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

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
Thread started 01 Feb 2009 (Sunday) 21:32
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

The Canon 400mm f/4 DO IS Thoughts

 
ed ­ rader
"I am not the final word"
Avatar
23,206 posts
Gallery: 4 photos
Likes: 488
Joined May 2005
Location: silicon valley
     
Feb 03, 2009 11:32 |  #31

RikWriter wrote in post #7245686 (external link)
Yeah, I think we established that. The question is, why does that make it unsuitable for low light? There is no requirement for you to use a 2X TC or any TC to take a low-light shot. It may mean you need a longer lens, but it has little relation to low-light shooting.


I hunt and I do a lot of bird/wildlife photography and frankly I've never had IS be that important to a widlife shot. Animals stop, true, but as a rule, you need higher shutter speeds for wildlife shots.


I guess it depends on whether you're in a blind or stalking or how you're getting to the place you're taking the photograph. I don't tend to use blinds...don't have that kind of patience, I suppose.

i can show you hundreds of wildlife shots i would have never gotten without IS but lets just leave it at a difference of opinion :D.

ed rader


http://instagram.com/e​draderphotography/ (external link)
5D4, 80d, 16-35L F4 IS, 24-70L II, 70-200L F4 IS II, 100-400L II, sigma 15 FE, sigma 14 f1.8 art, tc 1.4 III, 430exII, gitzo 3542L + markins Q20, gitzo GT 1545T + markins Q3T, gitzo GM4562

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
buddy4344
Goldmember
1,533 posts
Gallery: 400 photos
Best ofs: 14
Likes: 992
Joined Nov 2006
Location: Allentown, PA
     
Feb 03, 2009 11:41 |  #32

I have looked at many wildlife shots by Michael Poliza, Art Wolfe and Andy Biggs and am always amazed at how low some of their shutter speeds are while using big glass. I am not sure these images would be publish quality without IS.

As for my images, IS helps my unsteady hand in lower light and even allows a little more dof in ok light with these bigger lens (which have very shallow dof at [for example] f4).


Buddy4344

Gear: Canon 1Dx MkII, 7D MkII, Canon Lenses: 100 macro, 100-400 Ver.IIL IS, 24-105L IS, Canon 17-40, Canon 1.4x TCon, Rokinon 14mm. Kenko extension tubes, Kenko 1.4x pro TCon.and Kiboko 30L and 22L+

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Recon ­ Photojournalist
Member
Avatar
67 posts
Joined Mar 2008
     
Feb 03, 2009 11:49 as a reply to  @ ed rader's post |  #33

I can certainly understand where ed and Rik is coming from and I don't shoot from a blind at all. I am used to the ghillie suit and it becomes a habit( except the zoo :lol: ).

How's this unprocessed shot with the DO ?


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




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ed ­ rader
"I am not the final word"
Avatar
23,206 posts
Gallery: 4 photos
Likes: 488
Joined May 2005
Location: silicon valley
     
Feb 03, 2009 11:55 |  #34

Recon Photojournalist wrote in post #7245822 (external link)
I can certainly understand where ed and Rik is coming from and I don't shoot from a blind at all. I am used to the ghillie suit and it becomes a habit( except the zoo :lol: ).

How's this unprocessed shot with the DO ?

that's a pretty sharp leaf ;)!

ed rader


http://instagram.com/e​draderphotography/ (external link)
5D4, 80d, 16-35L F4 IS, 24-70L II, 70-200L F4 IS II, 100-400L II, sigma 15 FE, sigma 14 f1.8 art, tc 1.4 III, 430exII, gitzo 3542L + markins Q20, gitzo GT 1545T + markins Q3T, gitzo GM4562

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Recon ­ Photojournalist
Member
Avatar
67 posts
Joined Mar 2008
     
Feb 03, 2009 12:04 |  #35

I was hoping for some comment on the contrast




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ctwehues
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
703 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Joined Jan 2007
     
Feb 03, 2009 12:07 |  #36

Yes, all of my shots were unprocessed, straight conversion from RAW to JPEG in Lightroom. It's not that I don't believe you, but I do want to see, please, results from the 100-400 with TC at 560mm wide open that are as sharp as these. If they are, I'll just sell this lens. Im not a huge fanboy, but I've never seen a 100-400 come close straight from camera, and it never comes close (in my experience) with a TC attached. But if you have it, show it here.

