Canon EF 400mm f/5.6L USM

[350D_Noob]

Pretty curious as to how good of a lens it is and there is no archive in the lens archive section. I figured i'll just do it here.

Show your pictures!

[In2Photos]

Wow, I can't believe we don't already have one of these. I will add it to the list. Please share your pics.

[CyberDyneSystems]

Tooo funny! I was just thinking the same thing!

[cjm]

Wow, I can't believe we don't already have one of these. I will add it to the list. Please share your pics.LOL I noticed that months ago. I thought this lens must not be any good so no one buys it, but then when I questioned that theory I got a mouth full from 400mm f5.6 users that it is a great bird lens. So I am dying to see some awesome pictures also. Prove me wrong, please.

[tommykjensen]

Check IanD's gallery with owls. A lot of them have been shot with the 400 f/5.6

http://www.pbase.com/giant001/owls

[Belmondo]

Check IanD's gallery with owls. A lot of them have been shot with the 400 f/5.6

http://www.pbase.com/giant001/owls I should point out that IanD bought that lens from me. After I sold it to him, I recognized my mistake, so bought another one, new. The net loss in that little exchange was something like $600.00. I doubt I'll ever have the success that Ian had with his Grey Owl shots. They are spectacular.

[foxbat]

An invitation to post images from the 400 f/5.6L? I accept! Here's some sports shots to kick off with:

http://i98.photobucket.com/albums/l264/foxbat_gb/Sports/Windsurfing/windsurfer1.jpg

http://i98.photobucket.com/albums/l264/foxbat_gb/Sports/Windsurfing/windsurfer2.jpg

[foxbat]

And here's a couple of 100% crops of the moon from a few days ago. Note the total absence of CA around the high-contrast edges. Not even one pixel.

http://i98.photobucket.com/albums/l264/foxbat_gb/Nature/moon1.jpg

http://i98.photobucket.com/albums/l264/foxbat_gb/Nature/moon2.jpg

[foxbat]

Some raptors:

http://i98.photobucket.com/albums/l264/foxbat_gb/Birds/harrishawk1.jpg

http://www.aprd31.dsl.pipex.com/nature/greyeagle1.jpg

http://www.aprd31.dsl.pipex.com/nature/harrishawk1.jpg

[foxbat]

Some owls. I love owls, it's so hard to pick a representative sample from the shots I've got but I think these are OK:

http://www.aprd31.dsl.pipex.com/nature/barnowl2.jpg

http://www.aprd31.dsl.pipex.com/nature/bop06/rufousleggedowl1.jpg

http://www.aprd31.dsl.pipex.com/nature/barnowlflight1.jpg

http://www.aprd31.dsl.pipex.com/nature/bop06/tawnyowl1.jpg

http://www.aprd31.dsl.pipex.com/nature/bop06/barnowlportrait1.jpg

[foxbat]

And finally some small birds, almost all of these will have been taken with the addition of a 12mm or 20mm extension tube to reduce the minimum focus distance.

http://www.aprd31.dsl.pipex.com/nature/bluetit1-1.jpg

http://www.aprd31.dsl.pipex.com/nature/juvenilebluetit1.jpg

http://www.aprd31.dsl.pipex.com/nature/birds/mauritius/rwb1.jpg

http://www.aprd31.dsl.pipex.com/nature/birds/mauritius/madfody4.jpg

http://www.aprd31.dsl.pipex.com/nature/birds/mauritius/vw2.jpg

http://i98.photobucket.com/albums/l264/foxbat_gb/forums/naturescapes/robin-ns.jpg

[LightRules]

Simply tremendous captures, Andy. Excellent stuff.

[Phideaux]

Oh wow! I never realised you could use an extension tube with a long telephoto. I've only ever used them for close up macro work. How useful.

[cjm]

Andy those are awesome! Nice job.

[woollyback]

Wow, what can I say foxbat - brilliant. I have been wanting a 400mm but always wondered what it could do outside of birds - well I guess you have put my mind straight on that.
Thank you for posting these I have definitely made my mind up now.
Wow again
Rob

[Roy C]

I use the 400 5.6 mainly for birds but here are a few other subjects.
http://www.rchurchill.f2s.com/images/blue1.JPG

http://www.rchurchill.f2s.com/images/Migrant%20Hawker.jpg

http://www.rchurchill.f2s.com/images/hawker1.JPG

[cjm]

Wow Roy! I just love using a telephoto for macro bug photography :) Great examples!

[350D_Noob]

Anyone else? I'd really like to see pictures with this thing because I'm considering it. :confused:

[RgB]

Andy Now there Awls;)
MagiC!!! The word Tack comes to mind, you the Man with the 400L

[kwsanders]

The IQ and all are just incredible on all the photos that are posted in this thread. I was worried about the light gathering ability of the lens considering it is f/5.6, but I don't imagine that one would be out birding in the dark anyway. :)

The photos in this thread helped me make my decision to go with the 400mm f/5.6L instead of my first choice. My lens arrived today and I immediately got outside with it.

I know that it is not a duck shot, but here are a couple of my first shots with it. I will search out some ducks or birds this weekend. :)

This first shot is one of my son. He does not look too hot in this photo, because we found out today that he has strep throat, but he wanted me to take his photo. He was 32 feet away from me in this photo with a grove of trees behind him.

http://potn.kwsanders.com/img_7030.jpg


This second shot is an interesting one. We live on three acres of land that is on the outer edge of a family owned 152 acres. Part of that land is across the main two lane highway that goes through our area. That road is just over 800 feet from my front door. I was sitting on the steps outside my front door when I took this photo. The cow is somewhere around 900 feet away from me.

http://potn.kwsanders.com/img_7022.jpg

[woollyback]

Kerry,

Lens looks a winner... I had almost made my mind up to get this lens next then decided to go for 100-400, but this thread and your shots have convinced me even more it's the one for me.

