Canon Digital Photography Forums  

Go Back   Canon Digital Photography Forums > 'Sharing Knowhow' section > Talk About Photography > Bird Talk
Register Rules FAQ Members List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read



Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 13th of July 2012 (Fri)   #16
sthwild
Member
 
sthwild's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: North London
Posts: 109
Default Re: 400 2.8 IS vs. 500 IS - V1 only?

do you think it will be such a good lens? worth $10,500?
sthwild is offline   Reply With Quote
This ad block will go away when you log in as member
Old 13th of July 2012 (Fri)   #17
Billginthekeys
Billy the kid
 
Billginthekeys's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Islamorada, FL
Posts: 7,351
Default Re: 400 2.8 IS vs. 500 IS - V1 only?

Quote:
Originally Posted by sthwild View Post
do you think it will be such a good lens? worth $10,500?
If it is prime sharp wide open from 200-400, and the built in TC doesn't significantly alter IQ or focus speed (like a 1.4x on a super tele prime), then one could say so. I would like to see it for a bit lower personally, I would like to think $9,000 or so might not be totally impossble, if not right away, after prices have settled a bit. IMO though, they have to get it PERFECTLY right, it has to be a stellar performer, or it won't sell.
__________________
Mr. the Kid.
Go Canes!
My Gallery My Gear
what the L. just go for it.

Billginthekeys is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23rd of July 2012 (Mon)   #18
Larry Weinman
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 1,192
Default Re: 400 2.8 IS vs. 500 IS - V1 only?

Don't kid yourself, If you have to hike anywhere with the 400mm f 2.8 version 1 and a tripod it will wreck your shoulder.
__________________
7D 6D 100mm f 2.8 macro 180mm f 3.5 macro, MP-E-65 300mm f 2.8 500mm f4 Tokina 10-17mm fisheye 10-22mm 17-55mm 24-105mm 70-300mm 70-200 f 2.8 Mk II 100-400mm 1.4 TC 2X TC 580EX 430 EX II MT 24 EX
Larry Weinman is offline   Reply With Quote
This ad block will go away when you log in as member
Old 23rd of July 2012 (Mon)   #19
GMCPhotographics
Goldmember
 
GMCPhotographics's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Wiltshire, UK
Posts: 2,305
Default Re: 400 2.8 IS vs. 500 IS - V1 only?

I would disagree, sure it's heavy but it's not THAT heavy. I've lugged one about hiking and walking in some pretty remote places. Yep I ached a bit afterwards, but it's completely transportable in a rucksack no problems at all. Hey, I've even hand held it for short periods. There's a lot of fuss about it's weight and size...which is over spun and perpetuated on various forums.
__________________
Regards, Gareth Cooper
"If you’re happy and honest and fulfilled in what you do, then you’re having a successful life" (Ben Elton)
Gear List Flickr
GMCPhotographics is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23rd of July 2012 (Mon)   #20
Billginthekeys
Billy the kid
 
Billginthekeys's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Islamorada, FL
Posts: 7,351
Default Re: 400 2.8 IS vs. 500 IS - V1 only?

Quote:
Originally Posted by GMCPhotographics View Post
I would disagree, sure it's heavy but it's not THAT heavy. I've lugged one about hiking and walking in some pretty remote places. Yep I ached a bit afterwards, but it's completely transportable in a rucksack no problems at all. Hey, I've even hand held it for short periods. There's a lot of fuss about it's weight and size...which is over spun and perpetuated on various forums.
No one is saying it is not possible, but to claim that "weight is no issue" compared to the 500mm, is I think naive. Unless of course you plan to shoot from a stationary position almost all of the time, which I would find very limiting for birding.

I have the lighest 500mm Canon ever built (the non-IS version) and even that on a tripod and gimbal gets to be a chore totting around over the shoulder (sure it is fine in a backpack, anything is fine in a good properly strapped backpack). The 400 2.8 weighs 50% more than my lens, so I would certainly say that is noticable.

I think most people just want to know what the OP is meaning by "weight is not an issue" is he a body builder, will he be shooting all the time from a fixed position, or does he just think "well if I have to carry around 10 pounds of camera, I might as well carry 15! (made those weights up)"? Because to most of us that own the big prime's weight is definitely an issue.
__________________
Mr. the Kid.
Go Canes!
My Gallery My Gear
what the L. just go for it.

