correct 600mm ssc bag cap.

 

It was made feb 1977 and is just the 81st 600mm canon made in fd mount. I was surprised to see the serial number is not on the canon 600mm SSC plate and instead it's at the bottom of the lens 1/2" from the chrome ring mount.

 

They have to have $900 plus 7.5% tax. No barter, no counteroffers...

 

I don't need it I just thought I'd share my shopping trip find.

[awahlster]

Well I guess I come about as close to the guy you want to talk to about this as anyone so far. Since I own both a 500mm f4.5L S.S.C. and a 600mm f4.5 nFD (I said closest not exactly)

 

My choice would be for the 500mm f4.5L and in fact I am seriously thinking about selling off my 600mm f4.5 nFD and 500mm f4.5L S.S.C. and buying as nice of 500mm f4.5L nFD as I can find. And hopfully pocketing a few dollars.

 

The 600mm is the upper limit of what I would deal with in the field and then only near a support vehical humping in while mounted on a tripod is a pain not so much because of weight but the bulk. It's not as sharp as the 500 which of course means it's not as sharp as the 500 with an extender. If I need a 1200mm lens shot. I will just blow up a 100mm neg a little more.

[pensacolaphoto]

I have used the 500mm/4.5L lens often with the 1.4X converter. It is nearly as sharp as when not using the converter. After getting the 500 lens, I on purpose did not get a 300/2.8 or even the 300/4L but chose the standard 300/4 lens since I already had a super lens in the 500 lens.

[alan_swartz]

Dan,

 

Another vote for the 500L. Should be better glass, and the size and weight difference is significant. If you needed sheer, extreme focal length and were therefore deciding between 500mm and 800mm, then the focal length would be a real factor, but I don't think the difference between 500 and 600mm outweighs the other issues here.

 

I have the 500 and the 800. That is why I haven't sprung for the 600. It's too close to the 500 considering its "ordinary" glass, bulk, and weight. Those two biggest lenses (600 and 800) are something else to hold still, even on a very good tripod.

[dan_k2]

To all that have posted.... Thank you. I had been leaning towards the 500 as well, but then had the offer on the 600 that got the wheels turning.... Now if I could only afford everything I wanted..... sigh.... :) BTW.. With it being an "L" lens, I can't imagine the build quality being that much different, but where did they pull the 3/4 of a pound out of between the S.S.C. 500L and the nFD 500L??

 

Thanks again

Dan

[14mm 2.8l]

What are they asking for the 600mm ssc you've been offered and what's the price on the 500mmL they've got Dan K?

 

I looked up some info from my 1977 lensworks book. Earlier I said the 600mm SSC locally weighed about 6 pounds, I guessed. According to Lensworks it weighs 9 pounds 8 ounces. Sure didn't seem that heavy but I'll assume it is.

 

With either lens you'll need a better tripod and head. When i got my 400mm L I thought I could use my existing tripod and head and I was wrong. That cost me an additional $700...

 

Lindy

[rog21]

Lindy, not sure what you mean by needing a better tripod. I shoot my 500 4.5L with FD-EOS adapter on my EOS-3 with a monopod all the time (effecive 630mm f/5.6). I'm fine as long as I keep the shutter speeds up and remember to hold still :) I shoot a lot of sports, water-skiing and motorcycle racing mostly and a tripod is not really an option since I need to move around too much. Someday, maybe I'll be able to afford the 500 4.0L IS lens, but in the meantime, this will do nicely.

 

Now when shooting the 500 4.5L with an extender on the FD body (F1), either the 1.4 or 2X, you DO NEED A GOOD TRIPOD (IMO). They say you can't use an extender along with the FD-EOS adapter (though I've never tried it)...

[14mm 2.8l]

My carbon fibre legs are rated at 11 pounds.

 

My 400L weighs 13 pounds. Add F-1N speedfinder, ae motordrive equals 5 pounds. Wimberley gimbal head and QR system is another 5 pounds. So thats about 22 pounds on my 11 pound rated tripod. Not a viable option for me.

 

So if Dan goes with the 10 pound 600mm ssc purchase I'd assume he'll easily go over his tripod weight ratings if he attaches any camera to the lens.

 

Lindy

[dan_k2]

Well, I was offered the 600mm for 800 and the 500mm for a bit more. I'm shooting with the first run F-1, standard prism and no motor drive, so I'll be under the weight limit on the tripod (but not by much). Out of curiosity, what would you be asking for yours?

[rog21]

Dan K asked: <i>Out of curiosity, what would you be asking for yours?</i><br><br>

 

To whom are you directing this question?