 |
|
|
hsk06
Offline
Buy and Sell: On
Registered: Feb 1, 2008
Location: United States
Posts: 1208
|
|
Review Date: Feb 22, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,099.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
sharp, contract, bokeh, color are excellent. handle very well
|
|
Cons:
|
NONE given you already know what you are getting.
|
|
|
Just add this wonderfull lens to my collection and couldn't happier. I am glad that I went for the 400mm f5.6L prime instead of the 100-400 zoom.
sharpness, contract, bokeh, color are excellent and the lens handle very well. Most of my subjects are moving, so I don't miss IS as I thought I would.
This quickly becomes my walk around lens while my 17-55, 70-200 and 50 prime stay in the bag so you go figure out how much I love this baby.
|
|
 Feb 22, 2008
|
|
roberto1979
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Dec 29, 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 1420
|
|
Review Date: Dec 31, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $900.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
So sharp my photos actually cut me!
|
|
Cons:
|
For the price, nothing. If you wanted to pay more, IS might be nice.
|
|
|
WOW!!! I bought this and a 40D for an incredible, but not budget busting wildlife setup. I had a Bigma before, and the results were always average at best. The sharpness of this lens wide open is just amazing. It equals all my other L lenses when they're stopped down to f/8.
Pros: Did I mention this lens is sharp? Lightweight. I don't mind carrying it handheld for miles. Focus is amazingly fast. Built in hood is very very nice. Everyone that sees it looks at me like I'm a pro. It's cheap!!! I paid $900 for a perfect used copy that was only 1 year old.
Cons: It's not the fastest lens, but with 300 days of sun in Colorado, sunlight is rarely an issue. I guess if you shot in less light IS might be nice, but I can't imagine the price would stay the same. I personally wouldn't pay more to have IS. The biggest con to this lens though is now that I've finally gotten some really impressive eagle shots, I'd love to have a 600mm lens for just a bit more reach, because the quality of the pictures this lens produces are addicting!
|
|
|
Dec 31, 2007
|
|
albertino
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Dec 22, 2007
Location: Italy
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Dec 23, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
leggero ed economico-immagini nitide e contrastate
|
|
Cons:
|
manca la stabilizzazione
|
|
|
Grazie alla sua leggerezza puoi condurlo tranquillamente per ore.
Prima di acquistarlo ho meditato tantissimo in quanto temevo risultati mediocri. Provandolo ho dovuto ricredermi e posso affermare che il suo è stato un ottimo acquisto.
|
|
|
Dec 23, 2007
|
|
Hungtran10
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Nov 19, 2007
Location: United States
Posts: 3103
|
|
Review Date: Dec 14, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,023.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
- extremely sharp lens
- with the focus limiter, the autofocus speed is crazy fast. i have no problems shooting birds in flight
- sharp wide open
- handholdable
- beautiful color and contrasty images
- did i mention how sharp this lens is?
|
|
Cons:
|
nothing really. this lens is a work of art.
|
|
|
For wildlife photography, this lens will give you the most bang for your buck. I shoot birds in flight with this lens handheld. No problems. Some people say that for a 400mm lens without IS that you need to use a tripod. I would have to strongly disagree. With good lens holding technique and practice, this lens is easily handholdable. Since it is so sharp wide open, this allows for fast shutter speeds. The only time I stop down is for more depth of field when I am shooting insects or small birds.
Add a 36mm kenko autofocus extension tube for semi macro photography. I shoot larged sized insects (wasps, butterflies, dragonflies, praying mantis) or small birds with amazing sharpness and depth of field. This combo makes for a great backyard lens. I also go hiking with it at the local wildlife sanctuary without any problems. If you enjoy birding photography, this is THE lens to get.
Yes you can get the 500mm f4 but you are going to need a sturdy tripod and you are gonna need a really fat wallet because that lens is crazy expensive.
|
|
|
Dec 14, 2007
|
|
Thomaspin
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Dec 21, 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 65
|
|
Review Date: Dec 9, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $890.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Resolution, fit and finish, ergonomics
|
|
Cons:
|
Hood is hard to deploy
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dec 9, 2007
|
|
wfr2
Offline
Image Upload: On
Registered: May 14, 2003
Location: United States
Posts: 1568
|
|
Review Date: Nov 1, 2007
|
Recommend? no |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 7
|
|
Pros:
|
sharp, neat built in hood, compact (but long)
|
|
Cons:
|
It would be sooooo much better with IS
|
|
|
It is sharp but I find this lens to be frustrating. It may be politically incorrect to criticize this lens but it feels like an antique. 400mm demands IS. I bought it for use when I cannot lug my 500mmf4 around. I just do not understand why Canon has not updated this lens. It should be shorter and really needs IS.
