 |
|
|
CJBushnell
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: May 24, 2009
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Mar 28, 2017
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
400mm prime image quality at f4 and with IS. Lighter weight than the 300mm 2.8 with 1.4x teleconvertor. Canon Supertele weather proofing. price used is way cheaper than the version II of this lens. massive range with teleconvertors.
|
|
Cons:
|
Only center point focus with the 2x, for cameras which focus at f8 (maybe the newest cameras can use all points - you'd need to check that)
|
|
I bought this lens last year. It was the lens I wanted when I bought my 300mm 2.8 IS some years ago, but at the time, I couldn't stretch to the used price, (which was still up in the £5k range then). Last year I noticed that the used prices had dropped after the release of the 400 DO mark II, so I decided to buy one and see if it could replace my much loved 300. I shoot wildlife and use the 300 with the 1.4 and the 2x teleconvertors and this lens needed to be good with the 2x in order to justify the change.
What did I find?
------------------
1. IMAGE QUALITY: - it is sharp. The 300 2.8 is a touch sharper, (but that is Canon's sharpest lens). The important thing to say here, (as another reviewer here has already said), the DO has a look of it's own compared to other super teles. Personally, I like that look.
2. WEIGHT: - I really do notice the difference between the 300 and this lens. It's easier when hand-holding and noticeably lighter on the shoulder on a long walk.
3. BUILD: - it's on par with the other mark one super teles (strong and weatherproof)
4. FOCUSING: is extremely fast at 400mm; still very fast with the 1.4x at 560mm; at 800mm with the 2x, it's slower, but still good in decent light. When the light is low, it can hunt in situations where the 300 + 2x would not - BUT, remember that it's an f4 lens and the 300 is a 2.8, so the 300 has twice as much light to work with. Also the 300 +2x is only 600mm, so - you take your choice and accept the limitations either way.
5. TELECONVERTORS: - Here's where it gets interesting. It is sharp with teleconvertors. However - it's not forgiving of poor technique. I'm not sure whether the IS is as good as it is in the 300 2.8. I certainly found that a good tripod is needed to get sharp shots with the 2x. Also - be aware that if your subject is too far away, atmospheric quality can become a problem - at 800mm, things like heat haze and sea spray can affect image quality
BONUS: the 400DO at 1120mm !!!
I have found that the old Kenko Pro 300 DG 1.4x can be stacked behind the canon 2x iii and my camera 1D mark iii can't see it, so you can get 1120mm with this lens and still have center point autofocus. Sharp ?? - Yes - it is still sharp. Of course depth of field is shallow and again, you need to be close enough, so that atmospheric issues don't spoil image quality, but it is still sharp. I read somewhere once "focal length is no substitute for proximity". You really see that that's true at 800mm and beyond.
NOTE - you need good light for this to work well. It will struggle in low light.
What did I decide?
---------------------
Well - after finding that the Kenko Pro 300 DG 1.4x doesn't get recognised and therefore doesn't affect autofocus, I was left with a choice between:
EF 400mm DO IS: providing 400 and 560mm with all focus points and 784 and 1120mm with center point focus
vs.
EF 300mm 2.8 IS: providing 300, 420, 600 and 840mm with all focus points.
The 300 with all focus points was my choice. The use of all the focus points made the lens more useful to me - shame about the extra weight though.
If you're interested to see shots at 1120mm from the 400DO, here are some with the Grey Seals at Horsey in Norfolk this weekend (seal fur detail shots taken between 10-12m and the ones in the sea at about 18 and 25m):
https://www.flickr.com/search/?sort=date-taken-desc&safe_search=1&tags=ef400mmdotest&user_id=24422698%40N04&view_all=1
|
|
 Mar 28, 2017
|
|
john paskey
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jun 23, 2007
Location: United States
Posts: 202
|
|
Review Date: Jun 27, 2013
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $3,700.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
bought used for a reasonable price, light weight carry lens for birds/planes/etc used with both 1.4x tc on xxd bodies and 2x tc on my 1d bodies will auto focus nicely sharp!!! much easier to carry than my 500 f4is or the heavyweight 600 f4
|
|
Cons:
|
some pics need a contrast adjustment, some not - depends on light
|
|
|
really like this lens for general walkaround bird/plane pictures and some other uses way easier than 300f2.8, works well wih both tcs ymmv
|
|
|
Jun 27, 2013
|
|
dgdg
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jul 19, 2011
Location: United States
Posts: 6526
|
|
Review Date: Sep 24, 2012
|
Recommend? |
Price paid: Not Indicated
|
|
Pros:
|
Updated review - wow on micro adjusted 5DII
|
|
Cons:
|
too busy enjoying my images to notice
|
|
|
I recently upgraded to a 5DII. With improved iso performance, this lens is phenomenal for wildlife photos hand held. Super crisp photos! For small birds, focal length is way too short.
