Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies. Read More.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Sample Photo Archives Lens Sample Photo Archive
Thread started 15 Sep 2014 (Monday) 11:26
Prev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)

Canon EF 400mm f/4L IS DO II USM

 
advaitin
Goldmember
advaitin's Avatar
Joined Jun 2003
The Fun Coast of Florida
Mar 17, 2017 15:21 |  #601

Same combination as earlier. I still don't understand why it's throwing such high ISO with the Sigma MC-11 adapter. These are the same image, just SOOC and edited.

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

Canons to the left, Canons to the right,
We hold our L glass toward the light,
Digitizing in a snap reflective glory
That will forever tell our imaged story.

LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)
MedicineMan4040
The Magic Johnson of Cameras
MedicineMan4040's Avatar
Joined Jul 2013
Mar 17, 2017 20:22 as a reply to advaitin's post |  #602

1/1600 and F8 maybe? The adapter has no glass right? That would leave only three things F4 being the last of the three.


flickr (external link)
Vid Collection: https://www.youtube.co​m/user/medicineman4040 (external link)

LOG IN TO REPLY
mikeivan
Goldmember
mikeivan's Avatar
Joined Aug 2005
houston
Mar 17, 2017 20:49 |  #603

For me, the 400DOii + 1.4 ext + 7dii is the ideal combo. Light enough to carry and hand hold, fast focus, sharp wide open and weighs only 7 1/2 pounds, the entire rig!

It seems very versatile as well, birds, bugs, flowers, birds in flight, whatever. Best money I ever spent on camera gear:

This is a young Willet, stretching his wing. He was close. This is from Packery Channel Park on Padre Island.

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

This is a Great Southern White Butterfly (had to look it up). The tips of their antennae are "baby blue". She was very close, this is cropped a bit. Not sure of the flower species. This was in Hans Suter Park on Oso Bay in Corpus Christi.

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.


I shot the original 400DO for many years, this new lens is a big improvement.

MIKEIVAN

LOG IN TO REPLY
AnnieMacD
Oops, me again
AnnieMacD's Avatar
Joined Aug 2012
Applecross, Scotland
Mar 18, 2017 08:06 |  #604

MatthewK wrote in post #18303507 (external link)
Also, a new 1st for me!!! What I thought was yet another woodpecker of some sort, turned out to be something altogether unexpected. I didn't think I'd ever see one in my area! This taken in shade at the end of the day, as the sun was being blocked by tall trees behind me, and so wasn't best for optimum exposure. Wish I would have had higher SS, so next time will remember that.

These guys are fast! I'm eager to try out my blind to see if I can't get some shots in better light (especially dive-bomb fishing shots!).
thumbnailHosted photo: posted by MatthewK in
./showthread.php?p=183​03507&i=i88577206
forum: Lens Sample Photo Archive

Well, that's great but what the heck is it?


flickrexternal link

LOG IN TO REPLY
MatthewK
Goldmember
MatthewK's Avatar
Joined Apr 2009
Maryland
Post has been edited 9 months ago by MatthewK.
Mar 18, 2017 08:21 as a reply to AnnieMacD's post |  #605

Annie: that is a Belted Kingfisher. It was a surprise finding one around here because there aren't any real streams or lakes nearby, just polluted, man made water run off control ponds.

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.


HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

flickrexternal link

LOG IN TO REPLY
AnnieMacD
Oops, me again
AnnieMacD's Avatar
Joined Aug 2012
Applecross, Scotland
Mar 18, 2017 08:40 |  #606

MatthewK wrote in post #18304077 (external link)
Annie: that is a Belted Kingfisher. It was a surprise finding one around here because there aren't any real streams or lakes nearby, just polluted, man made water run off control ponds.

thumbnailHosted photo: posted by MatthewK in
./showthread.php?p=183​04077&i=i161947490
forum: Lens Sample Photo Archive


thumbnailHosted photo: posted by MatthewK in
./showthread.php?p=183​04077&i=i117369438
forum: Lens Sample Photo Archive

Thanks, Matthew, I was just half pulling your leg, and I didn't know what it was.


flickrexternal link

LOG IN TO REPLY
John ­ Sheehy
Goldmember
2,237 posts
Joined Jan 2010
Mar 18, 2017 10:18 |  #607

MatthewK wrote in post #18304077 (external link)
Annie: that is a Belted Kingfisher. It was a surprise finding one around here because there aren't any real streams or lakes nearby, just polluted, man made water run off control ponds.

If there are no fish in the area, then the kingfisher was probably in the process of eventually finding that out, and moving on.




LOG IN TO REPLY
MatthewK
Goldmember
MatthewK's Avatar
Joined Apr 2009
Maryland
Post has been edited 9 months ago by MatthewK.
Mar 18, 2017 10:49 |  #608

John Sheehy wrote in post #18304165 (external link)
If there are no fish in the area, then the kingfisher was probably in the process of eventually finding that out, and moving on.

Well, he was fishing and had caught some stuff, so hopefully he makes himself at home :-) My own personal Kingfisher!

