Canon EF 400mm f/4 DO IS

I searched and searched, and didn't see a thread for this lens that nobody cares for apparently

Shot with a 1Ds Mark III, both photos at f/4

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/png'

Date Modified 2009-02-22 21:20:01
Date Taken 2009-02-22 16:32:31
Camera Canon EOS-1D Mark III
Exposure Time 0.001s (1/1000)
Aperture f/4.0
ISO 100

Date Modified 2009-02-22 21:20:14
Date Taken 2009-02-22 16:32:52
Camera Canon EOS-1D Mark III
Exposure Time 0.0015s (1/640)
Aperture f/4.0
ISO 100

Date Modified 2009-02-22 21:21:18
Date Taken 2009-02-22 16:37:53
Camera Canon EOS-1D Mark III
Exposure Time 0.008s (1/125)
Aperture f/4.0
ISO 100
Focal Length 400mm (520mm in 35mm)

Date Modified 2009-02-22 21:20:58
Date Taken 2009-02-22 16:34:53
Camera Canon EOS-1D Mark III
Exposure Time 0.0012s (1/800)
Aperture f/4.0
ISO 100
Focal Length 400mm (520mm in 35mm)

Date Modified 2009-02-22 21:20:29
Date Taken 2009-02-22 16:33:15
Camera Canon EOS-1D Mark III
Exposure Time 0.0012s (1/800)
Aperture f/4.0
ISO 100
Focal Length 400mm (520mm in 35mm)

Date Modified 2009-02-22 21:24:33
Date Taken 2009-02-22 16:33:38
Camera Canon EOS-1D Mark III
Exposure Time 0.004s (1/250)
Aperture f/4.0
ISO 100
Focal Length 400mm (520mm in 35mm)

S.Horton wrote in post #6548116
Here's ~100% crop showing the bokeh of the 400 DO.

This is the famous "doughnut" look in the extreme. I rarely see this impact.
[/IMG]

Doesn't look any worse than my 100-400mm or the 300 f/4

Have you noticed any of the low contrast issues that are often cited as a reason for not getting this lens (by jpeg shooters especially). I can see from your wide open crops that sharpness is definitely NOT an issue.

Do you have any wildlife samples, especially critters with hair or feathers, that you could post up as unprocessed 100% crops? I'd like to see how this lens resolves detail on those fine features.

Unprocessed wildlife, not on hand -- But, I promise, when I (finally) get moving through all of the Yellowstone pics, sure, I can post a couple just for this thread. (EDIT: See above, shot two wildlife tests, posted 22 Feb 09)

I'll keep my eyes on this thread then. The light weight and native 400mm is what keeps me interested in this lens vs. the 300 2.8 with TC. The high price is hard to swallow though (but then so is the 300 2.8's price)

There were a bunch of shots by George Lepp in the latest Outdoor Photographer, using the 400 DO from a kayak for wildlife, and they all looked fantastic.

I don't really understand the bad reputation for the 400 DO

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

You can see small fish leaping from the jaws of these bubble feeding humpback whales.

Just found this thread, will contribute a couple of ducks.

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

With 1.4 TC, ~100% crop

Date Modified 2008-08-30 21:30:55
Date Taken 2008-06-17 18:39:42
Camera Canon EOS-1D Mark III
Exposure Time 0.0012s (1/800)
Aperture f/7.1
ISO 320
Focal Length 560mm (728mm in 35mm)