May 22, 2018, 12:20:46 PM

Author Topic: Canon 400mm DO  (Read 15076 times)

luckydude

  • EOS Rebel T7i
  • ****
  • Posts: 115
  • 1dxII, 5DIII, 7DII, lots of glass, tolerant wife
Re: Canon 400mm DO
« Reply #15 on: March 30, 2014, 07:21:04 PM »
I've got the 400mm DO as well as the 600mm II and the 400+1.4x II gets more use.  It's much much easier to hand hold (though that said I hand hold the 600mm II w/ 1.4x III.  I'm a nut job :)

The Tamron is interesting but it's slower right?  Pretty impressively sharp though and not that much slower.  I hadn't considered it as a replacement for the 400mm DO, that's an interesting idea.  Wonder what I can get for it on the used market.

Has anyone done a 400mm DO -> Tamron 150-600 swap?  If so, any regrets?  Or are you happy you did the switch?

Birders would be high on my list of interesting people.  How well does it autofocus on a 5DIII?

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Canon 400mm DO
« Reply #15 on: March 30, 2014, 07:21:04 PM »

AlanF

  • Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *********
  • Posts: 3509
Re: Canon 400mm DO
« Reply #16 on: March 30, 2014, 10:01:19 PM »
Most telephoto lenses give stunning results if you can fill the frame with the subject. The differences show up when the subjects fill just a small portion of the frame - the better the lens the smaller the image that can be used. To show what a lens is really capable of, you need to show the whole frame, a 100% crop of the image to illustrate the detail, the aperture, ISO, camera, shutter speed etc.
5D IV, 5DS R, 400mm DO II, 1.4xTC III, 2xTC III, EF 1.8 STM,  EF 24-105, 100-400 II, EF-S 15-85, Sigma 150-600mm C, EOS-M5 15-45, f/2 22, 11-22, Samyang 8mm f/2.8 fisheye: sold 7D II, EOS-M, Powershot G3 X,  Sigma 10-20, EF 300/2.8 II, 70-200/4 IS.

Grant Atkinson

  • EOS M5
  • ****
  • Posts: 171
Re: Canon 400mm DO
« Reply #17 on: March 31, 2014, 03:12:51 PM »
Sample image with the EF 400DO, on a Canon 1Dmk4, 1/800sec at f4, iso 640, resized to 1500x1000, from a 14mp slightly cropped original. Processed in ACR and CS6

Grant Atkinson

  • EOS M5
  • ****
  • Posts: 171
Re: Canon 400mm DO
« Reply #18 on: March 31, 2014, 03:42:26 PM »
With regard to Traingineers OP, and AlanF's mention of deep crops, this next image from the EF 400DO was taken with a 5Dmk3, Shutter speed 1/3200sec at f4, Iso 400, resized from a 22mp original and a 3mpixel crop. Sharpened in Adobe Camera Raw and resized to 1500x1000.
Overall, I found the EF 400DO to be very sharp with shorter shooting distances, and still decent with far-off subjects.  With its light weight, and rapid focus performance, it is an fun lens to shoot with, and quite responsive.  I found it very comfortable to use for tracking moving subjects.  Although it delivers images not quite as sharp as the EF 300 f2.8 IS  or the EF 500f4L IS it is still good enough for my purposes.  The new price is a bit steep though, although a well-priced, good condition used lens would be a viable option.
I have also written up a review on the lens, here:  http://www.grantatkinson.com/blog/canon-ef-400-f4-do-is-usm-field-review

I also saw an earlier responders thoughts on a new version of this lens, that would definitely be something to consider if Canon ever made one
cheers
Grant

cheers
Grant

CarlTN

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • ********
  • Posts: 2170
Re: Canon 400mm DO
« Reply #19 on: March 31, 2014, 05:50:58 PM »
Canon's own MTF charts show the 300mm f/2.8 II + 1.4xTC III (bottom) to be significantly better than the 400 DO (Top).
ps
Just checked Bryan's TDP comparison: the 300 at 420mm is distinctly sharper

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=338&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=0&LensComp=739&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=1&APIComp=0

Well, I did too, and it's not "distinctly sharper" except in the extreme full frame corners.  I would say "somewhat noticeable" on the full frame borders, and "not much different in the center".

