Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II USM

vbudihardjo wrote in post #13968982
dolina & mattymx: awesome sport shots!!!

Thank you. I had a blast shooting with that lens for the first time.

Fantastic shots everyone!
Dolina, you always perform great no matter the lens

I brought this lens to northern sweden, hoping to find golden eagles. A 50% crop, but a bird nonetheless. I love the colours this lens produces.

great shot dioladetus!!

Wow. Impressive capture regardless of the lens.

I see why Canon can charge so much for it. It is that good.

Heat haze really messes up focus and sharpness.

4.0MP crop

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com/​photos/alabang/6945752​843/

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com/​photos/alabang/6945754​181/

great illustration of heat haze!

here is one more of the golden eagle

apart from the weight difference from the previous version, do you really think there's a significant change in image quality, colors and etc? Please let me know if you have used both...

I'm considering to get one but its a bit hefty. I'm not a pro and this is quite expensive for a hobby only.

Thanks

^^ I own the DO. But I drooled over the old 400 thread, and I can tell you that I didn't get it because with a 2X it just wasn't all that good. But, this one, holy smokes, look at the 2X shots. Stunning.

That means you are getting a useful 800 f/5.6 as well.

If you compare the two sample threads, you'll notice the bokeh is also better on the II.

That said, the price change is massive. So, I'm still torn, a bit like you.

And remeber, there's a 200-400 f/4 with built in TC on the way, confusing things even more.

S.Horton wrote in post #14064103
^^ I own the DO. But I drooled over the old 400 thread, and I can tell you that I didn't get it because with a 2X it just wasn't all that good. But, this one, holy smokes, look at the 2X shots. Stunning.

That means you are getting a useful 800 f/5.6 as well.

If you compare the two sample threads, you'll notice the bokeh is also better on the II.

That said, the price change is massive. So, I'm still torn, a bit like you.

And remeber, there's a 200-400 f/4 with built in TC on the way, confusing things even more.

Thank you for your feedback. I really like what I see here and the price is the only reason why I'm pushing back. I'd definitely buy this now if its only in 8K range. Well, I guess I better start saving my lunch money and come up with $11.5K by next year. LOL. These pro photogs are killing me! LOL!

With good support and some time with it, you can get technically the same results. What most don't have is access to the time and money to patiently get to the right place, at the right time. When I can swing it, I will get this lens. Like all the others, it will just get added.

Trek_203 wrote in post #14063246
apart from the weight difference from the previous version, do you really think there's a significant change in image quality, colors and etc? Please let me know if you have used both...

I'm considering to get one but its a bit hefty. I'm not a pro and this is quite expensive for a hobby only.

Thanks

the weight difference is the only reason I got this lens. I've used both and cannot see much (any?) difference without a multiplier.

With the new 1.4 III on it, it is definately sharper than the previous combo. I'm not a pro either but would not have been able to capture some shots that I have if it was not for the hand holdability of this lens. I really like it.