Canon EF 600mm f/4L is III USM Lens

Looks to me more like diffraction softness than a lens defect. Most of the newer lenses are sharpest at around f/8 or f/11. While I appreciate the need for smaller f/stops with a 600mm lens, the difference in sharpness, whether lens performance or diffraction, though noticeable to a critical eye when enlarged to this extent, it is in my experience well within the capabilities to be equalized by the better sharpening programs say from Topaz Labs, ON 1, Projects and Landscape Pro. I am less sure of the ancient sharpening algorithm used by PS but I find that every digital photograph I've seen in the past 10 years, no matter what the lens/camera combination, benefit by some post shooting sharpening. I photograph mostly fast moving objects, airplanes, birds and cars, so having a lens that weighs almost 2# less, has better balance and may focus just a little faster matters quite a lot to me when photographing two airplanes converging on each other at 1000 ft/sec. And the weight and balance matters even more when you are at events that last 6-7 hours. I also am a user of the 1DX III and the full range of Canon EF lenses from 11mm-600mm -sfoAlan

Hemingway, even at his sesquipedalian best would fail to provide sufficient praise for a lens of this caliber. Mind you, the circus I went through to purchase it bears mentioning; Over a certain price threshold the accounting department requires a wire transfer, but nobody will inform you at the time of purchase. No email is sent out, one must wait on a phone call they do not anticipate. I did not receive this call, and endured some less-than-productive time being anointed with idiotic opinions from the staff of an indifferent call center. FORTUNATELY!! A member of the Executive Response Team stepped in and took personal oversight of the situation until everything was resolved. As for the quality of the lens? I’m still overwhelmed with a feeling of near enlightenment with the luscious background blurring from such a perfectly designed aperture. The weight savings is so gloriously noticeable that your inner soul will feast upon it with every mile hiked, and every rapid shot taken. Honestly the best part is being able to drop that gem of a line from Ferris Bueller the rest of your life, “If you have the means, I highly recommend picking one up.”

Please, Canon. I am a die hard user of Canon, and nothing else. You MUST continue the production of the 600 L IS II for the day mine eventually fails. The 600 f/4 lens is the most integral piece of imaging equipment next to the flagship sports body( more so actually). The real life experience using it is that it's "unusable" compared to the "Version II" EF 600 f/4L IS II. This product will be the first ever negative experience I have ever had with Canon shooting them my entire life and owning nearly every professional Lens and camera. The I.S is nothing short of defective. "flawed" would be an inappropriate understatement. But maybe even worse, the image quality is not on par with the Version II, whether it be with teleconverters or not. I would be totally happy if Canon continued the production of the Version II. I would literally pay more for it, and I already own 1 copy of the Version II ( it would be for a duplicate backup because it's the best lens I've ever used in my entire life, (along with the EF 50 1.2L). While you're at it, please continue production of the EF400 2.8 L IS II as even that lens has superior image quality to it's version III counterpart. Trust me, No one is buying these lenses for connivence, the weight savings between the Version I IS and Version II was much more significant to the usability and also the image quality was IMPROVED, instead of reduced.

An amazing lens- quality of photos is unparalleled, light weight for such a long lens, and properties are really useful. The lens is very hand holdable which makes it useful in situations where setting up a tripod is not possible or there isn’t enough time to set one up and still get the shot. I didn’t think about having the ability to preset focus points when purchasing the lens, but find that really useful in the field with bird photography. It will also be good when photographing wildlife. It is expensive, will be used much more than I even thought.

I have bought this lens in April and just could'nt believe how light it was and the perfect balance it has. It makes the old 600II feel like it has twice the weight of the new one. In good light the lens is sharp and a joy to use. However, when I have begun to actually us it in the field I have noticed that the images looked very bad when using it in low light with a 5D4. Below 1/250s the images are unusable. They are displaying a vertical blur no matter the settings. I've tried the lens on 4 different 5d4 and it's always the same. All users I know have the same issue. This is unacceptable for a supertele and there is no answer to this, yet. Again unacceptable. Stick to the old one until Canon gets it fixed.

I've always wanted a long lens for wildlife photography. I'm older & was unsure if I could handle the weight of the 600 & 800 mm lenses. So when this new version came out & was lighter, I decided this was the "one". It's not so heavy that I can't hand hold it. I've used it for distance pics & as a Macro Lens. I'm glad I purchased it.

i bought this a month ago... it has gone past my expectations for the fair and somewhat cheap price. overall this product is a must if you are starting photography.