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       end
  

Archive 2013 · 400/2.8 IS II vs others
  
 
Mark K
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #1 · 400/2.8 IS II vs others


Dear everyone
I have been looking into this segment of lenses for a long time. With limited budget, I need to buy the best I can afford. My main interests are nature/bird/bugs shooting so I laid my eyes initially on 600/4 II. Unfortunately there is still a $2000 difference between 400/2.8 IS II and 600/4 II and 800/5.6. My primary plan is to buy the 400/2.8 first, with a new TC2.0III. My thinking is that with 400/2.8, I get a very good/near perfect lense with 2.8 aperture wide open. With a 1.4TC, I can probably get a 560/4mm with image quatliy comparable to 500/4 (after reading DxoMark's recent review). Any commendations?
Thank you very much for the input.



Jul 09, 2013 at 06:47 AM
RobDickinson
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #2 · 400/2.8 IS II vs others


400mkII is pretty good with the 2.0tc mkII and hand holdable for a fair time. I'd easily put that up against my 400/5.6L and be beaten for quality I think.

I think people would say get the longest lens you can before adding the tc's but as you say its not so affordable! Some good used 400mkII's in my area are available too.



Jul 09, 2013 at 07:00 AM
Lars Johnsson
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #3 · 400/2.8 IS II vs others


The IQ is so good with all those lenses that you can't see any difference between them in real life. Go for the focal length that you need. For the things you are shooting I belive the 500 would be very good. It weight less and also cost a bit less. Most people consider the 400/2,8 more of a sport lens. And the 500-600-800 lenses more like bird/wildlife lenses. But they work for everything of course. I would not buy a lens for over $ 10k if the primary plan was to use it with 1,4x and 2x extenders. Buy a longer from the start. It doesn't cost more and it will give you faster AF. And a little bit better IQ.
It also depends on what camera you will use it with.



Jul 09, 2013 at 07:27 AM
dolina
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #4 · 400/2.8 IS II vs others


My sentiments are the same with Lars.

An advantage also of the 400/2.8 over the 600/4 is the rather compact size of the lens making transport much easier despite similar weights.



Jul 09, 2013 at 08:26 AM
Mark K
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #5 · 400/2.8 IS II vs others


In my place, 500 is 2 is still moee expensive.... this makesthe prices of both the 400 f2.8 II @$10199 and 800 f5.6 @12399 very attractive


Jul 09, 2013 at 09:05 AM
mitesh
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #6 · 400/2.8 IS II vs others


Mark,

If weight isn't a huge concern, the Mark I superteles can be found at very reasonable prices. Of course, I can't speak to availability in or around China, but a mint condition 600mm mark I can be had for well under $7,000 here on FM these days. IQ is still excellent, but it does weigh quite a bit more than the Mark II. If you plan on using a tripod most of the time, perhaps this isn't as much of an issue.

Good luck!



Jul 09, 2013 at 10:28 AM
Mark K
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #7 · 400/2.8 IS II vs others


Thank you guys..


Jul 09, 2013 at 04:10 PM
Chris Humphrey
Offline

Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #8 · 400/2.8 IS II vs others


I have the 400 f2.8 II and think it's pretty good. I wouldn't say it's super sharp with the extenders, but I've never used one of the newer model 400mm lenses to compare it to. Just my two cents.

I think I agree though with the others that if you're really wanting longer than 400, than just get the longer lens to start off with. You'll probably be happier in the long run.



Jul 09, 2013 at 04:16 PM
John Caldwell
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #9 · 400/2.8 IS II vs others


Chris and Rob: When you mention comparing the 400/2.8 II to other 400mm lenses, do you mean to say 400 or perhaps other (longer) FL?

John Caldwell



Jul 09, 2013 at 04:34 PM
AGeoJO
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #10 · 400/2.8 IS II vs others


I am joining the chorus here by saying that the Mark II lenses are in a class by themselves in terms of IQ. The degradation in IQ using any of those lenses using a 1.4X TC is negligible and under normal conditions may not even be noticeable. The usage of a 2X TC is a different story though. But if your ideal focal length is approximately 500mm, then your best bet would still be a 500mm lens.


Jul 09, 2013 at 04:54 PM
 

Search in Used Dept. 



artsupreme
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #11 · 400/2.8 IS II vs others


This 3yr old votes for the 400II








Jul 09, 2013 at 05:32 PM
Mark K
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #12 · 400/2.8 IS II vs others


Well very impressive. Currently I have 5D3, century old 30D with 70-200/2.8 IS I, 100-400L. I am....definitely getting a 7D2, perhaps...1Dx and current short telephotos changed to 70-200/2.8 IS II or 200/2.8L....My original plan was simply to get a 600/4 II but the price seems against my will. Nevertheless 400/2.8 has its strength in being fast and versatile.


