Hey All,

So I just bought a 400 DO and to put it bluntly I'm really wowed by the size and image quality of that little guy. It's made me put up my beloved 300 f/2.8 for sale and I'm even considering selling my 500 f/4.

Here is the situation. I'd like to have a "portable" wildlife lens as well as a bigger one that I can use on a tripod or take with me on car trips. I thought I had the perfect setup with the 300 and 500, but now that I've got the 400 DO and 500, I'm not sure when I would take the 500 over the 400. I almost think a 600 f/4 would make a good replacement, but I'm not sure the extra 100mm is worth it. This lead me to think about the 800, but jeez.... that thing is expensive!

Any advice or recommendations?

Thanks

Get the 800

B+H have a 1200 only 120K

bean do you have the 800? How do you like it and what other super teles have you used?

foxfire235 wrote:
...now that I've got the 400 DO and 500, I'm not sure when I would take the 500 over the 400. I almost think a 600 f/4 would make a good replacement, but I'm not sure the extra 100mm is worth it. This lead me to think about the 800!

What a terrible problem to have! Seriously, I wish I had your dilema...however, a friend of mine has a 400DO and I think it's a fantastic setup. If you also have the 300 & the 500, it might be worth it to sell those two and get the 800. At least that's what I would do if I had the mis-fortune of having to choose among three super tele's.(..sigh!)

HTH,
Omar

foxfire235 wrote:
bean do you have the 800? How do you like it and what other super teles have you used?

Yep I do have the 800. The more I use the lens the more I love it. Its light enough to handhold at times (especially with the 4 stop IS). Sharpness is great wide open, though I wouldn't say its far better than the 500 or 600. Where it really shines is the lack of CA even with a 1.4x TC. The 600 in particular tends to have more CA, especially with a 1.4x TC added.

Overall, for me it made sense, I was shooting with a 1.4x TC attached to the 600 99% of the time and now I shoot with the 800 mostly bare. The $$$ were hard to swallow at first, but now 6 months later the hurt has passed

omarlyn wrote:
foxfire235 wrote:
...now that I've got the 400 DO and 500, I'm not sure when I would take the 500 over the 400. I almost think a 600 f/4 would make a good replacement, but I'm not sure the extra 100mm is worth it. This lead me to think about the 800!

What a terrible problem to have! Seriously, I wish I had your dilema...however, a friend of mine has a 400DO and I think it's a fantastic setup. If you also have the 300 & the 500, it might be worth it to sell those two and get the 800. At least that's what I would do if I had the mis-fortune of having to choose among three super tele's.(..sigh!)

HTH,
Omar

Yeah, it's not exactly a "problem" is it?
The Nunavut Government treats us well up here, let's just say that!

Yes get the 800 if you have the money. It's the best of the super-tele lenses. Even wide open with extender it's fantastic. And the IS works so good

I have a 400DO and I love the ease of use in a car and the lightness for a limited amount of hiking I do. I also have a 500 and 600, I have not used the 500 since I got the 600, should sell it.
I thought long and hard between the 600 and 800 and ended up with the 600. I am an old guy and the weight was a big negative factor for the 600 and the cost of the 800, however, I don't carry my 600 very far from the car. The main reason for the 600 was ability to use a 50D and 5DII with a 1.4 extender an the ability to have f4 for background when needed. I tend to use the XXD cameras more than my 1DIII. I use my 1DIII primarily for birds in flight.
Vern