Thanks for posting these it's much appreciated.

Cheers

Rob

[mrclark321]

The 400 prime is an excellent lens and I really miss mine, the keeper ratio with this lens is amazing.

Dan

[kwsanders]

Lens looks a winner... I had almost made my mind up to get this lens next then decided to go for 100-400, but this thread and your shots have convinced me even more it's the one for me.

I am with you. I had completely decided to purchase the 100-400 myself. I then got to doing a little reading and I came across this thread and some other photos on a Canon 400mm f/5.6L group on Flickr. I changed my mind almost instantaneously and I am glad that I did. I have only had the lens a few hours and was out with it for about 30 minutes (raining here), but I think it is going to be on the camera quite a bit.

I may have to get a second camera body so that I can make use of my other glass. :)

[mrclark321]

I am with you. I had completely decided to purchase the 100-400 myself. I then got to doing a little reading and I came across this thread and some other photos on a Canon 400mm f/5.6L group on Flickr. I changed my mind almost instantaneously and I am glad that I did. I have only had the lens a few hours and was out with it for about 30 minutes (raining here), but I think it is going to be on the camera quite a bit.

I may have to get a second camera body so that I can make use of my other glass. :)


Kerry it's a great lens you just lose the versatility of a zoom. I had this lens for about 6 monthes and traded it for the 300 IS and really missed it. The AF is really fast and hand holding is easy with it. This lens is SHARP!
I just sold the 300 f/4 IS off to get another 100-400L for the versatility.
Ideally if I had the 70-200 f/2.8 IS and the 400 f/5.6L with a 1.4 X TC it would be an excellent setup. I had the 400L with the 135L and found myself in quite a few situations were one was too long and the other too short.
So I will try this line up and see how it works.

Dan

Dan

[cjm]

So how come this lens does not have IS? I guess that is probably next on Canon's list of lens upgrades to be released huh? Then again at 400mm a monopod/tripod is 75% of the time a must for sharp images. Bah i'll shut up.

[coreypolis]

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v721/viperx27/animals/EPV0172.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v721/viperx27/animals/EPV0166.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v721/viperx27/animals/EPV0045.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v721/viperx27/animals/EPV0023.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v721/viperx27/animals/CRW_2622.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v721/viperx27/animals/CRW_2614.jpg


All handheld, wide open. fist snow leopard shot was at 1/50 :)

[Roy C]

This one was taken at ISO 400 f5.6 at 1/100 sec handheld

http://i130.photobucket.com/albums/p267/RoyC_photo/grey.jpg

[kwsanders]

Beautiful shots, coreypolis and Roy. I really love this lens. I hope to be able to get out this weekend at some point and get some better photos with it.

[busterboy]

Taken with 400mm f/5.6..;)

http://www.timprocter.co.uk/photography/bird-table/bird-table=2.JPG

[johnstoy]

Just got the lens, and this was the very first picture with it... of a wild turkey in the forest...at f/8, 1/640, ISO 1600...Coincidentaly, this is only my 7th turkey sighting in 5 years...(This pic. is from approx. 40 ft. away.)

http://i93.photobucket.com/albums/l60/stoy17/TurkeySquirel/IMG_20061026_20751.jpg

[kross]

from me....:p

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v389/Kkross/ab2841b4.jpg

cheers.....

[coreypolis]

from me....:p



cheers.....
stunning

[kwsanders]

from me....:p
cheers.....

Kross... your photo really bugs me. It bugs me that I cannot get photos as nice and up close as this one. :lol:

Truly excellent shot! Well done.

[kwsanders]

I meant to post a photo earlier this evening, but forgot it. I did not get some good close shots of any ducks. Hopefully this shot of a Great Blue Heron will suffice.

http://potn.kwsanders.com/img_7165b.jpg

[kross]

Kross... your photo really bugs me. It bugs me that I cannot get photos as nice and up close as this one. :lol:

Truly excellent shot! Well done.

thanks! i put a 500d on the 400mm....:p

cheers...

[kwsanders]

thanks! i put a 500d on the 400mm....:p

Huh? Not sure I catch that one. :)

[canonshooter4life]

I think he means 400D ??

Brandon

[kwsanders]

I was thinking that it might be the case that he had the letters reversed. :)

I had to attach an XT to my 400mm f/5.6L. I would much rather attach a 5D to it. :D

[kross]

I was thinking that it might be the case that he had the letters reversed. :)

I had to attach an XT to my 400mm f/5.6L. I would much rather attach a 5D to it. :D

what i meant was, screw mounted a 500D close up filter on the 400mm f/5.6L..... double it as a macro lens...:D

cheers...

[canonshooter4life]

oh i guess i need to get one of those!

Brandon

[gardengirl13]

How well does this lens work with an ext tube? I'd love to get this lens but don't like that you have to stand over 11ft away. I have trouble with my chickadees getting too close with my 200!

[iplayazi]

My contribution to this fine lens. Best value purchase I have made.

http://www.pbase.com/iplayazi/image/60902992/original.jpg

[canonshooter4life]

WOW amazing shot nice work! Is this cropped at all or any use of TC ...how did you get so close where did you go??

Brandon

[iplayazi]

WOW amazing shot nice work! Is this cropped at all or any use of TC ...how did you get so close where did you go??

Brandon

Sorry you caught me, It was used with a kenko 1.4x and you are looking at the full frame.

Thanks for the compliment. It was shot in the Shetland Islands in UK at Hermaness

Todd

[kwsanders]

Beautiful shot, Todd. I have had my 400mm f/5.6L for two weeks. I got the Canon 1.4x extender in today. I am planning to take a trip this Saturday to a wildlife refuge in hopes of getting some good shots.

[kwsanders]

I hope you guys do not mind me posting one more to the thread. This is a totally different subject, but a much better shot than the previous one that I had posted.

http://potn.kwsanders.com/img_7407.jpg

[Stime187]

Bump, considering picking up this lens very soon... would love to see more sample images...

