Hands On With the Canon EF 400 f/4 DO IS II USM

tkbslc wrote in post #17161042
DO optics are not quite as sharp and they have uglier bokeh. There's a reason they aren't L designated, even though they are quite good.

Well that was the old truth. Canon is claiming by moving the refractive elements closer to the sensor in this release, that they had improved those issues.

Seeing the Nikon guys video makes me really want one of these, but reality of the price tag says I will never own one.

I have the version 1 of this lens, and it does quite well. This is an example of its ability, in the hands of a novice to long lenses.
The shot was from a 5d3 with 400 DO+1.4 Sigma TC @ ISO 200,f 5.6 1/500 handheld.

It's very easy to hand hold this lens, and one of the main reasons I bought it, (used). I new I would use it more than a lens that required a tripod every time I took it out.

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/jT3B​Ue

Wow, what a unique lens. Awesome job Canon! Now to look between the couch cushions for ~$7k in loose change...

This would be a perfect handholdable lens for the 7DII for a wildlife photog. Add the 2X and you're right where the action is with functioning AF to boot!

the lens looks fantastic! Perhaps I've been living under a rock but before this week I'd never heard of Matt Granger. His methodology for getting the first hands on previews of this equipment is impressive doing these things at Photokina. But the results speak for themselves really really really strange example photos.

Looks like the Canon Lens+Optics R&D dept. is head and shoulders above the competition.
Every lens they've released in the last 3-4 years has been very impressive, even the cheapo $150 lenses. Kudos are due.

I recently purchased a used version 1 of this lens, and have been quite happy with it. With a 2x, it's a hand holdable 800mm with AF and image stabilization. The new version looks notably better - sharper, and improved IS. Looks like a winner to me.

DJHaze596 wrote in post #17161201
At this price point, is there any other option that will give equal Sharpness and or range for cheaper? $6800 is crazy high. The only lens that comes to mind is the 300mm f2.8

I am a bit confused by the way you worded your question. You start off by saying, "at this price point", but then at the end of the sentence you say "for cheaper".

So, are you looking for something with equal sharpness and range that is at the same price point, or are you looking for something with equal sharpness and range that is cheaper?

If you are looking for something with equal sharpness and range "for cheaper", then the 400mm f5.6L would meet those qualifications. Same range. Equal sharpness. 1/5th the cost.

FEChariot wrote in post #17162461
Well that was the old truth. Canon is claiming by moving the refractive elements closer to the sensor in this release, that they had improved those issues.
.

Then why didn't they just make it an L and use that same tech to make the new 500mm and 600mm lenses much shorter? There's still some tradeoff, which is why DO is only used in a couple lenses.

I wonder if sports shooters will switch to the DO version.

I bet more DOs will be forthcoming, image the 200-400 in DO at 1/2 the weight and price. I'd be happy to add a 600 DO someday. Like many 'realists' I might be able to buy a 400 2.8 but truth is I can't wield it effectively (the reason I sold the Sig 120-300, I'd just be worn out by end of day).
Colt4570 you cat pic (awesome awesome awesome) screems loudly about this lens and the 2cd gen's potential.
Now someone please explain to the noob (me) what was going on with Granger's ISO choice? He also seemed fish out of water with the 6D (maybe a new body to him?). With mine I've gotten instantaneous focus lock in much dimmer light using that cross center point. I really think 'that Nikon guy' just didn't know the 6D.
I agree nothing wrong with the 400 5.6 at all, Like many I've seen hundreds of incredible pics with it, with our ISO capable bodies of today it's not that slow anymore either. If I was advising I'd steer anyone in that direction first. In fact the 400 5.6 and a dinky Nex-7 provide one of the lightest most wield-able packages I've seen:

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/mv81​LB

tkbslc wrote in post #17163228
Then why didn't they just make it an L

It a $7K lens. I'm sure anyone buying it isn't going to care if there is a L in the name or a red versus green ring

tkbslc wrote in post #17163228
and use that same tech to make the new 500mm and 600mm lenses much shorter?

Who is to say that they wont? It's not like Canon would re release all of their super tele's all at the same time for Photokina even if this was a break through technology improvement over the first versions and I'm not saying it is because I just don't know.

tkbslc wrote in post #17163228
There's still some tradeoff, which is why DO is only used in a couple lenses.

The Bokeh from the DO II looks pretty good to me at least here:

http://www.mattgranger​.com/images/Canon400f4​DO-3.jpg

And the MTF charts of this and the new 300/2.8 II look better for the DO II.

The image with the girl in red hair lists ISO 25,600????????????

MedicineMan4040 wrote in post #17163499
The image with the girl in red hair lists ISO 25,600????????????

It's at Photokina. I would say his 6D handles it pretty well though.

It reminds me of a blunderbuss.

MedicineMan4040 wrote in post #17163922
It reminds me of a blunderbuss.

Except this baby's got range.