Billginthekeys is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23rd of July 2012 (Mon)   #21
recrisp
Senior Member
 
recrisp's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: D/FW, Texas
Posts: 1,420
Default Re: 400 2.8 IS vs. 500 IS - V1 only?

All I know is that when I opened up the box to see my 400 2.8 I was in shock, it is so much BIGGER in person that when you see it online!
I have used my 100-400mm for a few years and thought that was a large lens, it attracts way too much attention (that I don't care for), but is LIGHT in comparison. It's a DINKY little thing to me now, after the 400 2.8, all I can do now is go down in weight when it comes to a lens. heheh
At around 12 lbs, it's a LOT to carry hiking, or not hiking, I ain't no wimp, but after hauling that thing around, well, it ain't as fun as it was when I first got it. I have hand-held it mostly, I do some shooting out of my truck's window(s), and 'some', not much from a monopod, but it's all work. If I had it in a backpack I could probably carry it all day with hardly any problem, but I'd not want to. Really, now that I have it, I don't know how much hiking I'll take it on now, to be honest, I can 'almost' get the same results with my 100-400, I said, "almost"...
Using anything that is near that weight is going to have the same end results, it'll be hard to transport, heavy to lift all day long, and it can be hard on you if you are like me, people that have carpal-tunnel. (CT) I have a semi-mild case of it, then after I got my 400 2.8 I got a worse case of it. Even carrying in in my truck and shooting out of the window (hand-holding it) can be detrimental on my wrists. I prop it up on the window with a closed-cell foam piece I made just for that, but lifting it on and off all day long takes its toll.
Even if I didn't have CT, hand-holding it is tiresome, I mean, yeah, it's definitely doable, but it doesn't make sense to, it's like pumping iron, it'll make your arms tremble after a few sets.

What would make the 200-400 worth the money is if if did what the 400 2.8 can, but is a LOT lighter, at least 5 lbs. That won't happen probably, but it'd make me think about it if I were in the market for a new lens.
(Not that I can afford any 'new' anything after my last few purchases)

Randy
__________________
Gear List
Flickr



recrisp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23rd of July 2012 (Mon)   #22
MajesticMomentsPhoto
Member
 
MajesticMomentsPhoto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Northern NJ
Posts: 765
Default Re: 400 2.8 IS vs. 500 IS - V1 only?

Quote:
Originally Posted by GMCPhotographics View Post
Does anyone know the Min focus Distance for the new 200-400 from Canon?
I have been looking everywhere as well can't find it anywhere..
__________________
Lots of Bodies & Glass....
MajesticMomentsPhoto is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16th of August 2012 (Thu)   #23
huntersdad
Goldmember
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 3,590
Default Re: 400 2.8 IS vs. 500 IS - V1 only?

Answers to a couple question posed here that I missed:

I have had the 500 before and found that I am unable to HH for any amount of time. After some extensive testing, I realized my best form that lens always came when it is gimbal mounted and on a tripod. As I don't have to do alot of hiking for my wildlife and it is 95% tripod mounted, weight, in this case, is not an issue.

I do shoot both BIFs and other wildlife. I will be in Alaska next year doing a little bear work. Whatever else comes along is gravy. Deer and waterfowl in the fall and winter, black bears in the spring - fall. This is really where the 400 peaked my interest - good low light capabilities with the ability to get longer if needed.

Last point - I asked about the 400 and 500. However, used prices being what they are, the 600 and 500 are now the same price and the 400 is running less. Would this sway your decision at all?
__________________
WEBSITE / Facebook

1Dx, 1D4, 24-70, 70-200, 500
huntersdad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16th of August 2012 (Thu)   #24
GMCPhotographics
Goldmember
 
GMCPhotographics's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Wiltshire, UK
Posts: 2,305
Default Re: 400 2.8 IS vs. 500 IS - V1 only?

I think I'd pop for a 600/f4 LIS if I needed to reach. A 400/2.8 LIS with both extenders if I wanted versatility or a 500/f4 LIS if I wanted light and versatile.
__________________
Regards, Gareth Cooper
"If you’re happy and honest and fulfilled in what you do, then you’re having a successful life" (Ben Elton)
Gear List Flickr
GMCPhotographics is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20th of August 2012 (Mon)   #25
huntersdad
Goldmember
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 3,590
Default Re: 400 2.8 IS vs. 500 IS - V1 only?