- Scott

[foxbat]

Bump, considering picking up this lens very soon... would love to see more sample images...

- Scott
Have a look at the owls and birds section of Ed Rotberg's gallery (http://www.edrotberg.org/gallery/list.php). He shoots almost exclusively with this lens.

[Roy C]

Heres one that I took a few days ago.
http://i130.photobucket.com/albums/p267/RoyC_photo/redshank.jpg

[kwsanders]

Beautiful shot, Roy. Spot on with the sharpness... at least to my eye. Is this handheld or on a tripod?

[Ed Rotberg]

Have a look at the owls and birds section of Ed Rotberg's gallery (http://www.edrotberg.org/gallery/list.php). He shoots almost exclusively with this lens.

Thanks for the plug Foxbat! The link you gave actually points to my Ireland/Scotland gallery. A better link to give would be this (http://www.edrotberg.org/gallery/index.php?groupid=8&pass=public&lang=eng).

I'll post some favorties with this lens - avoiding species already posted

Anna's Hummingbird (about 58mm of extension tube IIRC) Natural lighting (lots of reflectors )
http://www.edrotberg.org/images/Annas%204_5-15.jpg

Cactus Wren
http://www.edrotberg.org/images/Cactus%20Wren.jpg

Burrowing Owls
http://www.edrotberg.org/images/Burrowing%20Owls%2018.jpg

GBH in flight
http://www.edrotberg.org/images/GBH%20in%20Flight.jpg

Gambel's Quail
http://www.edrotberg.org/images/Gambel%27s%20Quail%203.jpg

Steller's Jay
http://www.edrotberg.org/images/Stellers%20Jay%202.jpg

Yellow-headed Caracara
http://www.edrotberg.org/images/Yellow-headed%20Caracara%202.jpg

And the times you really wished you had the 100-400mm zoom. Too close!!
http://www.edrotberg.org/images/Big%20Horn%201.jpg

= Ed =

[canonshooter4life]

I was checking out your site and those are some amazing shots!! when shooting the hummingbird did you use 58mm of extension on all of them... and about how close did it focus when you did use the 58mm??

Thanks

Brandon

[woollyback]

Ed,

Brilliant shots - your good self and foxbat should be on commission for every 400 canon sell... what better advert can there be.
I keep going round this loop 400 - 1-4IS - 400 and can't seem to make my mind up .
Every now and then the loop includes the 300 f4 IS and now the Sigma 300mm f2.8.
Thanks for posting these - lovely shots.
Best regards
Rob

[Ed Rotberg]

I was checking out your site and those are some amazing shots!! when shooting the hummingbird did you use 58mm of extension on all of them... and about how close did it focus when you did use the 58mm??

Thanks

Brandon

Brandon,

I actually believe that the 58mm was 56mm. That was a typo when I entered it. As to how close that would allow me to focus, I can't tell you because I never did the math or an actual test. I only know that it allowed me to fill the frame with these little hummingbirds, so it was an empirical thing.

My forray with the Anna's started because we have them in my backyard, and I wanted to take some photos. I did a lot of web searches, and everyone ws using flash. 90% of the flash photos of hummingbirds I saw looked flat and lifeless. The other 10% all involved complicated multi-flash setups. I did not want to get into that, so I resolved that I would try to do this will natural light, or a little fill light.

I started trying different things, and over the course of about 6 weeks, I finally came up with a setup that worked well for me using a lot of reflectors and extension tubes to get close enough. Some of the images you see on my site wre taken without extension tubes. Some were taken with fill-flash. By the time I had my ideal setup, my little model was molting some of his wing feathers :(

I want to do this exercise again, with more information that I have and perhaps some better technique. I think I'll also try using some different lenses. The hummers are pretty fearless so getting close isn't a deal-breaker. And as good as the 400mm f/5.6L is, a my 100mm Macro lens is even sharper ;) I also want to see if I can move my 500mm around fast enough on its Wimberly to keep up with the little guys.

= Ed =

[Ed Rotberg]

Ed,

Brilliant shots - your good self and foxbat should be on commission for every 400 canon sell... what better advert can there be.
I keep going round this loop 400 - 1-4IS - 400 and can't seem to make my mind up .
Every now and then the loop includes the 300 f4 IS and now the Sigma 300mm f2.8.
Thanks for posting these - lovely shots.
Best regards
Rob

Rob,

Been there. Done that. You really can't go wrong with any of these choices as they will all produce wonderful images. I'd say the 400mm f/5.6L is the most specialized of the batch, however. If you want it primarily for birds, you can't do better for the cost - certainly for birds in flight. If you have wider uses planned, it may not be the best choice.

= Ed =

[canonshooter4life]

I want to try some hummers in the spring with my 400L when they migrate through... I guess the extension tubes still gave you significantly larger images of the hummer when it was outside the original MFD... Arthur morris recommends in some situations to use tubes to get closer when the subject is outside MFD but inside the max FD with the tube... do you have any tips on getting them inflight or that sheen in their feathers??

Thanks

Brandon

[Ed Rotberg]

I want to try some hummers in the spring with my 400L when they migrate through... I guess the extension tubes still gave you significantly larger images of the hummer when it was outside the original MFD... Arthur morris recommends in some situations to use tubes to get closer when the subject is outside MFD but inside the max FD with the tube... do you have any tips on getting them inflight or that sheen in their feathers??

Thanks

Brandon

Brandon,

The only tips I can give you for catching them in flight is try to anticipate where they will go - they are fairly predictable - and patience. I spent many hours, sitting in one place, occasionally getting up to tweak my reflectors a bit. The iridescence in their feathers comes from light reflecting off of them. Having the sun behind me, and a lot of reflectors helped to get that iridescence. For what it's worth, these hummer images look incredible printed on Kodak Metallic paper. It really emphasizes the iridescence.