I just feel bad for the water birds that sometimes inhabit the area because the water is nasty, polluted with runoff and trash.


flickrexternal link

LOG IN TO REPLY
sanil
Senior Member
sanil's Avatar
516 posts
Joined Mar 2006
Hyderabad - Deccan
Mar 21, 2017 10:47 |  #609

1dx 400 DO II

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

https://www.flickr.com​/photos/anilsarvepalli​/ (external link)

LOG IN TO REPLY
MatthewK
Goldmember
MatthewK's Avatar
Joined Apr 2009
Maryland
Post has been edited 9 months ago by MatthewK.
Mar 21, 2017 18:27 |  #610

Northern Mockingbird.


HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

IMAGE: https://c1.staticflickr.com/3/2926/33421644342_ab242d19a6_b.jpg
[IMAGE'S LINK: https://flic.kr/p/SVmE​th] (external link)Northern Mockingbird #65 (external link) by M K (external link), on Flickr

flickrexternal link

LOG IN TO REPLY
russbecker
Member
Joined Jun 2007
Eastern PA, USA
Mar 23, 2017 06:52 |  #611

I have been comparing bird images posted on this thread taken with the 400DO II + 1.4x, i.e. effective focal length of 560mm at f/5.6, with pictures I have of the same species in similar light and similar ISOs taken with the Tamron 150-600 at f/6.3 and 500 to 600mm using a 7D2. I have to say I don't see a compelling reason to switch to this combo in that configuration from the Tamron.

It seems to me the strong points of the 400DO II, other than weight, are using it either at 400mm and f/4 where you can gain an f-stop in low light situations (at the expense of having to get closer) or using it with a 2X extender so you have 800mm at f/8. I would like to know how well the 2X extenders work with this lens and how hard that combo is to use, i.e. are you stuck using a tripod and can you actually use f/8?. Handholding at 600mm takes practice, even with IS.

Guess I'll have to rent one and a set of extenders and find out.


7D2 | 7D | 40D | 300 f/4 L | 70-200 f/2.8 IIL | 70-200 f/4L | 135 f/2 L | 85 f/1.8 | 100 f/2 | 60 f/2.8 macro | nifty-fifty | 10-22 f/3.5-4.5 | Tamron 150-600 | Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 | Sigma 30 f/1.4 | Sigma 50-150 f/2.8 | Sigma 120-400

LOG IN TO REPLY
John ­ Sheehy
Goldmember
2,237 posts
Joined Jan 2010
Mar 23, 2017 11:34 |  #612

russbecker wrote in post #18308539 (external link)
I have been comparing bird images posted on this thread taken with the 400DO II + 1.4x, i.e. effective focal length of 560mm at f/5.6, with pictures I have of the same species in similar light and similar ISOs taken with the Tamron 150-600 at f/6.3 and 500 to 600mm using a 7D2. I have to say I don't see a compelling reason to switch to this combo in that configuration from the Tamron.

I haven't seen many photos presented here where you would see much of a difference. Most of the images are downsampled, some quite a bit. Critical sharpness is most useful for heavy crops or very large prints (and upcoming large, hi-res monitors, when they have as many or more pixels than the cameras). I have the G1 Tamron, and while it is close to my 400/4 DO II IS stopped down a bit, the DO is much sharper wide open. The AF on the DO is also surer and faster; something you don't see in example photos, when you only see what the photographers think are worth posting after culling.

That said, I must admit that the inability to almost instantly back out to 150mm (or 100mm, as with the 100-400 I used to use) has cost me a lot of potential shots. I was standing on a dried lake bed in Florida last week, and seven Sandhill Cranes came down and landed 50 feet away from me, some flying straight toward me, and what would have been the best moments to photograph them, they were much larger than the frame. I even popped out the 1.4x as they were getting closer, but it did not help.

Heavy cropping from the DO has made me a fan of fast, sharp primes. Missed shots have caused me to be a little bit jealous of people who are not addicted to the critical sharpness with TCs and use the better quality 400mm, 500mm, and 600mm zooms as a sole lens in the field.

It seems to me the strong points of the 400DO II, other than weight, are using it either at 400mm and f/4 where you can gain an f-stop in low light situations (at the expense of having to get closer)

... and you *must* get closer to get the noise benefit; if you stay at the same distance, your only benefit is in AF ability. Cropping a lower-ISO version without the TC can have the same or even more noise when subject size is adjusted.

or using it with a 2X extender so you have 800mm at f/8. I would like to know how well the 2X extenders work with this lens and how hard that combo is to use, i.e. are you stuck using a tripod and can you actually use f/8?. Handholding at 600mm takes practice, even with IS.

