300 F4 vs 400 5.6...

[formula4speed]

Okay so this is my latest dilemma, I want something with some good reach capability and I'm quite partial to prime lenses. Basically I'm thinking the 300 f4 or 400 f 5.6 L lenses are my prime (pun intended) contenders. Now I have the 200 2.8 L and for my birthday in less than a week I plan on buying myself a 1.4TC so with that I'd have a 280 f4 which makes me lean towards the 400 and with the tc on that I'd have a 560mm lens. On the other hand the 300 f4 is supposed to be super sharp and with the TC I'd have a 420 5.6. I guess it comes down to whether I want the super sharp IS or lots of reach. Sigh... life is tough.

[CyberDyneSystems]

What will you use it for?

[formula4speed]

Mainly local birds, which makes me want the extra reach of the 400. But thats gonna leave a large gap in my lenses which is my main concern right now. I guess maybe I should consider a zoom lens, which just opens up the field a lot more.

[foxbat]

If you're going to use a TC then perhaps the 300 f/4 is for you. I have the 400 f/5.6, it is super sharp and a great birding lens but a TC would make it an f/8 with manual focus unless you have a 1-series body. I don't think you'll lose any noticeable sharpness by adding a 1.4x to the 300 and you'll still have AF. I'll bet there are a few members here with that combination that could verify that.

[tommykjensen]

If you're going to use a TC then perhaps the 300 f/4 is for you. I have the 400 f/5.6, it is super sharp and a great birding lens but a TC would make it an f/8 with manual focus unless you have a 1-series body. I don't think you'll lose any noticeable sharpness by adding a 1.4x to the 300 and you'll still have AF. I'll bet there are a few members here with that combination that could verify that.

Yep I got the 300 f/4 and the extender and here is a shot taken with that combination

http://photo.klein-jensen.dk/photohtml.php?n=zoo050306penguin1.jpg

[randyk]

If you plan to keep the 200 2.8, get the 400 5.6. But if you sell the 200, pick up the 135 and the 1.4x, the 300 would be a nice complement, giving you:

135 2.0
189 2.8
300 4.0 IS
420 5.6 IS

The 135 is in a class of its own. With the 1.4x, its only a hair less quality than the 200 2.8. For best results, the 300 f4 should be stopped down up to a full stop both with and without the converter.

[pturton]

Since your usage will be 'local birds', I recommend the EF 400mm f/5.6, a set of extension tubes and the EF 1.4x TC. Using 400mm for small birds (robin size or less) you need to get quite close to fill the frame - 2 to 5 meters (6 to 15 feet). I find that 560mm is often a minimum focal length needed.

The 300mm f/4 focuses to 5 feet and is more versatile because of that but is too short for most backyard birds unless you are in a blind or shooting through a window at birds within 3 meters (10 feet). Adding a Canon 1.4x or 2x TC still gives a picture that is quite acceptable.

On my site there are pictures of 'local birds' taken using the 300 and 400 with/out TCs. Many of the April pictures whose EXIF states 400 as the FL were taken using a 10D, 1.4x TC, 12mm extension tube and 400 f/5.6. This combination gives me reasonable AF at 560mm in good daylight without taping pins on the TC but reports the wrong FL.

I researched my tele lens needs for 6 months and ended up buying both the 300mm f/4 L IS and 400mm f/5.6 L. Now that I've waited 2 weeks for Canon to return my 300 because the IS unit failed I realize even more how much I enjoy that lens and its close focus ability without the need for extension tubes.

BTW, both lenses are razor sharp and still great using a Canon 1.4x TC.

Paul
http://www.iaw.com/~pturton/

[khiromu]

For the birds, get the longest you can. If you buy 300 plus TC, you will end up using the TC all the time..

[schmoelzel]

I agree with tommy.......for the sharpest lens, you can't beat the 300 F4 and extender. Might not be long enough for some birding but quality of shots is awesome!

[formula4speed]

Since there is no way I'm letting my 200 2.8 go (I love that lens) I think I'm gonna go for the 400mm since I always find myself wishing I had a bigger lens.

[foxbat]

Since your usage will be 'local birds', I recommend the EF 400mm f/5.6, a set of extension tubes and the EF 1.4x TC.You do know that what you are recommending is a 640mm manual focus f/8 lens don't you? Manual focus at that length on small birds that don't ever sit still at f/8 without even so much as a focussing prism in the viewfinder is not something I'd recommend lightly.

[CyberDyneSystems]

The 400mm has faster AF and is better at tracking moving subjects.. it is the small miracle for birds in flight.

If birding is your primary use,. then the 400mm is the better choice.

[pturton]

You do know that what you are recommending is a 640mm manual focus f/8 lens don't you? Manual focus at that length on small birds that don't ever sit still at f/8 without even so much as a focussing prism in the viewfinder is not something I'd recommend lightly.

