Question 400mm 2.8L II

I've been searching and searching for this lens or a IS at a decent price. Mainly for HS sports (very little) car races and nature mainly. I found what appears to be a 400 version II which I understand to be a better lens than the Version I which is comparable to the IS version, but sense this lens will be on a gimbal head most of the time.....I thought the IS would be a moog point. The guys looking for $4900.00...that's asking. Any pros or cons?

Wow with all the views .....I'm surprized I didn't get any input on this topic

The 400mm f/2.8L IS mkII costs $11,500... If this guy has one for $5000 then it's the mk1. Car races and wildlife, maybe some entry birding are great uses for this lens. HS sports, it will only be good for the outdoor sports, indoor will just be too close to the action.

Price seems a bit high. But cannot comment too much further because of lack of info.

As for the 400 2.8 series since EF Mounts:

400 f/2.8L I (non-is)
400 f/2.8L II (non-is)
400 f/2.8L IS
400 f/2.8L IS II (most recent)

These should be correct, but there is always a chance I'm completely wrong.

Hmmm thought I put that it was a version II and didn't list it as a IS which means it's just after the version I . So I believe it goes like this

400mm 2.8L
400mm 2.8L MKI
400mm 2.8L MKII This is the one so I believe it has a better AF than version I
400mm 2.8L MKII IS

Since it's a heavy lens, my thoughts you would be using it on a mono-pod or a tripod so the IS wouldn't be a big factor...but I'm not sure. Also I'm not sure on the price, it seems a little high, but havent been able to find many sales or info on this lens for resale

Check this page for list of all variants of the 400 2.8. You can check how old it is using the date code

http://en.wikipedia.or​g …on_L_lens#Super​_telephoto

Hollywoodgt wrote in post #13800673
400mm 2.8L
400mm 2.8L MKI
400mm 2.8L MKII This is the one so I believe it has a better AF than version I
400mm 2.8L MKII IS

Since it's a heavy lens, my thoughts you would be using it on a mono-pod or a tripod so the IS wouldn't be a big factor...but I'm not sure. Also I'm not sure on the price, it seems a little high, but havent been able to find many sales or info on this lens for resale

No, he was correct. http://www.canon.com …s/ef/super_tele​photo.html
400 2.8 NON-IS (which is somtimes called a MKI because there is a MK II, nothing is ever called a MKI unless it has been replaced simply to make it clear what one is selling)
400 2.8 NON-IS II, which is what you are looking at I am sure
400 2.8 IS (same as above, no such thing as a MKI)
400 2.8 IS II the newest lens available now, extremely expensive.

$4,900 for the non-IS II sounds a little high to me, maybe more like $3,900-4,200.

When used on a monopod or tripod IS is not entirely neccesary, I use a 500 without IS, however it can't hurt to have it. At slow shutter speeds you are going to want to use a remote release and mirror lockup anyway.

For the money if I were you and with what you want to shoot I would rather purchase a 300 2.8 IS, and a pair of extenders. 300 will be a lot more versital for sports (400 would be optimal for large field sports as mentioned above, 300 is still usable for court sports such as basketball as well), and can be a 420 F4 or 600 F5.6 for motorsports, nature, and birds.

The 400 II is just such a huge lens at 13 pounds. The newest 400 is 8.5lbs, the 300 2.8 IS is 5.6 lbs, and my 500 4.5 is 6.6 lbs.

If your priority is nature and birds I would skip them all and go for a 500 or 600. Just my two cents.

As a previous owner of the 400 2.8L Mark II, it was definitely a heavy lens... Sure you can try to hand-hold it, but within a few minutes your arms will feel the burn... I highly recommend using a mono/tripod while shooting... In your photography scenario, Jeffrey, a monopod will fit nicely... With regards to price, it'll depend on condition and what's included with the lens (i.e. case, cover, hood, etc.)... $4,900 does sound pretty steep, as Bill mentioned, for this version of glass... I concur with him about the price break he listed...

Below is a sample shot if me shooting with this glass and the results of what I was trying to capture:

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com/​photos/rickrphoto/5632​061719/

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com/​photos/airbutchie/5630​571687/

Butch, nice photo. that thing looks heavy.

if you don't really need the extra stops, take a look at the 100-400L, it's significantly cheaper than the 400 prime and a feather weight in comparison, I had one and think it was extremely sharp at 400m wide open, it was as sharp as the 70-200 4.0 IS I had at the same time.

This is good ...thank you a bunch guys. I thought it was too high. I just seen pics and the lens look to be in great shape. It has a hood,rain cover, soft belt cover, case and misc. The weight is a big factor also. Looks like I'm using the 70-200mm 2.8L Is II until I find something

Hollywoodgt wrote in post #13803203
...Looks like I'm using the 70-200mm 2.8L Is II until I find something

What about 300mm II? Which is not that heavy, and also much cheaper.

kawi_200 wrote in post #13800493
The 400mm f/2.8L IS mkII costs $11,500... If this guy has one for $5000 then it's the mk1. Car races and wildlife, maybe some entry birding are great uses for this lens. HS sports, it will only be good for the outdoor sports, indoor will just be too close to the action.

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Content warning: script

also indoor, ur gonna have to bump up the ISO a bit as its only 2.8

I only see this "Mainly for HS sports (very little) car races and nature mainly." Don't know where indoor sports came.

For what you describe, look at 300mm f2.8 IS.

I own a copy of this beastly glass and nowadays I've seen it around for $3500-4700 depends on the condition. The IQ of this lens it's amazing beautiful. It's heavy, big to lug around so a monopod would be your best friend. Good luck on your decision. Here's a sample of this magnificent lens...

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Redirected to error image by FLICKR

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Redirected to error image by FLICKR