|
|
|
Sep 24, 2012
|
|
dgdg
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jul 19, 2011
Location: United States
Posts: 6526
|
|
Review Date: Sep 17, 2011
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Luggable supertelephoto (day hikes possible!)
IS
F/4
|
|
Cons:
|
Minor - needs some extra pp with contrast
|
|
|
I bought mine on eBay for a fairly reasonable price in great condition.
I can lug this lens around with my toddler on my back in a kelty backpack on day hikes. And I can shoot handheld!
400 mm is a tough focal length to break into. There is a real line in the sand here where money and weight play a role.
I rented the 100-400 but the 5.6 aperture was too limiting in woodsy areas (ok in better light).
I rented the 500 f4 and it was just too big to take on day hikes with my family. If I were single, this would be my lens.
The 400 f5.6 does not have IS. Since light is not always great and I need to shoot hand held, I did not consider it much.
It certainly is a niche lens, overpriced brand new.
Takes a 1.4x converter very well. I have read and am beginning to agree it will take a 2x converter well if you stop it down one stop and use a tripod. I used it hand held at 800mm and was shocked by the quality of the image. I only wish I had the time to whip out my tripod.
I do need to process raw images with some extra contrast - seems like an overrated complaint. With a long lens I have noticed a bit of back focus so sent the lens and 5Dc in for calibration.
If the used price is fair - get one!
|
|
|
Sep 17, 2011
|
|
PetKal
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Sep 6, 2007
Location: Canada
Posts: 30421
|
|
Review Date: Jul 22, 2011
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $4,400.00
| Rating: 7
|
|
Pros:
|
400 DO is all about relatively small size and low weight for its focal length and nominal aperture. That's the selling point.
AF drive speed is good on long focusing distance limiter setting.
|
|
Cons:
|
IQ is not quite as good as 400 f/5.6 and a good copy of 100-400, but it is close. For some reason, and surprisingly, IS is not as effective as in 100-400. MFD is too long.
The lens is overpriced.
|
|
|
Canon have succeeded in having a delightfully small and light 400 f/4 lens thru DO technology.
However, IQ has ended up being a compromise. Also, some sort of a 1st generation IS is used in the lens although the 2nd generation might have been available at the time. The MFD is very long.
The lens is way too expensive for what it does.
If you want a real light, sharp and fast focusing wildlife lens for a modest price, get 400 f/5.6 or 100-400 instead.
If you want a superior performer and are prepared to put up with the weight, get 500 f/4 instead.
400 DO is a luxury lens for those folks who value its portability more than anything else and do not mind a bit of an IQ shortfall.
|
|
|
Jul 22, 2011
|
|
doughnut lover
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Nov 30, 2010
Location: Croatia
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Jan 8, 2011
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharper than a saber, lighter than 300/f2.8, smaller! No indication of spherical aberration. No noticeable color fringing at the edge of FOW at 200% magnification
|
|
Cons:
|
Would I dare to say price? Hardly! $4600 is a pretty penny but such a lens commands it!
|
|
|
This feather –light miracle of Canon’s engineering is a straight razor of photography.