Finally, the last tip I can give you is try to set up to have a good background behind your subject. Having a brightly lit background can kill your image. Something too dark makes it look unnatural. Ideally it can be far enough away that you don't have anything too busy in it.

Also, you will notice (since my EXIFs are always intact) that my later images were stopped down to f/10. This was not to make them sharper, but rather because once I had moved in so close, the DOF was so narrow that I could not get the whole hummer in focus at wider apertures. Not so much a problem in the image posted here, but definitely a problem when they were flying more towards me.

= Ed =

[Pentaxis]

I've been comparing shots from this lens, and its zoom counterpart, the 100-400l, and it seems that the 400 prime definitely has better sharpness and color for quite a few of the demonstrated shots. Is this an actual difference in the lens, or is it a difference in skill and or environment that is causing this? More pics from the prime seem to pop.

100-400l Pic Archive (http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=144028)

[Choderboy]

Pentaxis, have you seen this thread?
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=240054

[RikWriter]

Too late to contribute to the archive?
http://www.pbase.com/rikwriter/image/48556251.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/rikwriter/image/48556456.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/rikwriter/image/48556667.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/rikwriter/image/46661452.jpg

This one is with a 1.4X TC.
http://www.pbase.com/rikwriter/image/51372292.jpg

[kwsanders]

Wow! Those are some fantastic shots, especially the last one of the Great Blue. I wish mine came out that well. I am not sure if it is a distance problem (too far away), a focusing issue with the lens, or just the photographer. :(

[RikWriter]

Wow! Those are some fantastic shots, especially the last one of the Great Blue. I wish mine came out that well. I am not sure if it is a distance problem (too far away), a focusing issue with the lens, or just the photographer. :(

Do some tests with inanimate objects...the lens is excellent in general, but your particular one could conceivably have a problem.
BTW, all those shots were hand-held.

[plsurfer]

Mine is in the mail!!!!!! i cant wait!!! great shots everyone.

[kwsanders]

Do some tests with inanimate objects...the lens is excellent in general, but your particular one could conceivably have a problem.

Looks like the lens is just fine. I have taken some shots of a few things that have come out wonderful. I need to spend more time getting used to the lens and making sure that I remember to have a high enough shutter speed to reduce camera shake, etc.


Mine is in the mail!!!!!! i cant wait!!! great shots everyone.

Fantastic, plsurfer. I know that you will love the new glass. I look forward to seeing your first photos with it. I was just looking at the photos in your gallery. The action shots of the surfers are fantastic!

[foxbat]

Adding a few more to the archive. Both of these are taken with the 1.4x TC on a 1DMK2. The addition of the TC makes it a little harder to extract maximum image quality and it's easy to blame the glass when it's usually focusing errors or poor long lens technique that's at fault.

European Robin
http://i98.photobucket.com/albums/l264/foxbat_gb/Birds/robin1.jpg

Blue Tit
http://i98.photobucket.com/albums/l264/foxbat_gb/Birds/bluetit3.jpg

[Ospi]

wow, amazingly sharp and contrasty even with the TC. Nice shots foxbat, i hope the 300 f/4 performs this well with a tc.

[ChrisBlaze]

wow, amazingly sharp and contrasty even with the TC. Nice shots foxbat, i hope the 300 f/4 performs this well with a tc.

it does :D

[rathke]

Here's a flight shot with some boken.

[canonloader]

All taken with the 400L f/5.6 and 30D;

http://www.picturelacrosse.com/potn/bokeh/chick5.jpg

http://www.picturelacrosse.com/potn/bokeh/downy2.jpg

http://www.picturelacrosse.com/potn/janeagles/best2a.jpg

http://www.picturelacrosse.com/potn/janeagles/best1.jpg

http://www.picturelacrosse.com/potn/hawks/rtpole6.jpg

[unafaxer]

canonloader - wow...the shots of the eagles are awesome!

[canonloader]

Thanks Unafaxer. All possible with this lens. :)

[unafaxer]

It is on my list..but my wife says "one must have priorities":(
So I must wait a day or two before i get to press the B&H button.

[RikWriter]

A couple more.

http://www.pbase.com/rikwriter/image/74095820.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/rikwriter/image/74664375.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/rikwriter/image/74664334.jpg

[Roy C]

Here is an example of the lens with a Canon 1.4 tc (handheld-with the pins taped)

http://www.rchurchill.f2s.com/images/sparrow%201J.jpg

[Treat me like a tourist]

Great heron shots! what is that it has in the last one? I find heron behaviour fascinating!

[busterboy]

http://www.timprocter.co.uk/photography/bird-table/bird-table=2.JPG

[RikWriter]

Great heron shots! what is that it has in the last one? I find heron behaviour fascinating!

I think it's the head of a catfish, but I am not sure.

[iplayazi]

This lens still makes me happy on my purchase everytime I use it!

Todd

[iplayazi]

Here is an example of actual this lens can produce at 100% Its a shot of my avatar and earlier post.

Taken with a kenko 1.4x dg pro taped pins

http://www.pbase.com/iplayazi/image/75324734/original.jpg

[rw2]

Sparrow shot with the 400mm f5.6 on a 350d.

[350D_Noob]

Great shots everyone! Someone came into the place I worked and had this lens. Not as heavy I thought it would be. I compared weight to my 24-70 and it seemed almost similar.

[SgWRX]

i'm a noob with the 400 5.6. i find that it's very difficult to hand hold. somehow i got this shot and with a little more sharpening than i usually do it seems to look ok. a mono pod help of course, but i didn't have it on this shot and somehow i was able to get this 1/250th! how does it look?

[canonloader]

It looks fine for that shutter speed. The point is, at 1/3000 or 1/4000, you can wave it around like a conducters baton at the orchestra and still get sharp shots.

