Does anybody in this thread have/had the Canon RF400 or EF400 v3 lens to compare with the FE 400GM on the A1? I got my RF400 a week ago and it seems like a flawless piece of glass. No issues getting 100% keepers of slow-to-medium paced soccer game with my R5 / eyeAF / AF Scenario 1, but this rate drops to 60-70% when the game accelerates. I tried different AF scenarios with no apparent improvement. I checked a few random photos in DPP and in spite of the focus point is in the correct place (my subject's eye) - the actual focus is somewhere else.
A week ago I tried my A1 + 600GM, and I got ~1% of [very slightly] misfocused frames. Yes, the 600 is too long and not suitable for this kind of stuff, but I was really expecting the same success rate from my Canon system... I suspect upgrading my R5 to an R3 would help, but the idea of losing ~21Mpx doesn't make me happy. I think I could get a Sony lens instead. I'm aware of the lackluster OSS of the GM, but I couldn't care less about it. Looking at the TDP charts I see the 400GM has some CA, but that's ok with me too as along as I can get my shots in focus. So if someone had a 1st hand experience shooting sports with both systems - I would love to hear your thoughts.
Got my 400GM today. It works very well on the A1. The EyeAF is way more usable compared to the R5/RF400. My standard "fast zig-zagging wife" test is getting ~90% shots in focus (under 300% zoom). I was expecting something like 99% rate, but still it's a really good number. Zero critically misfocused/unusable frames.
I would like to run another test on the R3 + RF400, but those R3s are hard to find...
arbitrage wrote:
My 400GM is in the mail...but it is snailmail....so I won't have it till next week Wed/Thur. But that will be just in time for the weekend!!
I think Geoff is intrigued by the new Nikon 800mm f/6.3 PF (estimated delivery date of 6 months from order date)
And since the 400 f/2.8 can turn into a nice, sexy 800mm f/5.6, he may end up actually doing this
saaketham wrote:
I think Geoff is intrigued by the new Nikon 800mm f/6.3 PF (estimated delivery date of 6 months from order date)
And since the 400 f/2.8 can turn into a nice, sexy 800mm f/5.6, he may end up actually doing this
If I'm satisfied with the 400GM at 800mm then I will sell the 600 as I don't care one bit about 1200mm anymore. I've shot two copies of the 400GM borrowed from friends and so far with that limited testing I don't think I will be totally satisfied to give up my 600/1.4TC for the 400/2.0TC. But I had such limited time shooting it at 800 and not the best conditions without any direct back-to-back comparisons that I still need to see. Also the AF hit rate seemed lower with the 400/2x than the 600/1.4 which is probably expected but how much lower remains to be seen.
In my ideal world I'd rather just own the 400 for its more compact size, better balance, better MFD and MM. But I have a suspicion that the IQ/AF will keep the 600 in my kit just for the 800mm shooting.
Or I could sell the 600 and buy a Z9/800PF for that part of things
arbitrage wrote:
If I'm satisfied with the 400GM at 800mm then I will sell the 600 as I don't care one bit about 1200mm anymore. I've shot two copies of the 400GM borrowed from friends and so far with that limited testing I don't think I will be totally satisfied to give up my 600/1.4TC for the 400/2.0TC. But I had such limited time shooting it at 800 and not the best conditions without any direct back-to-back comparisons that I still need to see. Also the AF hit rate seemed lower with the 400/2x than the 600/1.4 which is probably expected but how much lower remains to be seen.
In my ideal world I'd rather just own the 400 for its more compact size, better balance, better MFD and MM. But I have a suspicion that the IQ/AF will keep the 600 in my kit just for the 800mm shooting.
Or I could sell the 600 and buy a Z9/800PF for that part of things...Show more →
Not sure why you would replace the 600 with the 400. The 400 has been great for megafauna at dusk but I can’t see it replacing a 600 for birds. The 400x2 may be good but definitely not as good as the 600x1.4.
I also use the 400 for a number of landscape and people images.
white wrote:
I also use the 400 for a number of landscape and people images.
I got mine for soccer. I tried my Canon 100-500 first but it could not deliver acceptable subject isolation. Also tried a 600/4 but it’s ridiculously long. 400mm is just right
While I don’t need a TC for a 400mm lens I still wanted to get the Canon RF 400 because it handles a 2x converter better, and can be used for handheld/monopod video due to its excellent IS.
TDP IQ comparison: https://bit.ly/3LMr9C5
I underestimated my R5’s lackluster AF though… the R5 works fine with the 100-500 because its DoF is huge, but when DoF is just a few mm - AF is the only factor that matters IMO. The A1 is a mind blowing camera that truly delivers in the AF department. I don’t know how good is the Z9 but after my R5 vs A1 [400mm] experience I won’t be getting a non-Sony camera + long lens combination anytime soon.
