400 2.8 IS vs. 500 IS - V1 only?

[huntersdad]

Which one for WLIDLIFE AND BIFs if mounted to a tripod and gimbal?

Weight is a non-issue. I'm leaning towards the 400 2.8 as it can also be a 560 f4 or 800 5.6, which would beneficial for wildlife.

[Black Bart]

Originally Posted by huntersdad

Which one for WLIDLIFE AND BIFs if mounted to a tripod and gimbal?

Weight is a non-issue. I'm leaning towards the 400 2.8 as it can also be a 560 f4 or 800 5.6, which would beneficial for wildlife.

Depending on distance I either use my 100-400 or 600mm f4.5
Sometimes I use a 1.4 tc on the 600.

[jhayesvw]

that is a tough question.
i know the 500 f4 takes a 1.4X very well to make it a 700 5.6.
not sure about a 2x making it a 1000 f8

[huntersdad]

500 with 1.4x or 400 with 1.4x and 2x.

[Billginthekeys]

Originally Posted by huntersdad

Which one for WLIDLIFE AND BIFs if mounted to a tripod and gimbal?

Weight is a non-issue. I'm leaning towards the 400 2.8 as it can also be a 560 f4 or 800 5.6, which would beneficial for wildlife.

500mm is my opinion.

You say weight is not an issue, meaning because you plan to shoot stationary, or because you figure if one is really heavy, than the other being really really heavy won't make much difference? I must say every pound extra matters once you start getting into a rig of that size. Do you ever intend to use it as a 400mm, or do you just like that it can be one? For IQ and especially focus speed, a lens without a TC will beat a lens with one every day. If you think you will be shooting the 400 mm with a TC 80-90% of the time, just get the longer lens. If you also intended to shoot sports than the 400mm is king in that domain, and still capable of great wildlife shots.

[Duane N]

For versatility I'd say the 400mm f/2.8 because of it either being a 400mm, 560mm or 800mm lens depending on the extender attached at the time. I own the 500mm f/4L...bought it in October 2010 and never regretted the purchase. I'm strictly a wildlife photographer so I want as much focal length as possible and the 500mm f/4L is a proven wildlife lens...weight was an issue when I was looking at a longer lens so the 500mm was my choice.

The 500mm takes the Canon 1.4 II or III versions well and I see no loss in image quality. I don't own a 2X converter but I have used one on my lens and found the focus speed too slow for my liking. I do however stack a Canon 1.4 and an older non-reporting Kenko 1.5 on it and get great results.....again, focus speed is too slow for anything other than stationary subjects and a lot of light is needed.

1050mm (stacked extenders) on a 1.3 crop body (1DIV) and this one was cropped slightly. 1/320" @ f/14, ISO 1250, tripod




Either way there's not going to be a right answer to your question from somebody not in your shoes. Both are great lens's. If I could afford it I'd own the 800mm f/5.6L but that's the situation I'm in because I find the more focal length I have the more natural my subjects become because they aren't worried about me getting closer with a shorter lens.

Good luck with your decision.

[FlyingPhotog]

I'll second what Duane says about the 500 + 1.4X .. Solid Combo.

Personally, I find the 2X II is a pretty significant IQ hit.

I love my 500mm because it can be handheld whereas the 400 is just a boat anchor that must have solid support under it.

[Jim Neiger]

If it was just for birds I'd say the 500mm. If you do a lot of larger wildlife, the 400mm is the way to go. I use the 500m F4 AND the 300mm F2.8. I have the new 600mm on order. I plan to sell my 500mm and 300mm and use the 600mm and new 400mm with built in TC when it's available.

[Billginthekeys]

Originally Posted by Jim Neiger

new 400mm with built in TC when it's available.

You mean new 200-400? AFAIK that is the only lens that is to have the built in TC at this point.

That sounds like a fantastic combo. With the 200-400 having the built in TC, did you think about doing the 800 instead though? Just curious.

[Jim Neiger]

Originally Posted by Billginthekeys

You mean new 200-400? AFAIK that is the only lens that is to have the built in TC at this point.

That sounds like a fantastic combo. With the 200-400 having the built in TC, did you think about doing the 800 instead though? Just curious.

Ooops - yes I meant the 200-400mm F4. The new 600mm F4 is lighter than the 800mm F5.6. If I add a 1.4TC to the 600mm, I get a 840mm F5.6 with image qaulity that I'm hoping will be as good as the 800mm alone. I also get the ability to shoot at 600mm F4. I can't do that with the 800mm. 800mm is heavier, less flexible for focal length and aperture, and costs about the same as the 600mm. Seems like a no brainer to me.

[Billginthekeys]

Originally Posted by Jim Neiger

Ooops - yes I meant the 200-400mm F4. The new 600mm F4 is lighter than the 800mm F5.6. If I add a 1.4TC to the 600mm, I get a 840mm F5.6 with image qaulity that I'm hoping will be as good as the 800mm alone. I also get the ability to shoot at 600mm F4. I can't do that with the 800mm. 800mm is heavier, less flexible for focal length and aperture, and costs about the same as the 600mm. Seems like a no brainer to me.

Ohh I agree with you, I was just curious because I read a thread the other day from a guy who just got the new 500 II claiming he would never replace his 800 with a 500/600 and TC's. I was just curious what you thought.

[jhayesvw]

I may sell a kidney for the 200-400

[Billginthekeys]

Originally Posted by jhayesvw

I may sell a kidney for the 200-400

I might too, but first Canon has to tell us how much they want for the thing so I can have an asking price for it!

[Jim Neiger]

Originally Posted by Billginthekeys

I might too, but first Canon has to tell us how much they want for the thing so I can have an asking price for it!

I've heard the price will be 10,500 US

[GMCPhotographics]

Does anyone know the Min focus Distance for the new 200-400 from Canon?