Home · Register · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username  

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

FM Forums | Canon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

  

Archive 2014 · Canon 400 2.8 non-IS version 1

  
 
Shield
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #1 · p.1 #1 · Canon 400 2.8 non-IS version 1


Came across an opportunity to buy one of these for $3200. Lens was recently serviced by Midwest in Michigan. There is some wear on the lens, but nothing earth shattering.
Includes the trunk. This would be a local deal and the elderly lady seller seems very sweet.

I don't know where else to post this and I'm sorry. I realize it's very heavy, only focuses beginning at 14 feet and I'd need a tripod/heavy monopod for use. And that Canon themselves no longer service it. My main concern is I'm overpaying.

It was $3800 but I negotiated $3200 cash (pending my wife "signing off" on the deal.












Edited on May 21, 2014 at 06:09 PM · View previous versions



May 21, 2014 at 05:10 PM
jcolwell
Online
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #2 · p.1 #2 · Canon 400 2.8 non-IS version 1


Looks nice.

The current Lens$db prices are about $2970 [E to E+] to $3820 [M-]. Given the one image you posted, "yours" looks like it's somewhere in between condition-wise, and price-wise.

OTOH, you could have "sober second thoughts" and say something like, "it's not a bad price, but I've heard that the Mk II is better, and it's not that much more expensive - I'll save up for a little bit longer, if that's all right with you.

This latter scenario is known as a trade-off for potential future spousal considerations...

(save a little longer and who knows... IS Mk I).



May 21, 2014 at 05:27 PM
jcolwell
Online
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #3 · p.1 #3 · Canon 400 2.8 non-IS version 1


OK, I see you posted more detailed photos of the lens, while I was crafting my reply.

These detailed images suggest the lens is in [E] cosmetic condition, at best. That doesn't mean that the Midwest deal is too expensive (I'm a happy Midwest customer, in past years), but it is more expensive than the typical eBay deal for the same lens. The eBay deal usually doesn't include additional sales tax, but it will usually require additional cost for shipping.

it's in your hands (or not).



May 21, 2014 at 05:32 PM
Shield
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #4 · p.1 #4 · Canon 400 2.8 non-IS version 1


She had it serviced at Midwest (Michigan), not Midwest Photo Exchange (Ohio) is selling it. Midwest is right down the road from me...


May 21, 2014 at 05:48 PM
jcolwell
Online
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #5 · p.1 #5 · Canon 400 2.8 non-IS version 1


My experience is with MPE.


May 21, 2014 at 05:52 PM
Shield
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #6 · p.1 #6 · Canon 400 2.8 non-IS version 1


Anyone else want to weigh in?


May 21, 2014 at 06:10 PM
johnctharp
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #7 · p.1 #7 · Canon 400 2.8 non-IS version 1


Shield wrote:
Anyone else want to weigh in?


Only with the voice of reason- would you really use it?

I mean, yeah, 400/2.8- cool!

Except that it's a liability due to age, so you'd want to be careful with it. It's heavy, so you will only use it when you need the reach and the speed. It has no IS, so using teleconverters with it is a largely losing proposition.

Unless you have a specific use for a bare 400/2.8 in a mounted position that doesn't involve too much moving around, that's worth $3200 to get shots from, I can't see recommending the purchase.



May 21, 2014 at 06:21 PM
Paul Mo
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #8 · p.1 #8 · Canon 400 2.8 non-IS version 1


$2600.00 would be a better deal.


May 21, 2014 at 06:26 PM
PetKal
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #9 · p.1 #9 · Canon 400 2.8 non-IS version 1


Don't. The MkI was an unremarkable performer according to credible accounts. Canon introduced the MkII as a fix for MkI weaknesses. The MkII is the one to get for $3,200, but only if in a truly excellent condition.


May 21, 2014 at 07:06 PM
gocolts
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #10 · p.1 #10 · Canon 400 2.8 non-IS version 1


As others have suggested....what are you going to use that beast for? That might help determine if it's worth a chance on something that big/expensive/old.

As for price, I agree with the above, $2,600 is a good deal, $2,800 if you really want it.



May 21, 2014 at 07:12 PM
Andrew J
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #11 · p.1 #11 · Canon 400 2.8 non-IS version 1


MKII is 2 pounds lighter and has fluorite, MKI does not.


May 21, 2014 at 07:26 PM
Will Patterson
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #12 · p.1 #12 · Canon 400 2.8 non-IS version 1


I had one for a while, lens was too heavy and photos too blury compared to the Mk II for my tastes. Nice chunk of glass, though.


May 21, 2014 at 07:33 PM
johnctharp
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #13 · p.1 #13 · Canon 400 2.8 non-IS version 1


The Wikipedia entry hasa good comparison table of the 400mm Canons.

You're talking about the oldest EF400/2.8- over 13lbs, and takes 48mm drop-ins if you can find them.



