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
Forums  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear
Guest
Forums  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon Lenses 
Thread started 17 Oct 2006 (Tuesday) 09:53
Search threadPrev/next
POLL: "How would you rate the EF 400mm L prime?"
1 -- I love it, it's sharp, not too heavy, and takes great pics
39
88.6%
2 -- I love it, though at times it's too heavy, but takes great pics.
3
6.8%
3 -- It's too heavy, costs too much, and I don't use it often.
0
0%
4 -- There are better options out there, for less money
1
2.3%
5 -- I had a bad copy, returned it, and stayed away.
0
0%
6 -- I owned it, and sold it, as I hardly used it anymore.
1
2.3%

44 voters, 44 votes given (1 choice only choices can be voted per member)). VOTING IS FOR MEMBERS ONLY.
BROWSE ALL POLLS
sponsored links (only for non-logged)

Rate the EF 400 5.6L prime.

 
inthedeck
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
11,579 posts
Gallery: 5 photos
Likes: 1140
Joined Sep 2006
Location: St. Augustine, Florida
     
Oct 17, 2006 09:53 |  #1

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.


MCSquared Photography (external link) on WWW
MCSquared Photography (external link) on Flickr
MCSquared Photography (external link) on IG
My name: Manish.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Chris ­ P ­ Bacon
Member
58 posts
Joined Jul 2004
Location: East Yorkshire, England
     
Oct 17, 2006 11:51 |  #2

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 :)


My Gear

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
LightRules
Return of the Jedi
Avatar
9,911 posts
Likes: 5
Joined Jun 2005
     
Oct 17, 2006 11:52 |  #3

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.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
inthedeck
THREAD ­ STARTER
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
11,579 posts
Gallery: 5 photos
Likes: 1140
Joined Sep 2006
Location: St. Augustine, Florida
     
Oct 17, 2006 12:03 |  #4

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.


MCSquared Photography (external link) on WWW
MCSquared Photography (external link) on Flickr
MCSquared Photography (external link) on IG
My name: Manish.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Double ­ Negative
*sniffles*
Avatar
10,533 posts
Likes: 11
Joined Mar 2006
Location: New York, USA
     
Oct 17, 2006 12:17 |  #5

Chris P Bacon wrote in post #2131902 (external link)
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.


La Vida Leica! (external link) LitPixel Galleries (external link) -- 1V-HS, 1D Mark IIn & 5D Mark IV w/BG-E20
15mm f/2.8, 14mm f/2.8L, 24mm f/1.4L II, 35mm f/1.4L, 50mm f/1.2L, 85mm f/1.2L II, 135mm f/2.0L
16-35mm f/2.8L, 24-70mm f/2.8L, 70-200mm f/2.8L IS, 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS, Extender EF 1.4x II & 2x II

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
inthedeck
THREAD ­ STARTER
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
11,579 posts
Gallery: 5 photos
Likes: 1140
Joined Sep 2006
Location: St. Augustine, Florida
     
Oct 17, 2006 12:38 |  #6

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.


MCSquared Photography (external link) on WWW
MCSquared Photography (external link) on Flickr
MCSquared Photography (external link) on IG
My name: Manish.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mrclark321
Noinker
Avatar
7,537 posts
Likes: 23
Joined Mar 2005
Location: .... with a long history
     
Oct 17, 2006 12:55 |  #7

Double Negative wrote in post #2132022 (external link)
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


Sony A7R3 & A7R4
Sony 16-35 GM
Sony 55mm 1.8
Batis 85mm
Sony 200-600

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
johnstoy
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
6,646 posts
Likes: 7
Joined Aug 2006
Location: Poconos, PA USA
     
Oct 17, 2006 12:56 |  #8

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...


John Stoy

www.poconophotos.com (external link)
My Gear List
"Are you only Looking or actually Seeing", from Microbiology 101.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mrclark321
Noinker
Avatar
7,537 posts
Likes: 23
Joined Mar 2005
Location: .... with a long history
     
Oct 17, 2006 12:57 |  #9

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


Sony A7R3 & A7R4
Sony 16-35 GM
Sony 55mm 1.8
Batis 85mm
Sony 200-600

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
calicokat
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
14,720 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Oct 2005
Location: Southern California
     
Oct 17, 2006 12:59 |  #10

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 :)


"You are going to fall off a cliff trying to get a better shot someday"- My hopeful and loving wife :eek: :twisted:
My Website (external link)

My Gear

Calicokat 1990-2007 RIP My Loving Kitty

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Double ­ Negative
*sniffles*
Avatar
10,533 posts
Likes: 11
Joined Mar 2006
Location: New York, USA
     
Oct 17, 2006 13:09 |  #11

mrclark321 wrote in post #2132211 (external link)
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.


La Vida Leica! (external link) LitPixel Galleries (external link) -- 1V-HS, 1D Mark IIn & 5D Mark IV w/BG-E20
15mm f/2.8, 14mm f/2.8L, 24mm f/1.4L II, 35mm f/1.4L, 50mm f/1.2L, 85mm f/1.2L II, 135mm f/2.0L
16-35mm f/2.8L, 24-70mm f/2.8L, 70-200mm f/2.8L IS, 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS, Extender EF 1.4x II & 2x II

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Chris ­ P ­ Bacon
Member
58 posts
Joined Jul 2004
Location: East Yorkshire, England
     
Oct 17, 2006 13:14 |  #12

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.


My Gear

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
inthedeck
THREAD ­ STARTER
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
11,579 posts
Gallery: 5 photos
Likes: 1140
Joined Sep 2006
Location: St. Augustine, Florida
     
Oct 17, 2006 13:16 |  #13

mrclark321 wrote in post #2132218 (external link)
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.


MCSquared Photography (external link) on WWW
MCSquared Photography (external link) on Flickr
MCSquared Photography (external link) on IG
My name: Manish.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
inthedeck
THREAD ­ STARTER
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
11,579 posts
Gallery: 5 photos
Likes: 1140
Joined Sep 2006
Location: St. Augustine, Florida
     
Oct 17, 2006 13:17 |  #14

Chris P Bacon wrote in post #2132287 (external link)
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 .. :lol:


MCSquared Photography (external link) on WWW
MCSquared Photography (external link) on Flickr
MCSquared Photography (external link) on IG
My name: Manish.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
nitsch
Goldmember
2,393 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Feb 2005
     
Oct 17, 2006 13:23 |  #15

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.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links (only for non-logged)

5,046 views & 0 likes for this thread, 16 members have posted to it.
Rate the EF 400 5.6L prime.
FORUMS Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon Lenses 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

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

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 2.58forum software
version 2.58 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is IoDaLi Photography
1823 guests, 120 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15,144, 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.