[scb]

400mm 5.6L, EOS 400D, Tripod, Jacky Winter, Yellow-tailed Black-Cockatoo

[Geo]

Just amazing pictures, this is the father of the lens.

[StroupePhotography]

Mine is on the way. I can`t wait to use it . Excellent shots all.

[Bimmerfest]

Click on the thumnails for larger images. Click on the image again a second time for hi-resolution full-sized images.

Love the 400mm!!

http://www.bimmerfest.com/forums/images/smilies/thumb.gif

http://photos.surfline.com/albums/userpics/11732/thumb_Picture_200.jpg (http://photos.surfline.com/albums/userpics/11732/Picture_200.jpg) http://photos.surfline.com/albums/userpics/11732/thumb_IMG_0540_1.jpg (http://photos.surfline.com/albums/userpics/11732/IMG_0540_1.jpg) http://photos.surfline.com/albums/userpics/11732/thumb_IMG_0499_1.jpg (http://photos.surfline.com/albums/userpics/11732/IMG_0499_1.jpg)

[nburwell]

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v696/nburwell/bunny.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v696/nburwell/bunny_3.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v696/nburwell/bunny_1.jpg

[foxbat]

Some more birdies for the samples archive. No teleconverters involved this time. 1DMK2 was the camera.

http://i98.photobucket.com/albums/l264/foxbat_gb/Birds/starling.jpg
1/400s ISO 500

http://i98.photobucket.com/albums/l264/foxbat_gb/Birds/robin-1.jpg
1/125s ISO 500

[michael_]

hmm this or the 100-400 hmm decisions.

[Ed Rotberg]

I'll toss a 3 more images into the mix. While I've been really enjoying my new 500mm, the 400 f/5.6L still holds a warm place in my heart and a prominent one in my kit. A couple of recent hand-held images.

http://www.edrotberg.org/images/Canon%20DPF/Great%20Egret%20With%20branches.jpg

http://www.edrotberg.org/images/Canon%20DPF/Snowy%20Egret%20Breeding%20Display.jpg

http://www.edrotberg.org/images/Canon%20DPF/Snowy%20Egret%20in%20flight%202.jpg

= Ed =

[James M]

Couple from me

http://jamesmarshall.net/dd/duckref1.jpg

http://jamesmarshall.net/dd/duckref.jpg

[grimreaper]

Couple from me

http://jamesmarshall.net/dd/duckref1.jpg

http://jamesmarshall.net/dd/duckref.jpg


Love the reflection in the first shot.

What are people's views about the latest versions of the 100-400 IS are as good at 400mm as the 400mm prime is, although the focus speed will not be as good I take it.

Here's a comparison between them.

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=278&Camera=9&FLI=0&API=0&LensComp=113&CameraComp=9&FLIComp=4&APIComp=0

[RikWriter]

What are people's views about the latest versions of the 100-400 IS are as good at 400mm as the 400mm prime is, although the focus speed will not be as good I take it.



IMHO, the prime is noticably better than the zoom at 400. I don't know about "the latest versions," but mine is only a couple years old and it's not as good as the prime.

[grimreaper]

IMHO, the prime is noticably better than the zoom at 400. I don't know about "the latest versions," but mine is only a couple years old and it's not as good as the prime.



Cheers for that, whys it so hard to pick between lenses when on a budget. :lol:

[James M]

Thanks James :)

[xpsentity]

I'm seriously considering this after a lot of dissapointing results with the 100-400. It's wierd, I've got tons of crap pictures from it, but some are SUPERB.. I can't nail down the cause. :(

I'm not sure if I'm mis-focusing somehow on the long shots, or what the deal is. For example, I took maybe 150 shots of wolves feeding on an elk in Yellowstone, and not a single shot is of acceptable sharpness. All 1/400+, monopod, IS on. But, on the other hand, I took a bunch of shots of the Pelicans, and even a good amount of in-flight, and a majority of them are SPOT-ON! It does seem that the further away the subject is, the worse the IQ gets.. a lot worse. It really looks like mis-focusing?

Any tips? (Sell it and get the 400? :lol:)

Does anyone have both? Is it worth it to have both?

[James M]

Swan

http://www.jamesmarshall.net/dd/swan400.jpg

[Technophile]

great shots here!. i am considering this lens. does anyone have any sports shots? such as surfing, boating, car racing, air shows, etc. i saw a few surfing shots, but id like to see more (and of other sports) with this lens!

[canonshooter4life]

Took these this weekend...

http://i16.photobucket.com/albums/b47/mj_23_rocks/Killdeer50pt146copy.jpg

http://i16.photobucket.com/albums/b47/mj_23_rocks/Killdeer50pt095copy.jpg

http://i16.photobucket.com/albums/b47/mj_23_rocks/Killdeer50pt091copy.jpg

[Ed Rotberg]

I'm seriously considering this after a lot of dissapointing results with the 100-400. It's wierd, I've got tons of crap pictures from it, but some are SUPERB.. I can't nail down the cause. :(

I'm not sure if I'm mis-focusing somehow on the long shots, or what the deal is. For example, I took maybe 150 shots of wolves feeding on an elk in Yellowstone, and not a single shot is of acceptable sharpness. All 1/400+, monopod, IS on. But, on the other hand, I took a bunch of shots of the Pelicans, and even a good amount of in-flight, and a majority of them are SPOT-ON! It does seem that the further away the subject is, the worse the IQ gets.. a lot worse. It really looks like mis-focusing?

Any tips? (Sell it and get the 400? :lol:)

Does anyone have both? Is it worth it to have both?

Yes, the 100-400 is generation 1 IS. When mounted on a tripod you MUST turn the IS off or you will get lousy results. Later generations of IS detect the fact that the camera is mounted on a tripod and deal with it accordingly. Generation 1 IS makes a mess of things if it is left on while mounted on a tripod.