Jul 09, 2013 at 11:24 PM
Sneakyracer
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #13 · 400/2.8 IS II vs others


Mark K wrote:
Dear everyone
I have been looking into this segment of lenses for a long time. With limited budget, I need to buy the best I can afford. My main interests are nature/bird/bugs shooting so I laid my eyes initially on 600/4 II. Unfortunately there is still a $2000 difference between 400/2.8 IS II and 600/4 II and 800/5.6. My primary plan is to buy the 400/2.8 first, with a new TC2.0III. My thinking is that with 400/2.8, I get a very good/near perfect lense with 2.8 aperture wide open. With a 1.4TC, I can probably get a 560/4mm with
...Show more

I would look into a 500mm IS. They are great lenses and have great balance between focal length, aperture speed, focusing speed and handholding possibilities.

For birding the best choice is probably the 600 or the 800. The 600 is just a bit more versatile though.



Jul 09, 2013 at 11:30 PM
Mark K
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #14 · 400/2.8 IS II vs others


Dear Seneakyracer
Thank you for the reply. I can check out the newer price for 500 IS II....previously version can be as low as 5999 brand new but the version II is fresh here, carrying a price tag higher than 400/2.8. My thinking is if the 500 IS II is so expensive, why can't I get a 400/2.8 instead....so I can get a 560/4 with 1.4TC without losing too much optical quality. Besides, I am buying 800mm anyway..



Jul 10, 2013 at 12:19 AM
Mark K
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #15 · 400/2.8 IS II vs others


I preorded the 400/2.8...and very excited to see the new lens to come


Jul 11, 2013 at 12:23 PM
PetKal
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #16 · 400/2.8 IS II vs others


Mark K wrote:
Dear everyone
I have been looking into this segment of lenses for a long time. With limited budget, I need to buy the best I can afford. My main interests are nature/bird/bugs shooting so I laid my eyes initially on 600/4 II. Unfortunately there is still a $2000 difference between 400/2.8 IS II and 600/4 II and 800/5.6. My primary plan is to buy the 400/2.8 first, with a new TC2.0III. My thinking is that with 400/2.8, I get a very good/near perfect lense with 2.8 aperture wide open. With a 1.4TC, I can probably get a 560/4mm with
...Show more



Jul 11, 2013 at 12:39 PM
Mark K
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #17 · 400/2.8 IS II vs others


PetKal wrote:
Dear PetKal

I understand your points. I have lost in my years' research in looking for an ultimate lens and camera combination should end soon, Currently I believe all Canon super telephotos have better optics and ergonomics their their Nikon rivals. As I have to carry my cameras and lenses to shoot, lighter weight and better optics have become a key feature currently Canon provides a better solution. I do have first hand knowledge of how better DR Nikon cameras have at lower iso but...at anything above ISO1600, which happens frequently during BIF shooting, Canon still leads.
I also understand for birding,
...Show more



Jul 12, 2013 at 01:05 AM
PetKal
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #18 · 400/2.8 IS II vs others


Mark K wrote:
I also understand for birding, 600/4 II seems to be the best lens of all. .


Actually, I do not believe that is the case in an unconditional sense.
Much depends on the available light, bird motion-species-distance, manner of lens use, etc., etc.

However, if one long lens ought to be singled out as a Swiss-knife of wildlife photography lenses, then my choice would be 500 f/4 II.



Jul 12, 2013 at 01:19 AM
Mark K
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #19 · 400/2.8 IS II vs others


PetKal wrote:
Actually, I do not believe that is the case in an unconditional sense.
Much depends on the available light, bird motion-species-distance, manner of lens use, etc., etc.

However, if one long lens ought to be singled out as a Swiss-knife of wildlife photography lenses, then my choice would be 500 f/4 II.


Thank you for your advice...500/4 is also the lightest having the same weight of Sigma 120-300/2.8



Jul 12, 2013 at 01:22 AM
dolina
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #20 · 400/2.8 IS II vs others


Mark K wrote:
Thank you for your advice...500/4 is also the lightest having the same weight of Sigma 120-300/2.8


I lol'd when I read that.



Jul 12, 2013 at 01:25 AM
1
       2       end




FM Forums | Canon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1
       2       end
    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username   Password    Retrive password