I have just purchased a new 400mm DO IS lens and love it. The IQ is much better than my 100 - 400 mm IS lens which is what I would have expected. One question I have however is that is there a screw on filter for the front of the lens as a protector for the lens, there appears to be a front thread but I cannot find any information about this
Always use the hood. The lens is fairly low contrast to begin with, and it really, really needs the protection from the hood to maintain the contrast that it has. But it's awesome.
I agree about the 400 DO. I had a chance to use one for a couple weeks and it was really great. The problem I have...and it's because I shoot 99% sports...is that it doesn't have a focus pre-set ring. Kind of important for me
I use my 300 2.8 all the time...probably about as sharp as the DO with a 1.4tc on the 300. But the DO is a smaller package than the 300 2.8.
Love my400mm DO as well. Never understood why some are reluctant to recommend it. I have the 300mm f/2.8, 500mm f/4 and the 800mm f/5.6. The lens that travel with me most is the DO. Only complain is the stupid lens cover on all the Canon's big lenses. Thanks to Don Zeck, that problem is solved with his ingenious invention.
jerrykur wrote:
Would anyone have a comparison between the 400 DO and the 100-400 (a good copy)?
I have both. My copy of the 100-400 is stunningly sharp (almost as sharp as the 500) and sharpness wise both are on par, the 400 DO however has less contrast than the 100-400. Given how good the IQ of my 100-400 is, I've debated selling the 400 DO, but many times that extra stop of light is very useful (both for getting higher shutter speeds and for better AF performance).
In my opinion, 400mm DO and 100-400mm f/5.6 are both 'soft' at their maximun aperture. With the 1.4 extender, DO beats the 100-400mm. With 2.0 extender, DO images are still useable under good lighting condition. One should expect the DO to beat the 100-400mm. After all, it costs almost 4 times more.
I also noticed the DO's lack of punch (read: contrast) but it can easily be adjusted during the PP. I already traded my DO lens and I cannot compare that with my100-400mm side-by-side but from my recollection though, a good copy of the 100-400mm will give the DO a run for its money. In that respect, I agree with Aravind (thedigitalbean).
For the cost, I never understood why someone would buy this over the 400/2.8L unless they really needed the light weight and that was the primary reason for purchase.
troy12n wrote:
For the cost, I never understood why someone would buy this over the 400/2.8L unless they really needed the light weight and that was the primary reason for purchase.
troy12n wrote:
For the cost, I never understood why someone would buy this over the 400/2.8L unless they really needed the light weight and that was the primary reason for purchase.
The 7 3/4 lb difference (!) between those two lenses covers the rest of my lenses and the body on a hiking trip