= Ed =

[johnstoy]

Baby Fawn Nursing just after sunrise, in the dark deciduous forest if Pennsylvania.
http://i93.photobucket.com/albums/l60/stoy17/NursingFawn0607/IMG_20070607_9999_100-1.jpg

Nursing in the Early Morning
http://i93.photobucket.com/albums/l60/stoy17/NursingFawn0607/IMG_20070607_9999_168.jpg

[angryhampster]

I'll toss a 3 more images into the mix. While I've been really enjoying my new 500mm, the 400 f/5.6L still holds a warm place in my heart and a prominent one in my kit. A couple of recent hand-held images.



http://www.edrotberg.org/images/Canon%20DPF/Snowy%20Egret%20Breeding%20Display.jpg



= Ed =


Loving this shot. Even though the 400 is a full stop slower than the 500, do you like it so much just because of its size and weight in comparison? I've never used either lens, but from what I understand, the 500 f/4 is godlike.

[johnstoy]

Osprey - Adult Female, in the sky of Carbon County, Pennsylvania
http://i93.photobucket.com/albums/l60/stoy17/Osprey3in%20Flight07/IMG_20070606_9999_288.jpg

[aladyforty]

Im madly saving for this lens, these shots are awesome, post more please:-)

[James M]

Another duck

http://www.jamesmarshall.net/dd/flight.jpg

[foxbat]

Im madly saving for this lens, these shots are awesome, post more please:-)Here's one from the archives. Nothing quite like a little duckling to hit a perfect ten on the cuteness scale:

http://i98.photobucket.com/albums/l264/foxbat_gb/Birds/duckling.jpg

[Mr. Clean]

A couple from my first outing. Awesome lens, for the price it's tough to beat. I prefer it over the 100-400 I had. Set the focus limiter switch and you have an AF demon!
One BIF and one, well, something or other. Both compressed extremely though unfortunately.

[Mr. Clean]

last one

[grimreaper]

hmm this or the 100-400 hmm decisions.



Thats what I keep thinking , but then I come back to this thread and pick this one again. :)

[Mr. Clean]

Thats what I keep thinking , but then I come back to this thread and pick this one again. :)
They both have their merits for sure. The 1-4 was nice for the IS, the 400mm is nice for it's IQ and super fast AF. Some will tell ya that the better IQ could go to either lens on a copy by copy basis. The 1-4 is more versatile too. I prefer my 400mm over the 1-4 I had though. Better price point, AF, and IQ.

[grimreaper]

They both have their merits for sure. The 1-4 was nice for the IS, the 400mm is nice for it's IQ and super fast AF. Some will tell ya that the better IQ could go to either lens on a copy by copy basis. The 1-4 is more versatile too. I prefer my 400mm over the 1-4 I had though. Better price point, AF, and IQ.



If I pick this lens then ill get the 70-200 f4 IS as well, to bridge the gap a little ,
does anyone know what the image quality is like on the 70-200 f4 IS with a 1.4 TC at 280 wide open compaired to the 100-400 at 280 wide open , if theres not much difference thats what ill go with i think:)

[Mr. Clean]

there's some TC examples here
http://www.pbase.com/lightrules/bigzoomtest

and here

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=342442

I'd guess that the 70-200 + 1.4 would be close to the same or perhaps a tad better.

[canonshooter4life]

Heres another one from me...

http://i16.photobucket.com/albums/b47/mj_23_rocks/BronteHjuly2081copy.jpg

[grimreaper]

there's some TC examples here
http://www.pbase.com/lightrules/bigzoomtest

and here

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=342442

I'd guess that the 70-200 + 1.4 would be close to the same or perhaps a tad better.


Cheers, it's between the 70-200 f4 IS , and sigma 100-300 f4, now :rolleyes: , most say for football/motosports 200 is not long enough, but the IS would be nice to have, and if im honest im not going to do over alot of that , i will be mostly doing wildlife/bird shooting , so the 70-200 and 400 should do me nicely i would of thought, :confused:

[aladyforty]

I keep coming back to this thread. I had been tossing up between the 100-400 IS and this lens but from what I’ve seen, the prime is the one I really want. I have the 70-200 F4 non IS and the EF 1X4 TC and shoot handheld all the time (occasionally use a monopod) and get very sharp images.

The 100-400 may just be a little too heavy for me and the 300 F4 IS sounds nice but I want as much reach as possible for a budget price. So the 400 prime sounds great and will take the TC well from what I’ve seen. It’s just a pity the auto focus does not work with the TC. I’ve never had IS so wont miss it but how easy is it to manual focus on wildlife? I have no Idea about taping the pins? Just waiting now to see how the tax man pays me this year and this lens will be in my kit. Love all the shots I’ve seen on here by the way.

[canonshooter4life]

heres a couple more

http://i16.photobucket.com/albums/b47/mj_23_rocks/Kerncliff083copy.jpg

http://i16.photobucket.com/albums/b47/mj_23_rocks/Backyard181copy.jpg

[calicokat]

http://calicokat.smugmug.com/photos/115419876-M.jpg

[350D_Noob]

A couple from my first outing. Awesome lens, for the price it's tough to beat. I prefer it over the 100-400 I had. Set the focus limiter switch and you have an AF demon!
One BIF and one, well, something or other. Both compressed extremely though unfortunately.

WHOA... For a second there, I thought that they were both one picture. :lol:

[Roy C]

.So the 400 prime sounds great and will take the TC well from what I’ve seen. It’s just a pity the auto focus does not work with the TC. I’ve never had IS so wont miss it but how easy is it to manual focus on wildlife? I have no Idea about taping the pins?.
Taping the pins is a breeze and takes about 30 seconds. AF works fine providing there is good light and a bit of contrast in the subject.
Attached is one I took last week with the 400mm f5.6 and 1.4tc (pins taped)
http://i130.photobucket.com/albums/p267/RoyC_photo/blue2-1.jpg

[aladyforty]

would these be the pins on the actual lens itself and what do you use to tape it? not sticky tape stuff I hope

[Roy C]

would these be the pins on the actual lens itself and what do you use to tape it? not sticky tape stuff I hope
No, its the left hand three pins on the lens side of the converter - I use bog standard sello tape.