|
|
|
Nov 1, 2007
|
|
blue_streak
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jan 25, 2007
Location: Canada
Posts: 35
|
|
Review Date: Oct 22, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
IQ, Build, Razor Sharp
|
|
Cons:
|
People with P&S cameras ask "What is that thing is for???" "Can I look?"
|
|
|
I have had this lens for a year and I really enjoy the pictures that I can generate with it. Funny thing, I sold my 70-200mm F/4 IS to a colleague of mine and after some further discussions about my 400mm 5.6L, he wanted to purchase it as well, sight unseen. I had it in the vehicle with me the next day and was going to sell it but when I started to ponder life without it I had to tell him it was off the market. No problem parting with the 70-200 F/4 IS, but this one feels like family. It is that good. Fun to use on a monopod and I love the reach.
Might sound insane, but on a tripod I have had some really nice shots turn out (of very very stationary objects) with a 2X and using the “Live View” function on the 40D to assist with manual focusing. That is a 1,280 zoom!
Think I saw some footprints on the moon…..
Simply a Great Lens.
|
|
|
Oct 22, 2007
|
|
aladyforty
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Feb 3, 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 2027
|
|
Review Date: Oct 6, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Very sharp and fast focusing lens, light enought to handhold, Built in hood
|
|
Cons:
|
No IS but I have never had an IS lens so not an issue for me
|
|
|
I’ve had this lens a couple of weeks now and I’m finding it producing beautiful shots, very contrasty and sharp. I had spent a lot of time researching the lens and was torn between this and the 100-400 L. Was told by many that I need IS but I’ve never used it so wont miss it. Handholding is not that hard, but keep the shutter speed up. I shoot mainly at higher ISOs when handholding and that negates the need of a tripod or monopod. It sits well on the monopod when I use it and I like that the tripod mount can be removed while attached to the camera. The built in hood is great and offers great protection to the glass. I have not found the F 5.6 of any disadvantage at all.
If you mainly shoot at 400m as I do for birds it is a great lens to add to your collection. I’m still yet to shoot many birds in flight but I’m told it is tops for that job.
|
|
|
Oct 6, 2007
|
|
Leon V
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Sep 3, 2007
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Sep 3, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Light weight
Compact lens size
Extremly fast autofocus
Sharp images wide open, awesome f/7.1-f/18
Great contrast
Practicle filter thread size
USM, fulltime manual focus
Built in lens hood
Detachable tripod mount
|
|
Cons:
|
No image stabilizer ???
|
|
|
Currently own Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8 L USM, amazingly sharp lens, fast autofocus. I required more reach for birding, 200mm just wasn't enough, and from what I had seen, a 2x converter was as good as going off and buying a cheapo mirror lens, or even upsizing in photoshop!
This 400mm lens is lighter and thinner than my 70-200, which makes it so much easier to hand hold. Due to the double focal length compared to a 70-200 at full zoom, any movement is magnified. I can still shoot handheld at 1/250 with 50% success! No image stabilizer!
The autofocus outpaces the 70-200, although the f/5.6 minimum apperture means that a little hunting is sometimes a problem in shadows. Fulltime manual focus sorts this out, as one can tweak, then snap the auto for accuracy, if required.
Optical sharpness is fabulous. Compared to a "re-adjusted" Tamron 200-500mm, which was previoulsy unusable from the factory, the Canon wins contrast and sharpness. At f/8-11 the Tamron is at its sharpest at 400mm, the Canon compares wide open. Stopping down to f/7.1 on the Canon, ultimate sharpness and contrast is achieved, and continues through f/18 or so, just depth of field increases.
The detachable tripod mount is a useful tool. The 70-200 f/2.8 doesn't have this, where the f/4 does I believe. It just allows much easier connection to a monopod or such, and also allows it to be reversed for comfort. I reverse the tripod mount, so the foot faces the camera, and turn this to a 90* angle. This rests in my hand very comfortably and aids stability.
I find this lens an absolute joy to use handheld, on a fixed monopod, on a monopod with tilt head and with a monopod over the shoulder technique. I can't be damned with a tripod, too big and too much weight to take on a hike. I don't find f/5.6 a problem with images, as frequently, 400mm does not give much deth of field at anything below 20ft. I tend to be at f/7.1 and above, and with a decent Canon d-SLR, ISO 800 is no problem.