Picked a 400 2.8 IS with 1.4x yesterday on FM. Versitility won me over.

Now to move my 120-300.
__________________
WEBSITE / Facebook

1Dx, 1D4, 24-70, 70-200, 500
huntersdad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22nd of August 2012 (Wed)   #26
Tom Reichner
Cream of the Crop
 
Tom Reichner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Washington state, USA
Posts: 5,297
Default Re: 400 2.8 IS vs. 500 IS - V1 only?

Quote:
Originally Posted by huntersdad View Post
Picked a 400 2.8 IS with 1.4x yesterday on FM. Versitility won me over.

Now to move my 120-300.
C O N G R A T U L A T I O N S ! ! !

I think you will be very pleased!

Hopefully you have a really, really solid tripod and a good head for it (like a Wimberley). That'll make a world of difference in your sharpness & overall image quality.
__________________
Wildlife Photographed in the Wild: http://www.tomreichner.com/Wildlife
Flickr: http://www.flickr.com/photos/9036119@N02/
Please do not send me a PM! Email me instead at tomreichner@yahoo.com My PM inbox is full, and I don't want to delete what's there. Email never gets full; please use that instead - I'd love to hear from you!
Tom Reichner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23rd of August 2012 (Thu)   #27
huntersdad
Goldmember
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 3,590
Default Re: 400 2.8 IS vs. 500 IS - V1 only?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom Reichner View Post
C O N G R A T U L A T I O N S ! ! !

I think you will be very pleased!

Hopefully you have a really, really solid tripod and a good head for it (like a Wimberley). That'll make a world of difference in your sharpness & overall image quality.
Well, I also picked up a RRS replacement foot and a Feisol 3772 tripod. For the time being, I'll use my Vanguard ballhead and Wimberley Sidekick for mounting.

Unfortuantely, when I received the lens yesterday, apparently there was an electrical short inside and the former owner was unaware of. It was working fine he shipped it, so we're thinking that it "broke" lose while in FedEx custody. So, it is being shipped to Canon for repair and a clean and check. Should get it back next week.
__________________
WEBSITE / Facebook

1Dx, 1D4, 24-70, 70-200, 500
huntersdad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 31st of August 2012 (Fri)   #28
Diamond Lil
Cream of the Crop
 
Diamond Lil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 6,495
Default Re: 400 2.8 IS vs. 500 IS - V1 only?

Wow! I just saw this. Very many congratulations! I look forward to seeing your photos and learning of your thoughts about it. Happy shooting!
__________________
Wow do I have a lot to learn! The Chosen Spot, NY
50D, EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS USM, EF 100-400 f4.5-5.6L IS USM, EF-S 17-85 f4-5.6 IS USM, EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM, EF-S 17-55 f/2.8 IS USM, EF 1.4X III Extender, Flight Brace

Diamond Lil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 31st of August 2012 (Fri)   #29
huntersdad
Goldmember
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 3,590
Default Re: 400 2.8 IS vs. 500 IS - V1 only?

Came back from Canon all well Wednesday. Of course, with an 18 month old running around, I haven't had time to really test it. 2x arrived yesterday, 1.4x came with lens. Leaving work at 1200 to go home and get it out.
__________________
WEBSITE / Facebook

1Dx, 1D4, 24-70, 70-200, 500
huntersdad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 31st of August 2012 (Fri)   #30
GMCPhotographics
Goldmember
 
GMCPhotographics's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Wiltshire, UK
Posts: 2,305
Default Re: 400 2.8 IS vs. 500 IS - V1 only?

That's great to hear, can you post a few piccys of your 400L with the RRS foot....I'd love to see what it looks like. I might get one myself
__________________
Regards, Gareth Cooper
"If you’re happy and honest and fulfilled in what you do, then you’re having a successful life" (Ben Elton)
Gear List Flickr
GMCPhotographics is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:38.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.12
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
This forum is not affiliated with Canon in any way and is run as a free user helpsite by Pekka Saarinen, Helsinki Finland. You will need to register in order to be able to post messages. Cookies are required for registering and posting. HTML in messages is not allowed, plain website addresses are automatically made active by the board.