March 2010 I had an opportunity to attend a shoot in a remote location. Holy Grail of yesteryears 400/f2.8 (non IS, but who needs IS for a lens that is permanently attached to a tripod) was not in a competition. My other long lens: 300/f2.8, until recently outdoor sport and walk around the park lens just don’t have the reach. Only choices I had was 500/f4 or 400/f4 DO. Day with a borrowed 500 convinced me that boys day over 60 have no business using anything heavier than 300/f2.8. I have not regretted day I purchased EF 400mm /f4 DO. It is SHARP, of great contrast, pleasing color rendering, no aberrations and above all LIGHT. Best wild life lens I have HAND HELD in over 40 years enjoying photography. Final proof that some ill informed individual bumbling about “artifacts” softness and other mirages need to place lens on a tripod and point it in the night sky. Take an image of stars and will notice no comas at the FOW edges. This test separates man from boys and this lens is no boy. This is a very mature lens! Other day I had setup a test image and compared all three great long lenses I am fortunate to own: at 200% pixel peeping 400 DO held its ground (and in the very image corners bettered old 400/f2.8). With 1.4 converter did not give as many more dateless as 300/ f2.8.
|
|
|
Jan 8, 2011
|
|
Steve Langton
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Oct 29, 2007
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Dec 7, 2010
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Size, weight, sharpness
|
|
Cons:
|
Price, contrast
|
|
|
I got hold of a used but 'nearly as new' copy of this lens a few months ago. The main advantage of this lens is, of course, its size and weight compared with a non-DO equivalent lens which makes it easier to carry and handle. My copy is certainly very sharp indeed, just as you'd expect from a top Canon prime lens. It also works very well with a 1.4X converter. The main image quality trade-off, being a DO lens, is contrast - straight out of camera images are just a little flat compared to, say, the almost perfect 300mm F2.8 but in all honesty this can be very simply corrected on the computer. The fact that it is 'only' F4 may be an issue for some, although this is again part of the trade-off for handling and ease of transport.
|
|
|
Dec 7, 2010
|
|
LeonardT
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Nov 23, 2010
Location: United States
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Nov 23, 2010
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $5,299.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
IQ, very light weight, easily hand held, reliable.
|
|
Cons:
|
None. I would normally list price as a negative but in this case you get what you pay for.
|
|
|
After searching for the perfect birding lens I settled on the 400mm DO. I originally tested an older, used lens at my local camera shop and found the contrast to be low. I then tried one of the shops new lenses and found the contrast was much higher then the used one I first tried. This lens has very high resolution and contrast. I use it with a 50D because of the 1.6X crop factor but I also use it with a 1DS MK II. I've had the lens for 3 years now and it has never failed to please. I'm primarily a Nikon shooter but Nikon has nothing to offer in this category that I'm comfortable hand holding for any length of time. A truly great lens.
|
|
|
Nov 23, 2010
|
|
danob
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Mar 15, 2005
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 315
|
|
Review Date: Mar 4, 2010
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Superb IQ and light weight Nothing else to beat it for this alone
|
|
Cons:
|
Perhaps lacks a tad of contrast easy to fix in PS CS4
|
|
|
Having hired a 500f4 for a day was unable to hand hold this for long and having had heart problems this was key in the 400 DO
There have been a few negative views but the IQ is fabulous and far better than my tip top 100-400 IS So I am delighted with it and works with the 1.4 and together with my 1dmk111 I have at last a perfect combo for BIF
|
|
|
Mar 4, 2010
|
|
juan65
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Feb 4, 2009
Location: United States
Posts: 305
|
|
Review Date: Feb 18, 2010
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
very sharp lens, great for close up, minimum focus distance 1.5 meter can be switch to 3 m, IS, USM, I like the push and pull hood,(yes it can be locked when extended) it makes the polarizer filter a lot easier to use.
|
|
Cons:
|
none so far,
|
|
first pictures came out with soft focus, I did the micro adjustment in my 7D to +12 and problem solved, so make sure your camera has the micro adjustment feature before you buy this lens,
I also recommend you buying from a dealer in your area, were you can walk in, test the lens in your camera and take it with you if you buy it,
trying to avoid sales tax from out of states online sales, may bring you problems, a lot of calls shipping lens back and all that bad stuff.
check out this tread; http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/868616/0#8142846
there is a picture of the lens with my camera in there.
because this lens has moving parts inside; the IS (image stabilizer)
I only recommend buying a new one,
buy it!
Juan
|
|
|
Feb 18, 2010
|
|
prion
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Aug 21, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Nov 10, 2009
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Fast AF, handheldable, takes 1.4X TC well, weight relative to 300mm f2.8
|
|
Cons:
|
Weight relative to 100-400mm lens.
|
|
I purchased a used lens at a significantly reduced price. The lens was in mint conditions (2006 model) but soft when compared to my very good copy of the 100-400mm lens. I sent it to Canon for adjustment ($250) and they did a wonderful job recalibrating the lens. The lens has performed flawlessly for me and I am very happy with it.