[aladyforty]

Thanks, I will remember than when i get the lens, hopefully not too far away. Ive had quite a few people tell me to get the 300 IS and just use it with the TC all the time. I would expect the 400 at 400 would be sharper than the 300 with a TC. As Ive said, i have never had IS so dont miss it. I have no problem handholding shots as long as the lens is not too heavy, thats the main reason Im not buying the bigma

[Grimm75]

Weather has sucked since I received my 400mm L but I got out last night and took a few test shots. Here's one:

http://i132.photobucket.com/albums/q22/grimm75/Picture038a.jpg?t=1184591947

[aladyforty]

Weather has sucked since I received my 400mm L but I got out last night and took a few test shots. Here's one:

http://i132.photobucket.com/albums/q22/grimm75/Picture038a.jpg?t=1184591947


Looks great, nice and sharp

[Skraap]

Anyone more got something to show from this beauty :D ?

[James M]

Some more from me

http://jamesmarshall.net/dd/bald3.jpg

http://jamesmarshall.net/dd/potn1.jpg

http://jamesmarshall.net/dd/potn2.jpg

http://jamesmarshall.net/dd/potn3.jpg

http://jamesmarshall.net/dd/potn7.jpg

http://jamesmarshall.net/dd/potn8.jpg

http://jamesmarshall.net/dd/potn9.jpg

[grimreaper]

love the heat on the 4th James

[aladyforty]

those are great shots, i too love the heat in the jet shot. Im still unsure about getting this or the 100-400. main reason is that although the zoom is very versitile I cant see it being anywhere near as sharp as the prime or even my 70-200 F4 L. I wonder if its worth getting the prime and hanging out for the zoom to be upgraded with a newer design

[vondo]

Two from a safari to Kenya:

This one is a young leopard in Tsavo West National Park, slightly cropped

http://www.hep.vanderbilt.edu/~vaandeew/Africa_2007/10-12_july_tsavo_west/1184189666a_jpg.jpeg

A tree climbing lioness in Nakuru National Park (uncropped):

http://www.hep.vanderbilt.edu/~vaandeew/Africa_2007_Prelim/gass/1184705338.jpeg

Over the course of two weeks that lens almost never came of my camera. I had a second body with a normal zoom on it as well, but the 400 was a constant.

[iplayazi]

Do you guys think the tape on the pins will still be required with the 40d? Just a thought

Great shots by the way

Todd

[aladyforty]

I cant wait to get this lens, only 2 weeks to go now before I can afford it. They are great shots of the planes and the animals guys.

[RPCrowe]

I won a gift certificate for rental gear from my local (Escondido, CA) Calumet camera store and I used the certificate to rent several lenses with the expectation of purchasing some long glass.

I will use the lens for nature, airshows, some (limited) daytime sports and for general tele work where compression of the field is advantageous or where I cannot get close to my subject.

I have a 70-200mm f/4L IS lens and a Tokina 400mm f/5.6 IS lens. The f/4L is a wonderful lens in all respects but it is a little short (even with a 1.4X TC added). The Tokina is an O.K. lens but not as great as I would like. My main problem with the Tokina is not so much image quality (it is a pretty sharp lens) but in A/F speed and accuracy.

I rented and auditioned the following lenses: Canon 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS, Canon 400mm f/5.6L and the Bigma!

I noticed that I was using the 100-400mm lens at full extension most of the time and that I was using it on a tripod or monopod a great majority of the times.

The Bigma is an O.K. lens but, the gnat sharp quality I desire in a lens is not quite there. Actually, it is on a par with the Tokina 400mm f/5.6 ATX SD.

I rented and finally picked for my long lens the great 400mm f/5.6L. I chose this lens for the following reasons:

1. The imagery is mind boggling - sharp, crisp and contrasty

2. It is lighter in weight than the 100-400mm zoom

3. I used the zoom at full extension almost all the time and I had a fine 70-200mm f/4L as a companion to the 400mm f/5.6L so I really didn't need the zoom

4. I used this lens primarily on a tripod or monopod

5. I didn't do any specific scientific testing but, the prime seemed sharper than the zoom at 400mm - especially wide open.

6. The prime has that hard to define quality which produces images with almost three dimensional quality (my 12-24mm Tokina, 24-70mm f/2.8L and 70-200mm f/4L IS also have this quality).

7. Finally, I was able to get a mint used 400mm f/5.6L a lot cheaper than I could have purchased a used 100-400mm zoom.

Sure, I'd have liked an IS version of this lens but, at this time there is no such lans available.

I am waiting for my new (used) 400mm f/4L to show up at my door and expect it any day. As soon as I get it, I will test it out locally and them go to the Thunderboat Races in San Diego's Mission Bay to give it a real life checkout.

Then it is on to the Bosque del Apache Wildlife refuge just South of Albuquerque and the Albuquerque Balloon Fiesta. After that, back to San Diego and the Marine Corps Air Station Miramar Air Show in October.

I wonder if a gimbal tripod mount (head) such as the Manfrotto 3421 would be a worthwhile addition. I presently use a Manfrotto Midi Ball Head (488). The gimbal mount runs about $200 from B&H. If I thought it would be worth getting - I might buy one.

[Mr. Clean]

Beautiful shots all!

[aladyforty]

I won a gift certificate for rental gear from my local (Escondido, CA) Calumet camera store and I used the certificate to rent several lenses with the expectation of purchasing some long glass.

I will use the lens for nature, airshows, some (limited) daytime sports and for general tele work where compression of the field is advantageous or where I cannot get close to my subject.

