p.4 #1 · Canon EF 200-400mm f/4L IS 1.4X: Quick Comparison
PetKal wrote:
I was told the whole of Canada got so far eight lenses in the first shipment. Four major Canadian dealers I have spoken to very recently seem to have no idea as to the next delivery time frame. I've heard guesses ranging from "this week perhaps" to " in 6 months" they might have some.
Clearly, there is dire need for Canon to embark on a Manhattan-like project to alleviate this state of emergency.
Seriously though. I'm sorta glad that I haven't quite gotten over the novelty of my (fairly) recently acquired Super Tele primes. So the appeal of the new zoom is not so compelling.
When it was first announced my first instinct was that it would be a welcome upgrade to my so called zoo lens, an old 100-400. However the new lens turned out to be in a different league altogether - and that includes the weight and cost.
p.4 #2 · Canon EF 200-400mm f/4L IS 1.4X: Quick Comparison
PetKal wrote:
I was told the whole of Canada got so far eight lenses in the first shipment. Four major Canadian dealers I have spoken to very recently seem to have no idea as to the next delivery time frame. I've heard guesses ranging from "this week perhaps" to " in 6 months" they might have some.
That is some slow drip Chinese Water torture I think next month I'll be ordering my 500 ii finally. At least they're cheaper and in stock
p.4 #3 · Canon EF 200-400mm f/4L IS 1.4X: Quick Comparison
Bones74 wrote:
That is some slow drip Chinese Water torture I think next month I'll be ordering my 500 ii finally. At least they're cheaper and in stock
Good plan, Stu ........in my books 500 II is a better lens, although a direct comparison between a prime and a zoom lens is not really appropriate because of very different functionalities.
p.4 #5 · Canon EF 200-400mm f/4L IS 1.4X: Quick Comparison
PetKal wrote:
Good plan, Stu ........in my books 500 II is a better lens, although a direct comparison between a prime and a zoom lens is not really appropriate because of very different functionalities.
True, and as much as I'd like to own the 200-400 I cant justify spending that sort of money on just a lens. I'm also hoping to add a 1DX to my kit too. My much loved 1Dmk4 went off to a good home a couple weeks back. The 70-200 (+1.4 x ext) on the 5D3 and the 500 on the 1DX will give me enough coverage
p.4 #9 · Canon EF 200-400mm f/4L IS 1.4X: Quick Comparison
OK, then that would be 1200mm > 784mm nominally, assuming that 200-400L does go to 400mm in reality, as there have been some suggestions that it might not be quite that long.
Either way, the lens should be capable of nominal 800mm f/8, if 2xTC is mounted on the "bare" lens, i.e., with the built in TC out of the way. Ron Scheffler might have done some shots with that combination.
Some folks have gone to 1120mm f/11 with it, but that is obviously MF stuff. See this link.
p.4 #10 · Canon EF 200-400mm f/4L IS 1.4X: Quick Comparison
I wonder why the number 1.4 is not taken seriously as an approximation to the square root of 2.0, 1.414, so that stacking two of them produces a real 2.0x instead of 1.96x. Then a 400 x 1.4 x 1.4 should be 800 instead of 784. I'm arguably sure that this is the intent.
Or, in other words two stacked 1.4x's approximates one 2x.
Lars Johnsson Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: Off
p.4 #11 · Canon EF 200-400mm f/4L IS 1.4X: Quick Comparison
Doctorbird wrote:
I wonder why the number 1.4 is not taken seriously an approximation to the square root of 2.0, 1.414, so that stacking two of them produces a real 2.0x instead of 1.96x. Then a 400 x 1.4 x 1.4 should be 800 instead of 784. I'm arguably sure that this is the intent.
Or, in other words two stacked 1.4x's approximates one 2x.
Db
But it's not a big deal Because no lens is exactly the length it should be either. Like 400, 500 or 600
p.4 #13 · Canon EF 200-400mm f/4L IS 1.4X: Quick Comparison
Doctorbird wrote:
Right on. So instead of writing 784 we should write 800 since 784 suggests about 0.1% accuracy.
Db
You are right, but photographers are generally neither scientists nor engineers......they do not need higher math exactitude. When we write "784mm" it is just a nominal value which serves as a communication expedient......that's how we know we are talking about 280-560mm f/5.6 + 1.4xTC. When we say "840mm f/5.6", obviously that's 600 f/4 + 1.4xTC, etc.
p.4 #14 · Canon EF 200-400mm f/4L IS 1.4X: Quick Comparison
PetKal wrote:
You are right, but photographers are generally neither scientists nor engineers......they do not need higher math exactitude. When we write "784mm" it is just a nominal value which serves as a communication expedient......that's how we know we are talking about 280-560mm f/5.6 + 1.4xTC. When we say "840mm f/5.6", obviously that's 600 f/4 + 1.4xTC, etc.
I suppose the number 784 is now in our elite vernacular. Otherwise, a lot of the same non scientists/engineers would ponder a while before concluding "aha, 784 = 400 X 1.4 X 1.4".
p.4 #17 · Canon EF 200-400mm f/4L IS 1.4X: Quick Comparison
PetKal wrote:
OK, then that would be 1200mm > 784mm nominally, assuming that 200-400L does go to 400mm in reality, as there have been some suggestions that it might not be quite that long.
It is 400mm when focused at infinity. With rear focus zoom lenses like the new 200-400 focal length the "long end" will be shorter when focused closer.
From Chuck Westfall via e-mail:
Here are a few guidelines having to do with "focus breathing."
1. Focal length is technically measured only at infinity.
2. Rear focus zoom lenses effectively increase angle of view in proportion to the distance setting. (The closer the distance, the greater the increase.)
3. The EF200-400L is a rear focus telephoto zoom, and as such, it exhibits similar behavior. (You should expect a viewable difference even at 35 feet.)
4. The super-telephoto primes use inner focus rather than rear focus, so their change in angle of view according to distance is far less than a rear focus zoom lens....Show more →
p.4 #18 · Canon EF 200-400mm f/4L IS 1.4X: Quick Comparison
BTW, I my order for a 200-400 was filled through the Explorer of Light program. I should have it soon and will be bringing it to the Galapagos and to Africa this summer. I will be doing a Focus On feature for Canon that should be online by early September the latest. I will be posting some 200-400 images on my blog right after I get the lens.
Chinese Water torture 
........in my books 500 II is a better lens, although a direct comparison between a prime and a zoom lens is not really appropriate because of very different functionalities. 
