April 23, 2014, 07:01:01 PM

Author Topic: Canon 200-400mm review  (Read 3588 times)


canon rumors FORUM

Canon 200-400mm review
« on: May 21, 2013, 06:00:40 PM »

Click

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 2073
    • View Profile
Re: Canon 200-400mm review
« Reply #1 on: May 21, 2013, 06:01:49 PM »
Thanks for the link.

garyknrd

  • Rebel T5i
  • ****
  • Posts: 127
  • Birding
    • View Profile
    • Bird photography
Re: Canon 200-400mm review
« Reply #2 on: May 22, 2013, 01:11:09 AM »
Nice pics, thanks for the link.
Live between Thailand and Texas, USA

optikus

  • PowerShot G16
  • **
  • Posts: 38
    • View Profile
Re: Canon 200-400mm review
« Reply #3 on: May 22, 2013, 02:58:57 AM »
Very nice - interesting report on that lens - thank you vm.

Joerg
EOS 1Ds, D60, 10D, 30D*, 400D, var. manual lenses, Zeiss and other german manufacturers and some EF/EFs ... *: 30D with extended IR-range for astrophotography

Dwight

  • Canon AE-1
  • ***
  • Posts: 74
    • View Profile
Re: Canon 200-400mm review
« Reply #4 on: May 22, 2013, 04:32:27 AM »
If I were to be absolutely true to myself, this is a lens I cannot afford at the moment, yet will lust over it for sometime.  Either this or the 300 2.8 II for me.  Huge price difference, yet it's a consideration for me later on...budget-permitting.  Will see how real-world performance pans out.  Thanks for sharing.

GMCPhotographics

  • 6D
  • *****
  • Posts: 518
    • View Profile
    • GMCPhotographics
Re: Canon 200-400mm review
« Reply #5 on: May 24, 2013, 06:06:30 AM »
http://pixsylated.com/blog/peter-read-miller-canon-200-400mm-london-olympics/


Lol...I was in the audience when this shot was taken and yes I saw this chap with this lens in the Press pit.
Give me a few days and I'll dig out a photo of this very moment from a less ideal spot :D

kaihp

  • EOS M2
  • ****
  • Posts: 210
    • View Profile
Re: Canon 200-400mm review
« Reply #6 on: May 24, 2013, 06:41:49 PM »
http://pixsylated.com/blog/peter-read-miller-canon-200-400mm-london-olympics/


Lol...I was in the audience when this shot was taken and yes I saw this chap with this lens in the Press pit.
Give me a few days and I'll dig out a photo of this very moment from a less ideal spot :D


Which of the 6 different shots are you talking about?

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Canon 200-400mm review
« Reply #6 on: May 24, 2013, 06:41:49 PM »

RGF

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1197
  • How you relate to the issue, is the issue.
    • View Profile
Re: Canon 200-400mm review
« Reply #7 on: May 24, 2013, 11:38:22 PM »
I ordered on from Amazon the evening of the announcement.  I got a polite email from some at Amazon.   May be standard form letter or something more.  Not sure.

I am traveling now, but will check when I get home on Memorial Day

GMCPhotographics

  • 6D
  • *****
  • Posts: 518
    • View Profile
    • GMCPhotographics
Re: Canon 200-400mm review
« Reply #8 on: May 26, 2013, 06:32:33 PM »
http://pixsylated.com/blog/peter-read-miller-canon-200-400mm-london-olympics/


Lol...I was in the audience when this shot was taken and yes I saw this chap with this lens in the Press pit.
Give me a few days and I'll dig out a photo of this very moment from a less ideal spot :D



Which of the 6 different shots are you talking about?


Soz, First shot and on review it was a different day. His shot was during one of the qualifying heats. I was there for the finals and she was wearing white on that particular day:


eml58

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1229
  • 1Dx
    • View Profile
Re: Canon 200-400mm review
« Reply #9 on: May 26, 2013, 08:16:30 PM »
From "Nikon Rumours", the gauntlet has been thrown down it seems.
The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing

bchernicoff

  • 6D
  • *****
  • Posts: 544
    • View Profile
    • My Photos
Re: Canon 200-400mm review
« Reply #10 on: May 26, 2013, 08:40:06 PM »
I don't think the background blur looks very good at all. And looking at the focal lengths printed under the images, I feel like everyone of them would have been better shot at 300mm f/2.8 and cropped if necessary. This assumes these weren't crops already.
6D, Fuji X-E1
Tamron 24-70 2.8 VC, Canon 50mm f/1.2L, 70-200 f/2.8L IS II, 400mm f/2.8L II, 100mm L IS Macro, Sigma 85mm, & 35mm f/1.4's, Rokinon 14mm f/2.8, Canon 2x Extender II, Kenko 1.4x, 430 EX II, Elinchroms

eml58

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1229
  • 1Dx
    • View Profile
Re: Canon 200-400mm review
« Reply #11 on: May 27, 2013, 01:21:05 AM »
I don't think the background blur looks very good at all. And looking at the focal lengths printed under the images, I feel like everyone of them would have been better shot at 300mm f/2.8 and cropped if necessary. This assumes these weren't crops already.


Well the lens is never going to be all things to all photographers, but I own the 200f/2, 300f/2.8 & 400f/2.8 Version 2 Lenses, Plus the 600f/4 Version 2, and more based on what I've seen in Andy Rousse's Review, I'de have to disagree that @ f/4 this Lens isn't just as good as any of the Primes I mentioned above, time will tell of course, once we have a few being used and start to see the Images, but I'm sold. If you haven't already, have a look here, can't see too much wrong with Bokah @ f/4, or at any other f/stop. I imagine the Photographer didn't shoot his Images at f/2.8 is because this is an f/4 Lens through the Zoom Range without the 1.4x Converter in place.


http://www.andyrouse.co.uk/index.php?page_id=174
The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing

bchernicoff

  • 6D
  • *****
  • Posts: 544
    • View Profile
    • My Photos
Re: Canon 200-400mm review
« Reply #12 on: May 27, 2013, 09:33:42 AM »
I don't think the background blur looks very good at all. And looking at the focal lengths printed under the images, I feel like everyone of them would have been better shot at 300mm f/2.8 and cropped if necessary. This assumes these weren't crops already.


Well the lens is never going to be all things to all photographers, but I own the 200f/2, 300f/2.8 & 400f/2.8 Version 2 Lenses, Plus the 600f/4 Version 2, and more based on what I've seen in Andy Rousse's Review, I'de have to disagree that @ f/4 this Lens isn't just as good as any of the Primes I mentioned above, time will tell of course, once we have a few being used and start to see the Images, but I'm sold. If you haven't already, have a look here, can't see too much wrong with Bokah @ f/4, or at any other f/stop. I imagine the Photographer didn't shoot his Images at f/2.8 is because this is an f/4 Lens through the Zoom Range without the 1.4x Converter in place.


http://www.andyrouse.co.uk/index.php?page_id=174


I was suggesting that the photographer could have just used the 300mm f/2.8 II lens.  Andy's images look fantastic though and I'm sure the flexibility of having a zoom is a big help in a lot of scenarios.
6D, Fuji X-E1
Tamron 24-70 2.8 VC, Canon 50mm f/1.2L, 70-200 f/2.8L IS II, 400mm f/2.8L II, 100mm L IS Macro, Sigma 85mm, & 35mm f/1.4's, Rokinon 14mm f/2.8, Canon 2x Extender II, Kenko 1.4x, 430 EX II, Elinchroms

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Canon 200-400mm review
« Reply #12 on: May 27, 2013, 09:33:42 AM »