 |
|
|
jrobichaud
Offline
Buy and Sell: On
Registered: Feb 21, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 1033
|
|
Review Date: Mar 3, 2013
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
The size/weight is amazing! I never would have thought that Canon could make this lens this light
|
|
Cons:
|
Not a negative, but the image quality is not improved from the IS MKI like they were able to do with the 70-200mm 2.8 IS mkII and the 24-70mm 2.8 mkII but it's not fair to expect that kind of upgrade.
|
|
|
I was able to secure the 400mm 2.8 IS mkII through the cps loan program. I've had a decade long battle between the need for 2.8 for football and the need for a good nature/travel lens. The 500mm f4L IS seems to be the best compromise. The new 400mm is the exact same weight as my 500mm IS mkI, balance is a little different since it's shorter and has a bigger FE, but it's about the same to carry or hike with. That aspect of the lens simply amazes me!
In securing the loan from Canon, I wanted to see if the IQ was an improvement along the same lines as the mkII 2.8 zooms of late. I can not believe how much the IQ was improved on the 70-200mm and the 24-70mm! For $11.5K I was expecting maybe the impossible. I've spent a couple days doing fairly critical comparisons between my 500mm f4L IS and the 400mm 2.8 IS mkII with the 1.4III converter on my ID mkIV and 5D mkII.
For me, the IQ between these two setups is a draw and where a difference existed, it favored the 500mm over the 400mm II with the 1.4 III. Now I know that you might think this is an unfair comparison, but that was the comparison that would have prompted me to make the purchase. I mention it here, because I know that there are others debating between the 500mm f4 IS mk I and the 400mm IS mkII with converters.
I should also mention that the 500mm with the 1.4 III beat the 400mm II with the 2xIII in all of my tests, resolution, contrast and overall sharpness. All my shots were with the lens stopped down 1 stop.
For me, the new 400mm 2.8 IS II is a fantastic lens, but optically on par with my 400mm 2.8 non IS mkII and my 500mm f4 IS. If reach, weight and IQ are big concerns for you, and 2.8 is a need at times, the 400mm II is a great option! As an alternative you could make the choice that I am making and have the 500mm f4L IS, the first version 300mm 2.8L non IS (a truly amazing lens, that compared favorably to the others with the 1.4 and 2xIII's) and still have $3500 in your pocket!
It's fairly easy to find the 500mm under $6K (paid $4700 for mine)and the 300mm at or under $2K (Paid $1300 for mine), and the 400mm 2.8 IS mkII is $11,500.
I should also mention that without converters, the new 400mm is on par with my old 300mm 2.8L and my non IS 400mm 2.8 mkII but not better to any noticable degree. Certainly not like the improvements made with the 2.8 IS zooms.
I hope this info helps someone with their decision, it sure made mine easy.
|
|
 Mar 3, 2013
|
|
icaro2005
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Sep 6, 2008
Location: Switzerland
Posts: 6
|
|
Review Date: May 16, 2012
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Just excellent in every way...love it !
Work very well together with the 5D3.
Lighter than expected...
|
|
Cons:
|
Wish the price was lighter too, for more people to enjoy this jewel...
|
|
|
I have this big fat jevel for two weeks and really enjoy every picture I take with it...
I am super very happy ;-)
|
|
|
May 16, 2012
|
|
jcmedeiros
Offline
Buy and Sell: On
Registered: Jun 30, 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 864
|
|
Review Date: May 9, 2012
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $11,500.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
3.4 lbs lighter that previous version
razor sharp edge to edge
IQ is simply outstanding
lens collar rotation is (finally) smooth as silk
|
|
Cons:
|
ludicrous cost
|
|
It is hard to find any fault with this lens. I owned an excellent copy of the previous version for just over six year and was never disappointed with the results it provided. When I saw the specifications for the IS II two things jumped out at me:
1) MTF charts indicated a nice improvement in edge to edge sharpness
2) it is 3.34 lbs lighter
Acquiring the new 400 IS II would seem to be a no-brainer - until I saw the estimated price was $10500 which was raised to $11500 before the first units even hit the stores. That is obviously a ton of money for anyone to shell out. After considerable hand-wringing, I decided to sell my 600 f/4L IS and 400 f/2.8L IS to raise the funds to purchase this lens - I hoped I wasn't making a huge mistake.
