Using a 400mm DO lens

While my 400 is in the shop getting worked on, Canon is lending me a 400 f/4 DO.

I know it's actually different glass with less chance of CA, but in far as shooting with the lens, is there any thing that the shooter has to be aware of while using this lens?

I won't have time to experiment before having to use it in the field.

Here's a link to some discussion about the 400 f/4 DO lens at dpreview.

http://forums.dpreview​.com …rum=1029&messag​e=21853407

Here's a link to an article about using the EF 70-300 DO. I know it is a different lens (obviously) but there may be some tips that might be useful.

http://www.fovegraphy.​com/70_300DO_TipsE.php

Don't forget to let us know how you make out with the 400 f/4 DO.

Don't see a lot of DO glass users in these forums

Those article do not bode well for the 400 DO's price. I'll have my 300 2.8 on another body -- with me as well so I'll be able to do a real side by side real world test.

Well, I can't say that I'm impressed with the lens at this point.

You be the judge ... first two are 1D Mark IV + 400 DO, last two are 1Ds Mark II with 300mm f/2.8.

[EDIT: Sorry I confused two bodies, this was the 1D Mark IIN + 300 f/2.8 on the last 2 shots, not the 1Ds]

These are "processed" so it's not exactly a comparison, however other than crop they were processed exactly the same with the same presets. When I get a chance I'll go back and export out original imports.

However, the saturartion and sharpness of the images from the 300 I think evident.

1.

Interesting. However...

Actually, the latter two look like they are bordering on oversharpened to me... That might be because of the conversion to internet resolutions, uploading process, of course.

Color rendition and background blur are certainly nicer in the last two, though I suspect it might be due to different lighting conditions. First two appear to be in full or nearly full sun, judging from the shadows and directionality... While the bottom two appear to be under moderate overcast or even in light shade.

Not defending the 400 DO (I don't have/use it or the f2.8, so I don't have a horse in this race)... just commenting.

I have seen some really nice work out of the 400 DO. Mainly, I think it's been people who needed as long a lens as possible, but left with no choice but to hand hold it most of the time.

I wouldn't be at all surprised if somewhat different post processing methods were needed... More sharpening, or different settings for example.

Our own Harvey_G uses this lens since he needed something a little lighter. It performs really well for him. It sure isn't a budget lens, though.

I do see your points -- they're absolutely not to be used in direct comparison. Just two different sets of shots at different times.

I'm just saying at the current cost, the 400 DO does not seem to deliver. If the DO was say $2.6k or $3k I would say "worth it". In it's favor, it's a bit smaller or same as the 300 in length but it's actually lighter - which is big plus to some people.

EF 400 f/2.8 IS ~ $7k
EF 400 f/4 DO IS ~ $6k
EF 100-400 f/4.5-5.6L IS ~ $1.6k
EF 400 f/5.6L ~ $1.3k

Just for full disclosure

#1 - Direct sunlight w/2 580EX II @ 1/16th power via PW
#2 - Direct sunlight, 1 flash for fill on ETTL via PW
#3 - Direct sunlight
#4 - Direct sunlight