May 21, 2014 at 07:40 PM
onesickpuppy
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #14 · p.1 #14 · Canon 400 2.8 non-IS version 1


PetKal.......while almost all on this forum take to heart your words of wisdom and learn from your experience (me included),
but I just sold mine after owning it for 10 years (yes..first version) and it was a super lens..sharp, fast focus, rock solid performer for me...starting on a 1MKIIn, 1DMKIII and now on a 1DMKIV and 5DMKIII. I will say....just like any lens...subject to if you get a good one or not!

gocolts....I used mine for mostly shooting eagles, road & drag racing events, baseball, etc. Got great action shots with it.

Will Patterson....again...must of had a poor sample. Mine created fantastic shots every time!!

johnctharp....yes...it is the first version....all lenses start somewhere...and while I had mine for 10 years, it never let me down. It looked just like it did the day I bought it...and we all know that some treat lenses as body bumpers..and some with kid gloves.

Shield...original poster....almost all statements given are good advise....YES...if the AF system goes...it will be next to impossible to get repaired (ponder that) that is the only reason of after 10 years I sold mine and got a more recent version (IS was never a real issue for me)....YES...its heavy...but 90% of the time, I had mine on a tripod...or at least a monopod.
I would agree...based on the "wear" marks, I'd attempt to gain it at the $2900 mark. You would want to do some test runs on your own camera....just to test the AF and check images. Look through the camera mount side to determine the quantity of dust inside....shouldn't be an issue...mine had almost none...but some could be rather dirty inside.

YES...there may be some better solutions..but I found mine to meet all my expectations and while it was heavy and old...it was an awesome piece of glass!!!

johnctharp....I'm not sure where you got your info on it hooked up to TC's....there are times I would double stack a 1.4 and 2x (had to be versions 2...can't stack versions 3)...but with either versions 2 or 3...mine produces sharp samples every time.....so just to validate that...here are a few samples to back it up.

Shield...to save any flaming or rude additions...you can contact me via PM if you'd like some more feedback on one of these...might know of another sample to look at.



© onesickpuppy 2014

Last light





© onesickpuppy 2014


Take off





© onesickpuppy 2014

Tight turn





© onesickpuppy 2014

full frame..no cropping...with a 2x TC




May 22, 2014 at 01:04 AM
johnctharp
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #15 · p.1 #15 · Canon 400 2.8 non-IS version 1


By 'losing proposition' I mean that going >400mm without IS will be challenging, and will limit uses. If you have the light for high shutter speeds, it obviously doesn't matter as you clearly show, but it really does depend on what the OP wants the lens for.

For example, a 400 DO might be a better investment, all things considered.



May 22, 2014 at 02:08 AM
gocolts
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #16 · p.1 #16 · Canon 400 2.8 non-IS version 1


johnctharp wrote:
By 'losing proposition' I mean that going >400mm without IS will be challenging, and will limit uses. If you have the light for high shutter speeds, it obviously doesn't matter as you clearly show, but it really does depend on what the OP wants the lens for.

For example, a 400 DO might be a better investment, all things considered.


I was thinking the same thing....I loved my 400 DO, but simply didn't use it enough to justify having so much money tied up in it.

But if you primarily plan to use it on a monopod or carry it short distances, and as has been shown above, the 400 2.8 gives you the most options when it comes to both high/low light shooting, as well as focal distance, as it makes for a fairly fast (all things considered) 560mm & 800mm lens with TC's.




May 22, 2014 at 07:07 AM
PetKal
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #17 · p.1 #17 · Canon 400 2.8 non-IS version 1


onesickpuppy wrote:
PetKal.......while almost all on this forum take to heart your words of wisdom and learn from your experience (me included),
but I just sold mine after owning it for 10 years (yes..first version) and it was a super lens..sharp, fast focus, rock solid performer for me...starting on a 1MKIIn, 1DMKIII and now on a 1DMKIV and 5DMKIII. I will say....just like any lens...subject to if you get a good one or not!




Thank you, however, in reality, very few people pay attention to what I have to say. (Incidentally, even one of my oldest internet friends who recently bought a 600 MkII lens, totally ignored my suggestions on lens accessories to get. You see, that has not hurt my feelings at all because I am quite used to being ignored)

There is always some statistical variation in different copies of the same lens model, therefore it is difficult to be 100% accurate with any lens appraisals. One can go by their own lens copy, and/or by some sort of a consensus gleaned from other knowledgeable lens users.
Some lenses have been traditionally considered to be high risk, such as 50 f/1.0, 400DO and 400 f/2.8 non-IS MkI, which means that the probability of getting a fine copy is slim, yet the purchase cost is generally high.



May 22, 2014 at 08:05 AM
Shield
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #18 · p.1 #18 · Canon 400 2.8 non-IS version 1


I appreciate all the feedback - the purpose was to basically sit on the sidelines on a tripod with it and get shots of my son's baseball team. After experimenting last night with the 70-200 2.8 + 1.4x, I am going with the 300 2.8 instead. It should give me enough reach until he's older and plays further out.

Thanks so much guys!
Shawn



May 22, 2014 at 01:05 PM
jcolwell
Online
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #19 · p.1 #19 · Canon 400 2.8 non-IS version 1


Good call.

The 300/2.8 takes an Extender very nicely, too.



May 22, 2014 at 01:08 PM





FM Forums | Canon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username       Or Reset password



This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.