Home · Register · Search · View Winners · Software · Hosting · Software · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username   Password

  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  New Feature: SMS Notification alert
  New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist
  

FM Forums | Canon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1      
2
       3       4       end
  

Archive 2012 · Canon 200-400 hands on
  
 
RobDickinson
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #1 · Canon 200-400 hands on


Would you make a prototype out of magnesium and carbon fibre? I doubt it.


Jul 02, 2012 at 03:49 AM
PetKal
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #2 · Canon 200-400 hands on


RobDickinson wrote:
Would you make a prototype out of magnesium and carbon fibre? I doubt it.


No, I'd make it using balsa wood.



Jul 02, 2012 at 04:06 AM
DocsPics
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #3 · Canon 200-400 hands on


PetKal wrote:
No, I'd make it using balsa wood.


...and fill it with helium.



Jul 02, 2012 at 04:25 AM
Pixel Perfect
Online
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #4 · Canon 200-400 hands on


So far it's made with unobtanium!


Jul 02, 2012 at 04:59 AM
Massimo Foti
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #5 · Canon 200-400 hands on


Pixel Perfect wrote:
There will always be a place for a 100-400L just for compactness and portability let alone the factor of 7 price difference.

One of these days Canon will update the 100-400 and happily reduce the price difference



Jul 02, 2012 at 06:29 AM
Bones74
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #6 · Canon 200-400 hands on


PetKal wrote:
Stuart Harling (aka Bones74) had a chance to handle a prototype (?) a year ago ( see this thread from last August). In there he said that the zoom felt heavier than 400 f/2.8 IS MkII.
If the 200-400L weight is not reduced for the production units, then that will IMO become a significant drawback of that lens model. Zoom or not, why get a 400 f/4 lens which weighs as much, and is probably priced as highly, as the 400 f/2.8 IS MkII prime ? A built in 1.4xTC is a neat "novelty", but I can very quickly
...Show more

Hi Peter, I did.. but I might have been tired from handholding the 400 ii on my 1Dmk4 The 200-400 definitely did feel heavier, but it could also have been the weight distribution. The prime felt more balanced and easier to hold (on the 1D body), but the zoom felt like there was more weight on the end (it's longer isn't it?). Zooming hand held felt very awkward as well. I remember thinking at the time that handholding and using this lens effectively was going to be difficult. I'd definitely buy one if I had the money and it was readily available, but it would spend most of its time on my monopod.


Edited on Jul 02, 2012 at 07:30 PM · View previous versions



Jul 02, 2012 at 07:44 AM
rscheffler
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #7 · Canon 200-400 hands on


PetKal wrote:

If the 200-400L weight is not reduced for the production units, then that will IMO become a significant drawback of that lens model. Zoom or not, why get a 400 f/4 lens which weighs as much, and is probably priced as highly, as the 400 f/2.8 IS MkII prime ? A built in 1.4xTC is a neat "novelty", but I can very quickly mount 1.4xTC or 2xTC on 400 f/2.8 IS MkII and thereby obtain a couple of very nicely performing options, i.e., 560mm f/4 and 800mm f/5.6 combos.


Because it's a zoom and it will still be smaller (in diameter) than the f/2.8 prime. Also, while you can quickly mount a TC, the built-in one will still be faster to toggle, and with it being internal, will be great for inclement weather use.



Jul 02, 2012 at 08:04 AM
Psychic1
Online
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #8 · Canon 200-400 hands on


"handholding the 400 ii on my 1Dmk4 The 200-400 definitely did feel heavier"

So, 9.5 lbs was an accurate estimate. I'll take the 500L II.



Jul 02, 2012 at 10:57 AM
PetKal
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #9 · Canon 200-400 hands on


Psychic1 wrote:
"handholding the 400 ii on my 1Dmk4 The 200-400 definitely did feel heavier"

So, 9.5 lbs was an accurate estimate. I'll take the 500L II.


Same here, unless 200-400L ends up being 2.4 kg or something of that sort, it doesn't interest me.

The 500 II has become my walkaround lens.....I even do portraits with it.
Psych, two important 500 II accessories you should get is the RRS replacement foot and Zeck's cap.
Thankfully, a very comfy strap comes with the lens, and that is an important accessory as well for easy carrying and shooting with the 500 II.



Jul 02, 2012 at 04:40 PM
Psychic1
Online
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #10 · Canon 200-400 hands on


PetKal wrote:
The 500 II has become my walkaround lens......


Thank you, thank you, thank you.

That is exactly what I was hoping to hear



Jul 02, 2012 at 04:48 PM
 

Search in Used Dept. 



Jim McCann
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #11 · Canon 200-400 hands on


The 500, for me, has become one of two main subjects of my dreams. My mind switches back and forth from Cindy Crawford to the 500. I've had Cindy on order for some 25 years now and she has not materialized. I've only had the 500 on order since May 25th of this year. I wonder which will come to me first?