When the 400 II IS arrived I was immediately blown away by how light it was. I routinely hand hold the 500 f/4L and this lens is actually slightly lighter. I knew I could hand hold it but somehow picking it up for the first time was still a shock.
In recent weeks I have had a few opportunities to test it out and the results are absolutely stunning. I had used the 400/600 IS for so long I had gotten used to their immense mass and inertia. The reduction in fatigue when using this lens is a revelation. I've also tried the lens with the 1.4x I teleconverter and am quite happy with the performance and results. I do expect to purchase the 1.4x III soon since I hear the focusing speed is even better.
You can see some sample taken with my 400 IS II here: http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1111741
To summarize my thoughts, I am very happy and very impressed with this lens. I have no regrets in selling two fine great white L's to finance the move.
|
|
|
May 9, 2012
|
|
Delpartal
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jun 3, 2010
Location: Spain
Posts: 1
|
|
Review Date: Feb 23, 2012
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Excelente en todo, es más asombroso!!!
|
|
Cons:
|
El Precio, el peso ha mejorado, pero aún sigue siendo pesado.
|
|
Lo considero una autentica JOYA, es muy caro, pero vale más de lo que cuesta, un ejemplo, combinado con el Canon extender X2 III:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/arojo/6781517173/in/photostream
Saludos a todos.
PD.-Ahora espero, impaciente, la Canon 1D X, creo que esta combinación será única.
|
|
|
Feb 23, 2012
|
|
dehowie
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Oct 21, 2004
Location: Australia
Posts: 1311
|
|
Review Date: Feb 14, 2012
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Amazing weight reductions,beautifully sharp ca free images.
|
|
Cons:
|
Nil..
|
|
|
Picked my series II up two weeks ago and have now used it in differing light and conditions.
In summary a spectacular lens.
The major shock to me is it's incredible performance with converters.
No reduction in visible sharpness with either of the 1.4 or 2x..when stacked extrelemy usable images.
Totally brilliant work by Canons engineers to reduce the weight by such a large amount and then increase the sharpness performance of the lens.
Staggering.
Cannot fault it after around 8000 frames in everything from full night to complete sun.
Love it..
|
|
|
Feb 14, 2012
|
|
dolina
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Nov 4, 2008
Location: Philippines
Posts: 4827
|
|
Review Date: Dec 10, 2011
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
The standard for the next 12 years. Lightest 400/2.8 as of this written review. If you are a sports photographer this is a job requirement.
|
|
Cons:
|
Sells for $11,499 on BH Photo. Always out of stock at Adorama and BHPhoto so despite the price there is strong demand for this.
|
|
Last Friday I was able to pickup the Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II USM in time for the finals of the United Football League, a Philippine professional football/soccer league.
Having only used the Canon EF 800mm f/5.6L IS USM (2008), Canon EF 500mm f/4L IS USM (1999), Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS USM (1999) and Canon EF 200mm f/2L IS USM (2008) for for outdoor sports and bird photography I was very much interested in using the best lens Canon has ever made for the application it was primarily designed to do.
To make this review unique to everyone I decided to use the lens with the EOS 5D Mark II and EOS 7D as oppose to any of the 1-Series bodies. I also shot with the EOS 5D Mark II to see how it would frame and look like on a EOS 1D X that will come next year.
