gocolts wrote:
I got my 400mm DO on the FM B & S board for $3,500 earlier this year. It's in great shape and had just gotten back from CPS service. Good deals for this lens are out there, you just have to be ready to jump when they come up.
At $5k-$6k this lens was never on my radar, but under $4k is where I think it starts to make sense, at least to me.
stanj wrote:
This is one of the more polarizing lenses in Canon's lineup. It lacks sharpness and contrast compared to comparable L-series primes, but it also lacks their weight. I have owned one since 2003 and absolutely love it. It's compact, light, and its sharpness can be fixed in post processing. However, I will admit that it is getting challenged by today's high density sensors, and it doesn't take TCs particularly well. It is also indisputable that by today's supertele standard, it has a really weird bokeh. But if you go on a hike or need to shoot an air show all day long, this is the best, especially if you can stop down one stop.
It's one of the big compromise lenses around, just like the 28-300. I love both of them as they have their place in the lens drawer ...Show more →
+1, well said. Terrific lens. I had one for years, then eventually sold it when I got my 500 II. It was awesome on the trail and in the kayak, but I couldn't justify keeping it once I splurged on the 500.
Lens arrived today. While I was out fishing for smallies, our fall bite is unbelievable. On the Mark IV now. Hopefully I will get out on a photo road trip this week.
brimull wrote:
I've found it to be very good with a few quirks as others have mentioned. I've observed a weird, psychedelic-looking background under some lighting conditions and the old image stabilization is weak compared to the newer version. But generally I've found its capacity for getting images of high IQ to be better than expected. If it's a tad below some of the other Canon tele's, it's not by much.
Here's a few with the Canon 1.4 III TC attached.
Brian M.
Sweet shots! The first and third look significantly sharper than the middle harrier shot to me...is that because the middle shot was a crop and the others weren't?
Also a 1.4 teleconverter question about this lens open to anyone...I have read the version III of the TC has some big benefits with the IS II lenses, but are these benefits reduced on older lenses like the 400 DO? Or in other words, is it worth getting the version III 1.4TC vs the version II 1.4 TC for this lens?
I own the DO as well as a 500 f4, and I own a 1.4x II as well as both a 1.4x III & 2x III. While I found a significant improvement on my 500 (Version 1) with both III converters, I could not see any difference on the DO with the III converters so I hung onto my 1.4x II to use with it.
Here's a shot made just yesterday with the DO and a Mark IV.
Loren E wrote:
Sweet shots! The first and third look significantly sharper than the middle harrier shot to me...is that because the middle shot was a crop and the others weren't?
Also a 1.4 teleconverter question about this lens open to anyone...I have read the version III of the TC has some big benefits with the IS II lenses, but are these benefits reduced on older lenses like the 400 DO? Or in other words, is it worth getting the version III 1.4TC vs the version II 1.4 TC for this lens?
Thank you. The harrier is a moderate crop, the other two slight to none. It's also wide open with the TC and the bird was much farther away. That might have led to a slight difference.
Agape wrote:
Lens arrived today. While I was out fishing for smallies, our fall bite is unbelievable. On the Mark IV now. Hopefully I will get out on a photo road trip this week.
That came fast! How's the lens look? In good shape and like new hopefully?
Agape wrote:
Lens arrived today. While I was out fishing for smallies, our fall bite is unbelievable. On the Mark IV now. Hopefully I will get out on a photo road trip this week.
This might fall into the "duh" category... but do take the time to calibrate focus. Mine needed a couple points adjustment on my Mark IV. Makes a difference.
