Rate the EF 400 5.6L prime.

This will be a poll to judge how people that OWN this lens like it. I am considering this as an option to extend my collection. I have heard many great things about it, and it's one of the contenders, in my short list.

Also, if you could post some information about it, that would be great.

It's a great lens that I'd recommend to anyone if you can live without IS and you have enough light for f5.6. It's probably the best big lens you'll ever get unless you have another £4000 hanging around, the focusing is lightning fast too

I assume you mean the f5.6, not the f2.8. If so, why the obsessiveness with it being "heavy"? It's a feather-weight...and it's superb too.

Yes, I meant the 5.6L, it states that in the subject.

As far as heavy, not too concerned, I have a tripod...and also a 300 F4LIS which by no means is 'light' but is a great lens.

I think I might just go with this...as the option. Seems very good to me.

Chris P Bacon wrote in post #2131902
It's a great lens that I'd recommend to anyone if you can live without IS and you have enough light for f5.6. It's probably the best big lens you'll ever get unless you have another £4000 hanging around, the focusing is lightning fast too

This pretty much sums up the lens. Great bang for the buck. One other thing it lacks is weathersealing... But for a low cost, sharp lens with fast AF you can't go wrong. Chances are you'll be using a tripod or monopod anyway so not having IS isn't the worst thing in the world. If you're looking to handhold, the 100-400mm zoom might be a better option.

Not too worried about weather sealing here...as the camera isn't weather sealed either. I haven't received the camera yet, but once it arrives, I will test it with the current lenses that I own. I believe the 400 5.6L might be the way to go...as the macro isn't getting the 'wow' factor that I thought it might.

Double Negative wrote in post #2132022
This pretty much sums up the lens. Great bang for the buck. One other thing it lacks is weathersealing... But for a low cost, sharp lens with fast AF you can't go wrong. Chances are you'll be using a tripod or monopod anyway so not having IS isn't the worst thing in the world. If you're looking to handhold, the 100-400mm zoom might be a better option.

I got better results handholding my 400 prime over the 100-400
The auto focus is amazingly fast. I traded mine for a 300 f/4 IS and miss the extra reach ( need a TC )

Dan

I waiting for my vendor to get the 400mm 5.6L into store stock...Since I don't have the benefits of the Sunbelt sun...I hope that at F5.6 it will still be a high use lens for birding...a Canon TC is a hopeful option for me...

You already have a TC, why do you feel you need bth the 300 and 400?

I love the 400 F/5.6L for birds in flight. I take it hiking with me, the size and weight do not bother me at all and I have taken it on 14 mile hikes. And is very sharp wide open where it is used 99% of the time

mrclark321 wrote in post #2132211
I got better results handholding my 400 prime over the 100-400
The auto focus is amazingly fast. I traded mine for a 300 f/4 IS and miss the extra reach ( need a TC )

I would agree... I only mentioned the 100-400mm because of the IS.

One thing I didn't mention earlier was that the 400 prime has quite a long minimum focusing distance (11 feet I think) which has caused me to have to back up to be able to get a picture of small birds a few times, the 100-400 is much better in this respect.

mrclark321 wrote in post #2132218
You already have a TC, why do you feel you need bth the 300 and 400?

If that was directed towards me, well...I might just sell the 300 F4L IS...and then can use the 400 with the TC for even more reach, on a FF camera. The money I get back on the 300 would in itself pay for the 400.

Chris P Bacon wrote in post #2132287
One thing I didn't mention earlier was that the 400 prime has quite a long minimum focusing distance (11 feet I think) which has caused me to have to back up to be able to get a picture of small birds a few times, the 100-400 is much better in this respect.

Agreed, but I am not a fan of the push/pull design. I used to own a push/pull Canon lens...and was very frustrated with it, most of the time...which is why I sold it. No need for the aggravation ..

It's a good lens, lightweight, sharp and fast focusing - ideal for handheld shooting of birds in flight so I voted no.1 however I don't love it. I like it, I'm glad to have added it to my gear, but the love is saved for the 100-400 which I prefer to use for anything other than birds in flight.