Now my impressions on the lens.
a) The weight difference (1,520g) of the Version 2 (3,850g) and the Version 1 (5,370g) is very noticeable. It was like shooting with a more compact Canon EF 500mm f/4L IS USM. To put it in perspective that's almost the weight of the 2010 Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM (1490g). Having never used a Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS USM for sports I had the 2PM game for 3rd and 4th place to get used to the lens before the 4PM game for 1st and 2nd place.
b) In terms of panning from left to right to track the ball felt "right" and was easy to adopt to.
c) I really like the image quality the lens delivered. It reminds me of the 200mm as it pretty much obliterates details of subjects out of the depth of field.
d) As for focusing it worked as well as the EOS 5D Mark II would allow while the EOS 7D performed better. Comparing the two I really wish Canon would offer the same or slightly upgraded AF system of the EOS 7D onto the EOS 5D Mark III.
e) I love the new lens cap of the Version 2 and prefer it over the LensCoat that I am using on all my white primes and the old Canon leather lens caps. I hope someone makes something similar as I expect the official Canon one to cost a lot.
f) This is where attention to detail comes in, the lens hood screw knob is so much easier to tighten and untighten. The material used for the knob feels better than any of the past knobs used. As everyone is so intent on image quality, weight reduction and price these small things sometimes gets overlooked. Makes me want to buy a lens hood for my f800mmf56lisusm/]800mm[/url] 500mm and 300mm even if the paint colors differs somewhat.
https://fbcdn-sphotos-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-snc7/s720x720/388450_10150511195385395_628670394_11232836_1997884398_n.jpg
Photo by Philip Ceasar Canaria Cadabuna
g) The owner of the Version 1 photographed above commented where he can trade in his just bought lens for the Version 2 because the sheer weight difference alone would make him upgrade. It is that good.
h) USM is now noiseless and operates seamlessly.
All shots used IS Mode 3. This feature was emphasized in the marketing literature of Canon. I cannot really comment on it as I haven't gotten used to it.
Sadly at the time of pickup the Extender Version 3s were not available. Will try them out in the future.
I expect this lens to sell for US$9,700-10,200 by August 2012
|
|
|
Dec 10, 2011
|
|
AJay
Offline
Image Upload: On
Registered: Jun 1, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 434
|
|
Review Date: Nov 23, 2011
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $11,499.00
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
This lens is extremely sharp. I cannot say enough about the contrast and sharpness of this lens. I don't think it could get any better.
|
|
Cons:
|
I purchased this lens to take the place of my 600mm, f/4, IS lens and found it sharper, but not as fast on the autofocus. This is apparent using a 1.4x TC (560mm) and very apparent using a 2x TC (800mm). Attempting to photograph Birds-in-Flight with the Canon 2x III TC was quite a chore. My 600mm (Not version II) is much quicker and accurate.
Without teleconverters it's a 10 out of 10, but adding TC's reduces the speed and accuracy of the autofocus.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nov 23, 2011
|
|
sjvln
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Oct 20, 2011
Location: United States
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Oct 20, 2011
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Great lens! Perfect for sports!
|
|
Cons:
|
None
|
|
|
Finally a 400 2.8 lens that is handheldable. Stunning image quality. My copy takes 1.4 iii and 2x iii TC very well (although I read about their TC sharpness isn't impressive).
|
|
|
Oct 20, 2011
|
|
PetKal
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Sep 6, 2007
Location: Canada
Posts: 30421
|
|
Review Date: Oct 16, 2011
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Everything
|
|
Cons:
|
Nothing
|
|
|
400 f/2.8 IS MkI is an excellent lens. The MkII is even excellenter. (--:
|
|
|
Oct 16, 2011
|
|
Scott Salter
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Sep 8, 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Sep 18, 2011
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
STUNNING Image quality even with the 2x TC Mk3 light enough to hand hold for in flight. If oyu only take one lens away this one with both TC and a 1D4
|
|
Cons:
|
Only draw back other than price slow to focus with 2x TC unless you focus at infinity then it will find the target on the way back (like 70-200 with 2x TC)
|
|
|
Worth the wait I don't know how they could improve on this lens. I always wanted q 400 2.8 but the weight was a killer I like to shoot birds hand held. I think this is the new standard in wildlife lens.
I you get a chance t have a go with one don't pass it up !!
Scott
|
|
|
Sep 18, 2011
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reviews
|
Views
|
Date of last review
|
|
10
|
48452
|
Mar 3, 2013
|
|
|
Recommended By
|
Average Price
|
|
100% of reviewers
|
$11,499.50
|
|
|
Build Quality Rating
|
Price Rating
|
Overall Rating
|
|
10.00
|
7.78
|
9.8
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