I have a 70-200mm f/4L IS lens and a Tokina 400mm f/5.6 IS lens. The f/4L is a wonderful lens in all respects but it is a little short (even with a 1.4X TC added). The Tokina is an O.K. lens but not as great as I would like. My main problem with the Tokina is not so much image quality (it is a pretty sharp lens) but in A/F speed and accuracy.

I rented and auditioned the following lenses: Canon 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS, Canon 400mm f/5.6L and the Bigma!

I noticed that I was using the 100-400mm lens at full extension most of the time and that I was using it on a tripod or monopod a great majority of the times.

The Bigma is an O.K. lens but, the gnat sharp quality I desire in a lens is not quite there. Actually, it is on a par with the Tokina 400mm f/5.6 ATX SD.

I rented and finally picked for my long lens the great 400mm f/5.6L. I chose this lens for the following reasons:

1. The imagery is mind boggling - sharp, crisp and contrasty

2. It is lighter in weight than the 100-400mm zoom

3. I used the zoom at full extension almost all the time and I had a fine 70-200mm f/4L as a companion to the 400mm f/5.6L so I really didn't need the zoom

4. I used this lens primarily on a tripod or monopod

5. I didn't do any specific scientific testing but, the prime seemed sharper than the zoom at 400mm - especially wide open.

6. The prime has that hard to define quality which produces images with almost three dimensional quality (my 12-24mm Tokina, 24-70mm f/2.8L and 70-200mm f/4L IS also have this quality).

7. Finally, I was able to get a mint used 400mm f/5.6L a lot cheaper than I could have purchased a used 100-400mm zoom.

Sure, I'd have liked an IS version of this lens but, at this time there is no such lans available.

I am waiting for my new (used) 400mm f/4L to show up at my door and expect it any day. As soon as I get it, I will test it out locally and them go to the Thunderboat Races in San Diego's Mission Bay to give it a real life checkout.

Then it is on to the Bosque del Apache Wildlife refuge just South of Albuquerque and the Albuquerque Balloon Fiesta. After that, back to San Diego and the Marine Corps Air Station Miramar Air Show in October.

I wonder if a gimbal tripod mount (head) such as the Manfrotto 3421 would be a worthwhile addition. I presently use a Manfrotto Midi Ball Head (488). The gimbal mount runs about $200 from B&H. If I thought it would be worth getting - I might buy one.


Thanks for posting this. I’ve not had a chance to test either of the lenses (100-400 L vs. the 400 F 5.6 L) I have read a lot and think the prime is the way to go. I also have the 70-200 F4 L

The one thing I find curious is that people keep calling the 400 prime light and the zoom a heavy lens. I looked up the specs on both and it seems there is hardly a difference between them only 110 grams. So why is this so?

[RPCrowe]

As per Canon specs (I never weighed mine) the 400mm f/5.6L weighs 2.8 pounds. Paired with the 30D; your combination would weigh in the area of 4.3 pounds.

That would be heavy to some folks and light to others depending on your frame of reference.

I use my 400mm f/5.6L on either a Manfrotto 831 monopod or a Giottos MT8180 tripod along with a Manfrotto 3421 Gimbal Lens Mount. The tripod and mount weigh 7.3 pounds while the monopod and gimbal mount weigh 3.6 pounds.

So my load is between a bit less than 8 pounds with the monopod and 11.6 pounds with the tripod.

I don't mind carrying either but, I don't expect to be doing any rough country trekking or very much climbing with either rig.

[Dorman]

This archive is the devil.... the IQ from this lens is simply astounding and what a value at it's price.... must stay strong!

[angryhampster]

this is always one of my favorite archives to see updated :)

[aladyforty]

I hope to add to this thread soon, ordered this lens yesterday and cant wait to get it:-)

[DonaldB]

I've had this lens for a couple of weeks now and I really like it...I'm glad I got it instead of the zoom...:D

I'm shooting it with a 5D...here's a couple of pics with it...

http://www.pbase.com/image/85244462/original.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/image/85241664/original.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/image/85644287/original.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/image/85352327/original.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/image/85776512/original.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/image/85776500/original.jpg

[Grimm75]

this is always one of my favorite archives to see updated :)

Well here you go then. :)

http://i132.photobucket.com/albums/q22/grimm75/Hummers/Picture042a.jpg

[farmdog fan]

a tiny young sparrow.

[farmdog fan]

and a sleepy one. both handheld.

[trumpet_guy]

http://www.pbase.com/tswen/image/81095371/original.jpg

[SoaringUSAEagle]

All taken with the 400L f/5.6 and 30D;





http://www.freeassociationblog.com/potn/janeagles/best2a.jpg

http://www.freeassociationblog.com/potn/janeagles/best1.jpg



Where were you at to get these?

[canonloader]

Hey Jeff, come to La Crosse, and I'll show you. :)

Check out the gallery in my footer, there's more. ;)

[aladyforty]

all these shots are great, Its making me impatient to get this lens

[Z3rocool]

http://i115.photobucket.com/albums/n293/z3rocool_2006/REHEAT.jpg

http://i115.photobucket.com/albums/n293/z3rocool_2006/F16_filtered.jpg

http://i115.photobucket.com/albums/n293/z3rocool_2006/HG_filtered.jpg

http://i115.photobucket.com/albums/n293/z3rocool_2006/Hawk_filtered.jpg

[canonshooter4life]

here are some more recent ones from me...

http://i16.photobucket.com/albums/b47/mj_23_rocks/Algonquin2007230copy.jpg

http://i16.photobucket.com/albums/b47/mj_23_rocks/Algonquin2007148copy.jpg

http://i16.photobucket.com/albums/b47/mj_23_rocks/Algonquin2007433copy.jpg

[Dorman]

Wow what a painful update (for my wallet), rather nice for the eyes!