400mm 2.8 +1.4x v 500 f4

Would like to know which way to go. The choice is the 400 f2.8 with converters as opposed to the 500 f4.
Has anyone evaluated the merits of either?

Well, just because there has been so many views and no replys, i wiil say what i would do.

400mm 2.8

...... look out i am gonna get slated

Best Regards

Ian.

400 mm f/2.8 L IS is heavier and more expensive. If you plan to rarely use 400mm focal length, go for 500mm f/4 L IS.

The 400/2.8 is mostly a sports lens used from a tripod or maybe a monopod. The 500/4 is for wildlife, birds and such. Can be handheld. Big difference in price as well.

I have used both and went with the 400. The 500 is actually too light in windy situations where you want to shoot hand held. Alot depends on the subjects you intend to shoot too. If it is birds each lens has its advantages and draw backs. The 400 w/ the 1.4 is longer than the 500 at the same f/stop. But it has greater mass and is not the easiest to wheel around and track in flight shots.

The 500 is lighter and does worth the 1.4 but you lose most of the AF capability. Either lens will render beautiful shots and you will be amazed at what it can do.

I would suggest renting a few times for each one prior to making an investment that large, I did and it paid off.

Depends what you wan`t to shoot, if its sports then go for the 400 as previously stated its a great lens for that type of photography. If you plan on shooting wildlife then go for the 500, as has already been said the weight of the 500 is enough to hand hold for periods.........also if you shoot wildlife especially small animals the 500 with TC`s gives more length than the 400 with TC`s...............a bit obvious I know but reach is king when shooting small animals.



Mark

If more sports and less wildlife, then 400mm f2.8 IS. If other way around, then 500mm f4 IS.

I examined the merits of each and decided to buy both.

400/2.8 IS is the ubiquitous field sports lens, the 500/4 IS is great for wildlife and motorsports. Take your pick.