p.5 #1 · EOS-R with 400mm f4DOII. Compromised IS functionality?
Grampy wrote:
I am also having a serious problem with very soft images using the EOS R and the 400 F4 DO V2. I cannot get a crisp image. I don't know if its a lens issue or the fact that I am using the EF lens with the $99 Canon adapter. I talked to Canon and sent them images. I tried their suggestions of cleaning the contacts, switching modes, manual focus etc. to no avail, so I think it must be the lens. There is no micro adjustment with mirrorless cameras I'm told. Any suggestions. I'm going to ask a friend to try the lens on the 5D4 and see if its sharp or not, then I guess I will know. Any suggestions, I planned on using with the R5, when I get it....Show more →
You may have a lens issue. My DO II is sharp on the R and R5. Here is one even with the 2x. I used both the The basic adapter and the control ring adapter with no difference in quality.
p.5 #2 · EOS-R with 400mm f4DOII. Compromised IS functionality?
I actually had a look back at the images I took with the 400DOII when I tried it a couple weeks ago on the R5. I remember a lot of them being slightly soft and at the time I thought it was because of atmosphere over the water I was shooting. But then I noticed that latter shots with the 600III when if anything there would have been more heat haze because it was another hour later, were tack sharp. I hadn't really clued in until I read this thread again. But I think I may have been experiencing what you guys are. I was just shooting a super easy Canada goose and some gulls just floating by me. Later on I was shooting quicker moving Yellowlegs with the 600 and no issues.
p.5 #3 · EOS-R with 400mm f4DOII. Compromised IS functionality?
arbitrage wrote:
I actually had a look back at the images I took with the 400DOII when I tried it a couple weeks ago on the R5. I remember a lot of them being slightly soft and at the time I thought it was because of atmosphere over the water I was shooting. But then I noticed that latter shots with the 600III when if anything there would have been more heat haze because it was another hour later, were tack sharp. I hadn't really clued in until I read this thread again. But I think I may have been experiencing what you guys are. I was just shooting a super easy Canada goose and some gulls just floating by me. Later on I was shooting quicker moving Yellowlegs with the 600 and no issues.
p.5 #4 · EOS-R with 400mm f4DOII. Compromised IS functionality?
It's difficult to compare the 600 is III to anything... when I received one from CPS and compared it to my 500 IS II, I was blown away by the differences. The price tag did that as well.
p.5 #8 · EOS-R with 400mm f4DOII. Compromised IS functionality?
As promised, Canon has released a new firmware for the 400 DO II lens! I will shortly try it out today.
Release notes
"Firmware Version 1.0.9 incorporates the following fix.
Fixes a phenomenon, in rare cases, the IS mechanism may cause the image to jump.
Firmware Version 1.0.9 is for lenses with Firmware Version 1.0.8 or earlier. If the lens' firmware is already Version 1.0.9, it is not necessary to update the firmware.
The lens' firmware version can be checked from the camera's menu."
p.5 #10 · EOS-R with 400mm f4DOII. Compromised IS functionality?
highdesertmesa wrote:
All I know is I will be thankful to everyone who beta tests the R5 for the first year. It may be the second generation R, but it's going to be first generation R IBIS – add to that the firmware controlling it all has to span two mount protocols and lens types and work seamlessly with IS.
I won't be surprised if IBIS on the R5 is an either-or proposition for EF lenses – either you choose IBIS or IS but you don't get both working in tandem.
Interesting historical comment. We got both, but the either or proposition turned out to be that we can't use one or the other on it's own; it's all or nothing. How ironic.
p.5 #11 · EOS-R with 400mm f4DOII. Compromised IS functionality?
stalderm wrote:
As promised, Canon has released a new firmware for the 400 DO II lens! I will shortly try it out today.
Release notes
"Firmware Version 1.0.9 incorporates the following fix.
Fixes a phenomenon, in rare cases, the IS mechanism may cause the image to jump.
Firmware Version 1.0.9 is for lenses with Firmware Version 1.0.8 or earlier. If the lens' firmware is already Version 1.0.9, it is not necessary to update the firmware.