I find little challenge in hand-holding the DO at 800mm with APS-C. I've taken sharp shots at 1/30, maybe 1 out of 3 with no noticeable blur in a slowly-shot (non-burst) series, when the subject was not moving around, and I was settled in and relaxed. Sometimes my coordination gets a little loose momentarily, and the single-point will drift off of a small bird barely larger than the AF point in the OVF, and I force a time-wasting AF on the background or some unintended branch, but everything works out most of the time, if the subject doesn't flee and you get more tries. The biggest problem with f/8, at least on the 7D2, is that when you miss the subject like that in AF, it takes too long to get back in focus, which happens much faster with 560mm/5.6. I thoroughly expect Canon to put much better f/8 AF into the successor to the 7D2; even just having the nine central AF points as f/8 would be a great improvement, as the nine-point AF mode is much less prone to hunting at f/5.6, when light and/or contrast are low.




LOG IN TO REPLY
MatthewK
Goldmember
MatthewK's Avatar
Joined Apr 2009
Maryland
Post has been last edited 8 months ago by MatthewK. 2 edits done in total.
Mar 23, 2017 13:27 |  #613

The size and weight of the DO II, even with the 2x extender, is easily hand hold-able. That's the primary benefit: being able to reach 800mm in a small package.

Bare Lens: exquisitely sharp, super fast AF. F/4 gives you that extra stop for lower(ish) light shooting.

w/ 1.4x: 560mm with no loss in sharpness or AF speed.

w/ 2.0x: 800mm, you can see degradation in image, and it takes a little more care to get a sharp, contrasty image. AF is also slower. I tend to avoid using the 2.0x, and luckily on crop 80D the 1.4x is usually enough for me and my needs.

It's a stop faster, that's its benefit. I also shoot with the 100-400 II, and having more AF points at f/4 vs. f/5.6 is nice. IQ differences are small, and that's fine because there are other awesome lenses in this FL too, but again the beauty of the DO is the 800mm capability in a hand hold-able package.

EDIT: I meant to say, with the 100-400 + 1.4x extender, you're at f/8, and on some cameras that only leaves you the center AF point. With the 400 DO II + 1.4x, you're at f/5.6, which gives you more AF points.


flickrexternal link

LOG IN TO REPLY
MedicineMan4040
The Magic Johnson of Cameras
MedicineMan4040's Avatar
Joined Jul 2013
Mar 23, 2017 23:08 |  #614

MatthewK wrote in post #18307319 (external link)
Northern Mockingbird.


thumbnailHosted photo: posted by MatthewK in
./showthread.php?p=183​07319&i=i224708687
forum: Lens Sample Photo Archive

QUOTED IMAGE
[IMAGE'S LINK: https://flic.kr/p/SVmE​th] (external link)Northern Mockingbird #65 (external link) by M K (external link), on Flickr

Love Mockingbirds. They are my favorite visitors out back, even fly right up close to me and land. None of the other birds will.


flickr (external link)
Vid Collection: https://www.youtube.co​m/user/medicineman4040 (external link)

LOG IN TO REPLY
MedicineMan4040
The Magic Johnson of Cameras
MedicineMan4040's Avatar
Joined Jul 2013
Mar 23, 2017 23:10 |  #615

MatthewK wrote in post #18308808 (external link)
The size and weight of the DO II, even with the 2x extender, is easily hand hold-able. That's the primary benefit: being able to reach 800mm in a small package.

Bare Lens: exquisitely sharp, super fast AF. F/4 gives you that extra stop for lower(ish) light shooting.

w/ 1.4x: 560mm with no loss in sharpness or AF speed.

w/ 2.0x: 800mm, you can see degradation in image, and it takes a little more care to get a sharp, contrasty image. AF is also slower. I tend to avoid using the 2.0x, and luckily on crop 80D the 1.4x is usually enough for me and my needs.

It's a stop faster, that's its benefit. I also shoot with the 100-400 II, and having more AF points at f/4 vs. f/5.6 is nice. IQ differences are small, and that's fine because here are other awesome lenses in this FL too, but again the beauty of the DO is the 800mm capability in a hand hold-able package.

Would have to agree with every thing you've said.
Me too in shooting with the 100-400ii....just in my environment the lighting is hard and the DO wins out. That
said I've been using the 100-400ii more and more, forced myself to for a long time but now I like it too :)


flickr (external link)
Vid Collection: https://www.youtube.co​m/user/medicineman4040 (external link)

LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)

169,968 views & 1835 likes for this thread
Canon EF 400mm f/4L IS DO II USM
FORUMS Sample Photo Archives Lens Sample Photo Archive


Not a member yet? Click here to register to the forums.
Registered members get all the features: search, following threads, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, settings, view hosted photos, own reviews and more...


AAA

Send feedback to staff    •   Jump to forum...    •   Rules    •   Index    •   New posts    •   RTAT    •   'Best of'    •   Gallery    •   Gear    •   Reviews    •   Polls

COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies. Privacy policy and cookie usage info.

POWERED BY AMASS 1.4version 1.4
made in Finland
by Pekka Saarinen
for photography-on-the.net
Spent 0.00203 for 6 database queries.
PAGE COMPLETED IN 0.1s
Latest registered member is Latino Toons
785 guests, 304 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 6430, that happened on Dec 03, 2017