Its main advantages over my 100-400mm lens are:
1) Faster AF especially in low light conditions.
2) The f4 aperture (vs. f5.6 in the 100-400mm lens) allows for faster shutter speeds in low light conditions.
3) Takes a 1.4X teleconverter very well and unlike my 100-400mm lens + 1.4X TC it auto focuses with my 50D.
I posted some comparison pics at: http://www.pbase.com/juliom/testing
|
|
|
Nov 10, 2009
|
|
Rusty1
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Oct 5, 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 1050
|
|
Review Date: Jun 18, 2009
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Light, compact, balances like a dream in your hands. Sharp, weathered sealed, IS, fast AF even with the 1.4 TC, image quality with the TC is still quite good.
|
|
Cons:
|
Very expensive new, only F4 but you know that going in.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jun 18, 2009
|
|
RikWriter
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jun 22, 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 2984
|
|
Review Date: May 31, 2009
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $3,500.00
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
Incredibly light and easy to handle. Fairly nice IQ and contrast without a TC.
|
|
Cons:
|
Doesn't take TCs well...slow focussing, and low contrast even with the 1.4X TC.
|
|
|
I got a great deal on this lens and I wanted badly to love it, but it just didn't do enough for me. The main reason I wanted it was that it was f4 and thus could take a TC without losing AF, but in the end it didn't take TCs well enough to make it worthwhile to use it over the much cheaper 100-400.
|
|
|
May 31, 2009
|
|
iammikie
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Oct 20, 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 804
|
|
Review Date: May 14, 2009
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Extremely Light weight, sharp as can be, very well balanced
|
|
Cons:
|
Contrast needs a bump in photoshop
|
|
|
I owned this lens when I was a Canon guy, sold it a year or so ago when I switched to Nikon, but I got really tired of carrying around the heavy Nikon glass, so I repurchased it new (ouch), and got a 50D to go along with it. Many hate the DO technology, some like me can't live without it.
Yes, it is very expensive, resale value is so-so, but I can carry it along all day with no problem, it is sharp and well balanced.
|
|
|
May 14, 2009
|
|
jimhalay
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Oct 30, 2008
Location: United States
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Apr 4, 2009
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $3,200.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Light weight, small, fast focusing and great image stabilization for effective hand holdiing.
|
|
Cons:
|
Needs a little post processing contrast adjustment.
|
|
|
I bought the lens on e-Bay for cheap just to try it out. I love this lens for it's strengths, light weight and smaller size and wouldn't trade it for anything else. It's a natural for birding and sports photography. The slight lack of contrast never bothered me and the quality compared with the 300 2.8 is all there. You really appriciate this lens when you are sitting in a kayak under a Osprey nest for a couple of hours. I rated the build quality a little low because it actually fell apart one day at the screws holding the body to the lens. I found out later that this is not that uncommon with all Canon lenses.
|
|
|
Apr 4, 2009
|
|
John Daniel
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jun 6, 2004
Location: Canada
Posts: 1517
|
|
Review Date: Mar 14, 2009
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Light, bright, very fast focus, sharp, relatively small, lens usable with 1.4X on APS-C and the 2X on 1 serie. Hand holdable (really hand holdable without big muscles)
|
|
Cons:
|
Sometimes needs a tad of contrast to be added in PS.
|
|
|
I have been using the 500 f/4L IS and also the 300 f/2.8L IS. But for weight reasons, I have sold them to buy the 400 DO. Before doing so, I have done quite some test with all tree to make my decision and I do not regret it at all.
This is a heck of a great lens, sharp, light, fast...all you need.
|
|
|
Mar 14, 2009
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reviews
|
Views
|
Date of last review
|
|
43
|
173594
|
Mar 28, 2017
|
|
|
Recommended By
|
Average Price
|
|
93% of reviewers
|
$4,866.61
|
|
|
Build Quality Rating
|
Price Rating
|
Overall Rating
|
|
9.81
|
7.24
|
9.3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
