400 2.8 IS I vs. 500 f4 IS I?

[huntersdad]

Reviewed the lens suggestions at the top and these were virtually tied. Search provided nothing.

Looking for a supertele for WILDLIFE AND BIFs. Lens would be paired with a 7d and 95% of the time used on a gimbal and tripod. I don't hike alot so weight is not necessarily a problem.

I've had the 500 before and it is no doubt stellar, but I'm wondering if the flexibility of the 400 and it's use with 1.4 and 2x tcs might be more inline with my need for it to handle wildlife (think deer and bears).

Suggestions or tips from members having had or used both or just the 400?

[recrisp]

I guess I'll be one of those guys that say, "I don't have a 7D, but I use the 400mm 2.8 with a 1DIV, and I love it!"

I know isn't a lot of help, but I just recently bought the 1DIV and the 400mm 2.8 and they work really well together, for that pair anyway, your 7D will be slightly different. (The 1D and the 400mm 2.8 are made for each other though, literally) I know the 500mm you mention is better, but I have never seen one, so I can't compare, I looked for one and couldn't find one anywhere. If you are looking for inexpensive rather than looks, look in the Classifieds here and see if the used one is still there, the 400mm 2.8, that is... It looks like it's been through a lot, but supposedly it still works very good.

Anyway, from the amount I have used my 400mm 2.8 I love it, it's a MONSTER as far as weight goes though, 12lbs, I don't like that part. From what I have read about others using one with their 7D's, they love it too.
(I have used it hand-held mostly, I sure don't recommend that though, and I won't be doing that much anymore)

I'm sorry I can't be of real help to you, but maybe this'll open up some really helpful communication with others for you.

Randy

[johnf3f]

I used to have a pre IS 400 f2.8 an it was a lovely lens! Yes it's big and heavy - but it's sharp and fast! Just a thought I never missed the lack of IS on this lens - probably because it weighed 6.1 Kilo - that should damp any vibration! Mine worked well with both 1.4 and 2 x Mk2 converters (it was fairly OK with stacked t/c s). The main problem was that unless I was photographing fairly large mammals it was always too short! I moved to the 600 F4IS which, to me, is a far more useful focal length and means I am not using t/c s most of the time. I would suggest the 500 F4IS is a good compromise as it does give more reach (essential for my uses) and is significantly lighter, so you can hand hold it for more than a few seconds!
Both 400 and 600 were used on FF, 1.3 and 1.6 crop.
Just my 2p.

[MCAsan]

Strikes me the 400 2.8 is more flexible. You can shoot it plain, with a 1.4TC or a 2.0TC. You can shoot it on a crop of FF body. With the 500 4.0....no 2.0TC. You can get greater reach with the 400...by using the 2.0TC.

[J.Litton]

I went with the 500. Used it and loved it. I figured all the pro's use a 500, so they must be doing something right.

[RikWriter]

I'd rather have the 600 f4 than the 400 2.8, to be honest.

[Candor]

Originally Posted by MCAsan

Strikes me the 400 2.8 is more flexible. You can shoot it plain, with a 1.4TC or a 2.0TC. You can shoot it on a crop of FF body. With the 500 4.0....no 2.0TC. You can get greater reach with the 400...by using the 2.0TC.

If I am understanding you correctly why do you say you can't use the X2 tc with the 500?

[monty28428]

^Probably because he does not own a 1D* minus the 1Dx I guess according to specs it does not auto focus at f/8

[Candor]

Originally Posted by monty28428

^Probably because he does not own a 1D* minus the 1Dx I guess according to specs it does not auto focus at f/8

Ok, that's right it won't af with the 7D. Thanks.

[johnf3f]

Originally Posted by RikWriter

I'd rather have the 600 f4 than the 400 2.8, to be honest.

+1 Having had both the 600 is a better focal length for me. Pity the 1Dx does not like T/Cs - firmware update please Canon - you will not sell me a new camera until you fix this issue!

[huntersdad]

Originally Posted by RikWriter

I'd rather have the 600 f4 than the 400 2.8, to be honest.

Care to give me a reason why?

Now that the 500 and 600 are running the same price and the 400 is cheaper than both, it's really getting interesting for me.

[RikWriter]

Originally Posted by huntersdad

Care to give me a reason why?

Now that the 500 and 600 are running the same price and the 400 is cheaper than both, it's really getting interesting for me.

The 600 can reach 840 with a 1.4X TC, whereas the 400 would need a 2X to get to 800 and in my experience, the 2X TC is very detrimental to IQ and focus speed and accuracy.

[huntersdad]

Thanks for all the help guys. I picked up a 400 2.8 IS and 1.4x yesterday off FM. Looking forward to getting it.