Thanks!




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
RikWriter
Goldmember
Avatar
3,939 posts
Gallery: 81 photos
Likes: 850
Joined May 2004
Location: Lakeland, FL
     
Feb 03, 2009 12:32 |  #37

ed rader wrote in post #7245714 (external link)
i can show you hundreds of wildlife shots i would have never gotten without IS but lets just leave it at a difference of opinion :D.

ed rader

What sort of shutter speeds did you use in the shots?


My pics:
www.pbase.com/rikwrite​r (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
RikWriter
Goldmember
Avatar
3,939 posts
Gallery: 81 photos
Likes: 850
Joined May 2004
Location: Lakeland, FL
     
Feb 03, 2009 12:36 |  #38

ctwehues wrote in post #7245920 (external link)
Yes, all of my shots were unprocessed, straight conversion from RAW to JPEG in Lightroom. It's not that I don't believe you, but I do want to see, please, results from the 100-400 with TC at 560mm wide open that are as sharp as these. If they are, I'll just sell this lens. Im not a huge fanboy, but I've never seen a 100-400 come close straight from camera, and it never comes close (in my experience) with a TC attached. But if you have it, show it here.

Thanks!

The 100-400 is horrible with a TC, no question about it. The 400 f5.6 is better...whether it's as good as the DO, I don't know.


My pics:
www.pbase.com/rikwrite​r (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
condyk
Africa's #1 Tour Guide
Avatar
20,886 posts
Likes: 21
Joined Mar 2005
Location: Birmingham, UK
     
Feb 03, 2009 14:13 as a reply to  @ RikWriter's post |  #39

RikWriter wrote in post #7245101 (external link)
I don't mean to be harsh or prickish, but I have to agree. The shots don't look as good as what I've seen from a 400 5.6 at 100%. I give you, they are with a TC, but they're really nothing that would impress me enough to buy the 400 DO.

Agreed ... When I started reading the thread I thought my eyes were shot given the OTT praises. I just am not convinced even though I'd like to be.

ctwehues wrote in post #7245181 (external link)
... you must remember you are looking at a compressed JPEG image that is not full size on a relatively-low resolution computer screen. I

Every shot posted here is the same but I have seen many shots of better technical quality. I've definately got better shots with my ex 400mm 5.6 L with a 1.4 and even a 2x.


https://photography-on-the.net …/showthread.php​?t=1203740

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ctwehues
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
703 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Joined Jan 2007
     
Feb 03, 2009 14:54 |  #40

Again, these shots are not supposed to be evaluated based on their "technical" or "artistic" qualities. I just want to show people how sharp the lens is. But again, Im not married to this lens. In fact, if the 400mm f/5.6 is better (and I have shot with two copies of that lens, just check my For Sale posts), I would gladly sell this lens and make off with the extra $3k. But please post the pics so that we can all view them. If the 500mm is better, please post and let me see. Same goes for all other better shots--just post them here. Telling me you have them but not posting them is tough for me to evaluate the images for myself, which I think is what we all want. I do love the lens, but again, if the 500mm is that much better, it would get me thinking for sure.

Thanks again,




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
KenjiS
"Holy crap its long!"
Avatar
21,370 posts
Gallery: 555 photos
Likes: 2657
Joined Oct 2008
Location: Buffalo, NY
     
Feb 03, 2009 15:07 |  #41

DisrupTer911 wrote in post #7239610 (external link)
those are gorgeous captures, especially with having a TC on it.

the 400/4 DO is one lens I have my heart set on, it produces such gorgeous colors and sharpness.