Hope that helps
|
|
|
Sep 3, 2007
|
|
breenj
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Sep 24, 2005
Location: Marshall Islands
Posts: 324
|
|
Review Date: Jun 24, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharpness, color, light weight, fast AF, built-in hood
|
|
Cons:
|
None really - you already know that it is f/5.6 and doesn't have IS - everything it claims to have or do, it does very well.
|
|
|
I use this on a 30D (1.6x crop)
I just sold this when I got a 500mm, and I already am thinking I might regret it. Considering the size and weight, and the sharpness at this focal length, it is a great lens.
Sharp even wide open, with only a little improvement seen (to incredibly sharp) stopping down. This was sharper than my 300f/4 IS, which is no slouch.
|
|
|
Jun 24, 2007
|
|
Jay Taft
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Dec 28, 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 713
|
|
Review Date: Jun 23, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharp at f/5.6, light enough to hand-hold, built-in hood, solid construction, fairly quick focus, focus range selector switch.
|
|
Cons:
|
None really for the quality to price ratio. If I had to identify one characteristic it would be the minimum focus distance which is about 11 feet. But even this is not much of a problem.
|
|
|
The lens is very impressive for the price. After using a 70-200 f/4 L IS for birds in flight, I decided I needed something longer. Because the shutter speed needs to be very short for animals in motion anyway, and the light needs to bright, I thought the 400 f/5.6 could work for my style of photography.
The 400 f/5.6 exceeds my expectations. It also works well for stationary subjects when hand-held or on a tripod. A neoprene camouflage cover set protects the lens when steadying it against trees and rocks. (Bought both the lens and cover set here on FM.)
Highly recommended for day-time situations. Works well with a Canon 1.4x TC, although I find I don't need to use a TC very often.
As the reviewer below suggests, this lens is helps one learn good long lens technique. I become more proficient each time I use this lens, and the images it produces are superb when it is used correctly.
|
|
|
Jun 23, 2007
|
|
aladyforty
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Feb 3, 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 2027
|
|
Review Date: Jun 9, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
|
|
|
I find all the reviews here very helpful (apart from a few that it seems they have to realise that if one buys this lens they should deal with its light limitations)
It has swayed me towards the 400 prime as opposed to the 100-400. I look forward to any more reviews leading up to me purchasing it
|
|
|
Jun 9, 2007
|
|
davidearls
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Mar 9, 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 3954
|
|
Review Date: May 10, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $975.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharpness, contrast, focus speed
|
|
Cons:
|
single thread hole in tripod foot
|
|
|
One of the great steals in Canon's L-glass line-up. IQ has been noted over and over, and for under $1,000 used, nothing I've seen is better.
There are two ways to look at anything, and my view of the lack of image stabilization (IS) on this lens is that it's a positive. One thing I notice about the big-name pros who preach IS is that they all developed their techniques on non-IS lenses. They're better photographers with IS, but they all learned without it.
This is in some ways a "student's lens" in that it returns images that are only as good as your technique. There is a direct correlation between the quality of your images and the improvement in your technique. If learning hand-held is your thing, you would develop some amazing HH technique with this lens. I don't shoot HH, but shooting without motion from a stable platform means more than just "bolting it down." This lens doesn't require a $500+ tripod and a $400 Wimberley. Mine's rock-steady on a Bogen 3021 or Gitzo 2220, but it wasn't when I bought it, or so I thought.
"Slow" shutter speed? Again, you need to learn to shoot at "slow" shutter speeds. If you're shooting wildlife, you need to study your subject and learn to anticipate your shot. I frequently shoot at f8 or even f11 with this lens, and stopping it down almost eliminates the need for sharpening in post processing. Using fill flash means learning another valuable technique.
I've owned this lens for over a year, and it's helped me become a better photographer. This lens reports exactly how good your technique is with every exposure.
My only suggestion for an improvement would be to extend the tripod foot and add a second screw mount. 400mm exerts a lot of leverage against a single mounting screw, and my lens has always had a tendency to twist on the tripod (not during a shot).