Jim



Jul 02, 2012 at 04:54 PM
Psychic1
Online
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #12 · Canon 200-400 hands on


Jim
IF you sent Cindy a $15,000 check you would get a visit,,, OH, just noticed your city and state.
Better make it $25,000.

I can probally get you Cindy Lauper for $5,000.




  Canon EOS-1Ds Mark III    EF24-105mm f/4L IS USM lens    80mm    f/5.0    1/320s    200 ISO    0.0 EV  




Jul 02, 2012 at 04:59 PM
rscheffler
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #13 · Canon 200-400 hands on


There is room for both the 200-400 and 500, as they serve different applications. 200-400 will be extremely versatile for field sports in particular, but many other action events as well, where a fixed 500 would generally be on the long side, and thus somewhat restrictive. With higher MP crop bodies certainly in the future, the need for longer than 400mm for *some* photographers will be reduced. So at least in the areas where I circulate, the 500 is a rare sight. 400 2.8 is the most common. But there are plenty of Nikon shooters with the 200-400 and I expect that once this lens materializes, it will also become pretty common at events. Hopefully it lives up to the high expectations.


Jul 02, 2012 at 06:44 PM
Jim McCann
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #14 · Canon 200-400 hands on


Psychic1

Cindy Lauper would be more of a nightmare! She looks like she's been down a very long and arduous road. But I, too, am not getting any prettier as I age.



Jul 02, 2012 at 07:06 PM
Imagemaster
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #15 · Canon 200-400 hands on



PetKal wrote:

If the 200-400L weight is not reduced for the production units, then that will IMO become a significant drawback of that lens model. Zoom or not, why get a 400 f/4 lens which weighs as much, and is probably priced as highly, as the 400 f/2.8 IS MkII prime ? A built in 1.4xTC is a neat "novelty", but I can very quickly mount 1.4xTC or 2xTC on 400 f/2.8 IS MkII and thereby obtain a couple of very nicely performing options, i.e., 560mm f/4 and 800mm f/5.6 combos.


Well how about the prime will not give you 200mm to 399mm And you most certainly can't mount or unmount a TC on the prime as quickly as you can the built-in TC on the zoom. Neither of those may be important to you, but they may to many others.



Jul 02, 2012 at 07:26 PM
PetKal
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #16 · Canon 200-400 hands on


Imagemaster wrote:
Well how about the prime will not give you 200mm to 399mm And you most certainly can't mount or unmount a TC on the prime as quickly as you can the built-in TC on the zoom. Neither of those may be important to you, but they may to many others.


I betcha a nickel to a doughnut that of all 100-400 users' shots, at least 99% are taken at 400mm FL. Do you think that 200-400L will be any different ? So much for zoom "versatility".
Besides, Markle, 200-400L will probably be too heavy for you to use handheld.



Jul 02, 2012 at 09:17 PM
StillFingerz
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #17 · Canon 200-400 hands on


Monito wrote:
Here is the 200-400 vs the 500:

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-XrjrZEWGW5I/TWFdAllexrI/AAAAAAAAADo/9u8GY6g6fg4/s1600/owvj7.jpg

and the 200-400 vs the 100-400:

http://www.seekinghelper.com/images/other/comparison_100-400_200-400.jpg

Now you know why the 100-400 is so popular. It's the push-pull which makes it compact and light.


Monito, thanks for those shots...now I know those big whites aren't for me, the 100-400 will be big/heavy enough!



Jul 02, 2012 at 09:42 PM
Psychic1
Online
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #18 · Canon 200-400 hands on


400mm and 560mm would be the only focal lengths I would use.

It would save me one full stop (5.6 vs 8) and the time to install or remove the 1.4xii from the 400L 5.6.

$7000 and 7 additional lbs, does not seem worth the effort.

The Nikon weights 7.4 lbs.



Jul 02, 2012 at 10:38 PM
Pixel1970
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #19 · Canon 200-400 hands on


It's going to be insanely expensive, the only way I'll ever touch one is on a trade show floor.


....or thru CPS at a sporting event in a year or two when they're in ample supply.



Jul 02, 2012 at 11:11 PM
dehowie
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #20 · Canon 200-400 hands on


Count me in for a 200-400.
It replaces the 100-400 for around the airport.
It replaces the 300 500 and 600 for long range work and I have a 400/2.8 for low light.
Having a 200-400 a 400 and an 800 you ave complete razor shap coverage from 200-800mm and with only two bodies and you don't stumble around spotting your sensor with dust flipping converters on and off.
Oh and I have thousands of 100-400 images not at 400 primarily because it's IQ drops away at 360-380mm.
This is one lens I can't wait for!



Jul 03, 2012 at 01:41 AM
1      
2
       3       4       end




FM Forums | Canon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1      
2
       3       4       end
    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username   Password    Retrive password