I wish I could find one for cheap lol

AMEN!

Its good to finally see some samples from this lens! I've wanted one for a while after reading about its size/weight [SUPposedly its more handholdable than the 300 f/2.8] it sounds like the perfect hiking lens to me!


Gear, New and Old! RAW Club Member
Wanted: 70-200. Time and good health
Deviantart (external link)
Flickr (This is where my good stuff is!) (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
buddy4344
Goldmember
1,533 posts
Gallery: 400 photos
Best ofs: 14
Likes: 992
Joined Nov 2006
Location: Allentown, PA
     
Feb 03, 2009 15:08 |  #42

As I noted above, I am a newbie to this lens and the weather has not been up to doing shoots outdoors, so I have shot images of soup cans and such at about 40ft (length from my family room to my dining room) with both the 400 and 500 just to compare sharpness. I didn't save those shots, but both are tack sharp with the 500 showing a little more contrast. The 'advantage" of the 400 is that it is soooo short that it is incredibly easy to shoot handheld - that is what you are paying for.


Buddy4344

Gear: Canon 1Dx MkII, 7D MkII, Canon Lenses: 100 macro, 100-400 Ver.IIL IS, 24-105L IS, Canon 17-40, Canon 1.4x TCon, Rokinon 14mm. Kenko extension tubes, Kenko 1.4x pro TCon.and Kiboko 30L and 22L+

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ed ­ rader
"I am not the final word"
Avatar
23,206 posts
Gallery: 4 photos
Likes: 488
Joined May 2005
Location: silicon valley
     
Feb 03, 2009 15:11 |  #43

RikWriter wrote in post #7246113 (external link)
What sort of shutter speeds did you use in the shots?

this one was @ iso 1600, 1/200s, 400mm f5.6..........

IMAGE: http://erader.zenfolio.com/img/v0/p323753001-4.jpg

here's one @ iso 6400, 1/60s, 180mm, f5........

IMAGE: http://erader.zenfolio.com/img/v1/p479483253-4.jpg

ed rader

http://instagram.com/e​draderphotography/ (external link)
5D4, 80d, 16-35L F4 IS, 24-70L II, 70-200L F4 IS II, 100-400L II, sigma 15 FE, sigma 14 f1.8 art, tc 1.4 III, 430exII, gitzo 3542L + markins Q20, gitzo GT 1545T + markins Q3T, gitzo GM4562

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Roy ­ Webber
Goldmember
3,185 posts
Likes: 4
Joined Nov 2006
Location: Corralejo, Fuerteventura....Canary Islands Spain
     
Feb 03, 2009 15:58 |  #44

[QUOTE=DisrupTer911;72​39610]those are gorgeous captures, especially with having a TC on it.

the 400/4 DO is one lens I have my heart set on, it produces such gorgeous colors and sharpness.

I wish I could find one for cheap lol[/quote]
Me too ;)


Canon 7D, 40D,100-400 IS L, EFS 15-85 IS, EFS 10-22-With Faulty USM, 055XPROB+488RC2, 430 & 580 II Flash, Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8-:cool:
Photos (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Moschero
Member
232 posts
Joined Apr 2006
Location: Santa Barbara, Ca.
     
Feb 03, 2009 15:59 |  #45

Wow


EOS 20D, EOS 5-D MK2, 50 MM 1.4, 24-70 MM 2.8 L, 17-40 M.M. F4 L, 70-200 F4L, 300 F4 L IS, 580 EX, 430 EX, Hensel Integra Pro Plus 500 W.S. X 3, ST-E2 Transmitter, BG-E2 Grip, Epson R1800 Printer and a credit card that has a nervous twitch

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

7,608 views & 0 likes for this thread
The Canon 400mm f/4 DO IS Thoughts
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


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


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is royd63uk
1074 guests, 354 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.