Compared to other alternatives, 300mm f/2.8, 500mm f/4 and 600mm f/4 the combination of the 400mm f/5.6, 12mm extension tube and EF 1.4x does work remarkably well for the modest cost. Exposure using the sunny 16 rule with ISO 400 will give a shutter-speed of 1/1600 @ f/8 in bright sun and 1/800 @ f/8 on a bright overcast day. This lens combination also auto-focuses reasonably well for small birds with my 10D.

BTW, to get sufficient DOF at close quarters with any lens =>300mm, stopping down the lens is often necessary.

If photography was my profession, I'd certainly buy the best lens for the job but taking pictures is only a hobby for me so I look for a working compromise.

This gray squirrel was just as timid and jumpy as most birds. I used the 10D + EF 1.4x +12mm extension tube + 400mm f/5.6 and with AF on the eye and recomposed. A grain bag was used for support.

Corrected EXIF: 400mm @ 560mm, 1/60 sec, f/11, ISO 200
132kb
http://www.iaw.com/~pturton/dpr/graysquirrel.jpg

Paul

[lomond]

Compared to other alternatives, 300mm f/2.8, 500mm f/4 and 600mm f/4 the combination of the 400mm f/5.6, 12mm extension tube and EF 1.4x does work remarkably well for the modest cost. Exposure using the sunny 16 rule with ISO 400 will give a shutter-speed of 1/1600 @ f/8 in bright sun and 1/800 @ f/8 on a bright overcast day. This lens combination also auto-focuses reasonably well for small birds with my 10D.

400mm f/5.6, 12mm extension tube and EF 1.4x.......this auto-focuses on your 10D ?
I wish it would on mine......I would never had bought the 1D MKII. :?

[foxbat]

This gray squirrel was just as timid and jumpy as most birds. I used the 10D + EF 1.4x +12mm extension tube + 400mm f/5.6 and with AF on the eye and recomposed. A grain bag was used for support.Don't get me wrong, that's a lovely shot you've posted and I absolutely love my 400mm f/5.6 and would never give it up for the world but the information you have posted is factually incorrect. You do not get AF with the 400mm f/5.6 + 1.4x TC on a 10D. Period.

[lomond]

Before anybody thinks I'm dumb, I did know the canon 10D can't AF above f5.6.

I was just being facetious. :)

[DocFrankenstein]

Before anybody thinks I'm dumb, I did know the canon 10D can't AF above f5.6.

I was just being facetious. :)
:confused:

[lomond]

:confused:


Too late.............damn.....how dumb was that. :o

Even worse...cant spell. :o

[pturton]

Before anybody thinks I'm dumb, I did know the canon 10D can't AF above f5.6.

I was just being facetious. :)

The EF 12mm Extension Tube when placed between the 1.4x TC and the 400mm f/5.6 does not report the correct f-stop to the 10D camera and acts just like the 'tape trick' (taping the left-most 3 pins on the 1.4x TC.) It focuses as fast as my 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS when a 2x TC is attached - in other words, SLOWLY. ;-)

Of course the 1D Mk II will focus without trickery and much faster than this combo.

Paul

[pturton]

Don't get me wrong, that's a lovely shot you've posted and I absolutely love my 400mm f/5.6 and would never give it up for the world but the information you have posted is factually incorrect. You do not get AF with the 400mm f/5.6 + 1.4x TC on a 10D. Period.

The information I posted is factually correct.

Do a search on Google for "1.4x TC tape trick".

[lomond]

The information I posted is factually correct.

Do a search on Google for "1.4x TC tape trick".


The tape trick again.
Lets all burn out our USM motors.

Canon stop AF above certain f stops for a reason.

[pturton]

The tape trick again.
Lets all burn out our USM motors.

Canon stop AF above certain f stops for a reason.

Is it really any different than setting the focus mode to AI Servo and tracking moving subjects without a TC attached? I don't think so. A brief press of the shutter to obtain AF while using the tape trick certainly puts no more load on the USM than the use AI Servo mode without a TC.

If the 'burn out' of USMotors was a problem, Canon would have disabled USM under low light conditions on all cameras to prevent the circuitry from continually hunting for focus and damaging the USM.

[lomond]

Is it really any different than setting the focus mode to AI Servo and tracking moving subjects without a TC attached? I don't think so. A brief press of the shutter to obtain AF while using the tape trick certainly puts no more load on the USM than the use AI Servo mode without a TC.

If the 'burn out' of USMotors was a problem, Canon would have disabled USM under low light conditions on all cameras to prevent the circuitry from continually hunting for focus and damaging the USM.

Canon must be fools then to miss such a great selling point, i.e. AF at f8 or f11.
Please, I think Canon Know what they are doing.

[gcogger]

Then I guess Kenko/Tamron will be flooded with warranty claims when their cheaper TCs (that don't report aperture changes) cause burnt out USM lenses...

Or perhaps Canon decided to disable AF at greater than f/5.6 to avoid forums like this filling up with complaints about dodgy AF on Canon cameras?

[lomond]

Hey, try the tape trick or the Kenko/Tamron TC's if you like.
It's your lens, you bought it.

Just offering some advice.