The lens' firmware version can be checked from the camera's menu."
Suggestion: You may want to post a separate topic about the firmware update, so other owners will see it and it won't be buried in this thread. I think it would help if it's on it's own. I would post it, but I don't own the lens and you or others who have the lens could better explain the issue and why there's an update.
p.5 #12 · EOS-R with 400mm f4DOII. Compromised IS functionality?
stalderm wrote:
As promised, Canon has released a new firmware for the 400 DO II lens! I will shortly try it out today.
Release notes
"Firmware Version 1.0.9 incorporates the following fix.
Fixes a phenomenon, in rare cases, the IS mechanism may cause the image to jump.
Firmware Version 1.0.9 is for lenses with Firmware Version 1.0.8 or earlier. If the lens' firmware is already Version 1.0.9, it is not necessary to update the firmware.
The lens' firmware version can be checked from the camera's menu."
Nice. It was a very jarring occurrence on the 400DOII. It still happens on the 100-500 though but it isn't as violent. I felt that it was so violent that if one had it happen numerous times on the 400DOII that it would eventually do permanent damage to the IS system.
p.5 #13 · EOS-R with 400mm f4DOII. Compromised IS functionality?
arbitrage wrote:
Nice. It was a very jarring occurrence on the 400DOII. It still happens on the 100-500 though but it isn't as violent. I felt that it was so violent that if one had it happen numerous times on the 400DOII that it would eventually do permanent damage to the IS system.
What do you think about the 100-500 instead of the 400 DO ? (iQ, Af, etc..)
p.5 #14 · EOS-R with 400mm f4DOII. Compromised IS functionality?
Khatgs wrote:
What do you think about the 100-500 instead of the 400 DO ? (iQ, Af, etc..)
It is a good lens, good IQ, fast and accurate focus. Lighter weight so better balanced as you don’t have an adapter nor giant EF TCs involved. However It is just too slow in aperture for gloomy days. I’m still strongly considering picking up the 400DOII. Going to be doing another demo of it today and then decide if I buy it or not. I just wasn’t confident with the DO and 2xTC on R5. But a friend is using that combo now and is getting good results. So I’m optimistic as I had no issues with the 2xTC on my 5DIV and A9.
p.5 #15 · EOS-R with 400mm f4DOII. Compromised IS functionality?
arbitrage wrote:
It is a good lens, good IQ, fast and accurate focus. Lighter weight so better balanced as you don’t have an adapter nor giant EF TCs involved. However It is just too slow in aperture for gloomy days. I’m still strongly considering picking up the 400DOII. Going to be doing another demo of it today and then decide if I buy it or not. I just wasn’t confident with the DO and 2xTC on R5. But a friend is using that combo now and is getting good results. So I’m optimistic as I had no issues with the 2xTC on my 5DIV and A9. ...Show more →
Looking forward to your feedback as I keep getting tempted. The 100-400mm II is performing so well on the R5, even with a 2xTC, that I should hold my horses and hope Canon will come out with an RF that can match the 500mm PF whose weight and size I much prefer over my sold DO II.
p.5 #17 · EOS-R with 400mm f4DOII. Compromised IS functionality?
I mentioned this in the other FW thread but wanted to add here. I am currently borrowing two different 400DOII lenses right now. Don't ask me why
The first already had the new FW when I borrowed it on Friday. I've had no IS clunks/jumps shooting it for 3 days now. I borrowed the 2nd copy just this afternoon. It hadn't had the FW yet. Within a minute of shooting I had my first clunk and a number after that. I updated FW when I got home and after that there was no more IS jump/clunking.
p.5 #19 · EOS-R with 400mm f4DOII. Compromised IS functionality?
stanj wrote:
Let me get this straight: You're upgrading the FW on borrowed equipment? Let me write down not to lend you any gear
Yes, the older gentleman I borrowed it from asked me to do it as he had never done a lens FW update before. Pius did his own FW update before giving me the lens.
If I hadn't updated the FW on the guys' lens I'm pretty sure it would be into CPS getting a new IS unit by end of day. The thing was clunking every 5 mins panning BIF.