If you're a grade-B western cowboy shooter, kicking the doors open with your guns blazing, well, this probably isn't the lens for you. If you're serious photographer who wants to advance your technique, this is a great lens, and one that will leave you with with many, many memorable reminders of your learning days.
|
|
|
May 10, 2007
|
|
timbop
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Dec 29, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 6669
|
|
Review Date: May 4, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $900.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Phenominal lens - excellent sharpness, AF, and in a lightweight package
|
|
Cons:
|
nothing
|
|
|
This is absolutely a fantastic piece of hardware. It is well on its way to replacing my 70-200/2.8L as my favorite lens (until night soccer season at least). When you buy it, you know the specs - it doesn't have IS or a very wide aperture. Who cares - the images it captures are stunning and the price makes it a bargain. It is absolutely tack sharp with beautiful colors and contrast wide open. The AF is incredibly fast, and it takes a 1.4TC like a dream. My 20D needs a bright sunny day to AF with the TC, but the images even with the cheap tamron TC are extremely good. A little extra sharpening, and you won't know the TC was there. It is easy to handhold because it is very light weight - my tripod + ballhead weight more than the 20D with this baby mounted. I prefer to shoot on a tripod, though - you are guaranteed sharp shots when using good lens technique.
I was concerned not having the zoom for larger critters, but I have not had any trouble with being too close. At normal distances wildlife will grant you, the focal length is not too much. I guess in a zoo or safari jeep the fixed length might be a problem at times, but for ordinary nature shooters it is fine. Combined with my 70-200 (and forthcoming 1dm2) I have no need for a long zoom like the 100-400.
|
|
|
May 4, 2007
|
|
genefixer
Offline
Buy and Sell: On
Registered: Jan 22, 2007
Location: United States
Posts: 6639
|
|
Review Date: Apr 23, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,050.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
relatively compact, sharpest image imaginable for the price. built in lens hood mostly a plus. can be a bit sticky at first but seems to loosen up
|
|
Cons:
|
wish it were IS but it would be more $$$.
|
|
I bought this lens and the EF 300mm f/4L IS at the same time and tested them side by side using the Canon 1.4X ext II on the 300. I compared shots taken handheld with the 300 vs on a tripod. The rest tests were the shots taken on a tripod at various f stops in several light conditions and several subjects including the neighbors brick wall across the street, a full moon etc. The 400 won clearly for sharpness and contrast. I decided that my 70-200 f/4L IS with the extender would get me up to near 300 and that the 400 would take over from there. Even with the IS feature if the 400 had it I doubt that I would handhold it much.
See the bird pictures including images of the Quetzal and hummingbirds at : http://www.pbase.com/generepair/costarica07
you will be able to tell which were taken with the 400.
Get it!
|
|
|
Apr 23, 2007
|
|
Andrew Welsh
Offline
Buy and Sell: On
Registered: Jan 19, 2007
Location: United States
Posts: 5000
|
|
Review Date: Apr 4, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $950.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Relative low cost gives you optical performance on par with $8,000+ USD 600mm/f4 lens
|
|
Cons:
|
For astrophotography, the star diffraction pattern at f/5.6 is "chunky". Much nicer and symmetric at f/8. This is a higly specialized nit however
|
|
I did a review in the FM forums here before I realized I could post one here. I am using a 1.6x crop factor camera (Rebel XT)
In essence, this is a superb lens all around. The "US Treasury Department MTF Resolution Chart" (i.e. a $20 bill) tests bear out the fact that this is an outstandingly sharp lens edge to edge. In the most demanding-of-your-optics photography, astrophotography, this lens shines on par with far more expensive APO telescopes. And it autofocuses on bright stars using the Rebel XT. I can only imagine a 1D MkII strapped to this guy focusing on the dimmest of stars...
Fast focus, sharp images, blah blah I can't say anthing else here that hasn't been said. From an astrophotography angle, this lens will make an excellent open cluster / widefield nebula / large galaxy lens. Targets like the Plieades, North America Nebula, Andromeda Galaxy are perfect. And in the astro-world, f/5.6 is actually rather fast when compared to many scopes being f/10 or more.
I found the f/5.6 star diffraction spikes to be slightly asymmetrical, just not to my taste. Here's an example:
<img src=http://www.welsh-house.net/contests/400mm-f56-star-test.jpg>
Stopping down to f/8 (where the lens is sharpest anyway) the diffraction pattern is much nicer:
<img src=http://www.welsh-house.net/contests/400mm-f8-star-test.jpg>
As you can see this is an outstanding lens for the price!
|
|
|
Apr 4, 2007
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reviews
|
Views
|
Date of last review
|
|
120
|
312035
|
Feb 5, 2022
|
|
|
Recommended By
|
Average Price
|
|
95% of reviewers
|
$1,071.57
|
|
|
Build Quality Rating
|
Price Rating
|
Overall Rating
|
|
9.74
|
9.56
|
9.5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