CarlTN

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • ********
  • Posts: 2170
Re: Canon 400mm DO
« Reply #20 on: March 31, 2014, 05:52:02 PM »
The Tamron 150-600mm is the same weight as the 400 DO, costs less than 1/5th of the price, has much better IS, and you will have a shock when you compare them at 400mm:

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=338&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=0&LensComp=929&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=3&APIComp=0

Except that the Tamron is only f/5.6 at 400mm, much slower than f/4.

CarlTN

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • ********
  • Posts: 2170
Re: Canon 400mm DO
« Reply #21 on: March 31, 2014, 05:55:45 PM »
With regard to Traingineers OP, and AlanF's mention of deep crops, this next image from the EF 400DO was taken with a 5Dmk3, Shutter speed 1/3200sec at f4, Iso 400, resized from a 22mp original and a 3mpixel crop. Sharpened in Adobe Camera Raw and resized to 1500x1000.
Overall, I found the EF 400DO to be very sharp with shorter shooting distances, and still decent with far-off subjects.  With its light weight, and rapid focus performance, it is an fun lens to shoot with, and quite responsive.  I found it very comfortable to use for tracking moving subjects.  Although it delivers images not quite as sharp as the EF 300 f2.8 IS  or the EF 500f4L IS it is still good enough for my purposes.  The new price is a bit steep though, although a well-priced, good condition used lens would be a viable option.
I have also written up a review on the lens, here:  http://www.grantatkinson.com/blog/canon-ef-400-f4-do-is-usm-field-review

I also saw an earlier responders thoughts on a new version of this lens, that would definitely be something to consider if Canon ever made one
cheers
Grant

cheers
Grant

So the original pixel dimensions of this crop are what?  You're saying this crop was originally 3 megapixels? 

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Canon 400mm DO
« Reply #21 on: March 31, 2014, 05:55:45 PM »

Grant Atkinson

  • EOS M5
  • ****
  • Posts: 171
Re: Canon 400mm DO
« Reply #22 on: April 01, 2014, 02:22:44 AM »
Hi Carl
To answer your question, I have attached a downsized version of the 22mp original frame of the bee-eater image.  I posted the deep crop to show the IQ that I got from the EF 400 DO, as it can be better examined in that way, as per AlanF suggestion.
It is not quite as crisp at those distances/crops as an EF 300f2.8, 4002.8 or 500 f4 but still pretty decent.
If Traingineer wishes to see more real-world samples from the EF 400DO I can share others, some in extreme low light, and also some birds in flight...
Hope that helps
cheers
Grant

CarlTN

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • ********
  • Posts: 2170
Re: Canon 400mm DO
« Reply #23 on: April 01, 2014, 02:41:54 AM »
Hi Carl
To answer your question, I have attached a downsized version of the 22mp original frame of the bee-eater image.  I posted the deep crop to show the IQ that I got from the EF 400 DO, as it can be better examined in that way, as per AlanF suggestion.
It is not quite as crisp at those distances/crops as an EF 300f2.8, 4002.8 or 500 f4 but still pretty decent.
If Traingineer wishes to see more real-world samples from the EF 400DO I can share others, some in extreme low light, and also some birds in flight...
Hope that helps
cheers
Grant

Thanks Grant.  The amount of crop looks like less than I first thought.  It's quite nice results, I agree...and I'd definitely like to see more samples.  I know I'm not the original poster, so if I could see them some other way, let me know.  I posted in the "bird in flight" thread from my 70-300, at 300, even more cropped than that (and only starting at 20MP)...at ISO 1600, and it didn't look too bad (and I'm pretty sure I was shooting through a window too).  Nobody seems to have liked or noticed it though!  (the squirrel eating seeds in a bird bath, while a cardinal flies below him!).

Grant Atkinson

  • EOS M5
  • ****
  • Posts: 171
Re: Canon 400mm DO
« Reply #24 on: April 01, 2014, 04:12:23 AM »
Here's another real-world image taken with the EF 400 DO IS, and 1Dmk4, handheld, S/speed 1/5000sec at f4, Iso 500, and a downsized image for web with ACR and CS 6.  Cropped to 2 mpixels from a 16mp original.
And I checked out your cardinal at very high iso Carl, in the BIF thread, amazing results that the sensors can produce at such high sensitivities.  Think the highest I have shot at in the field is iso 10 000
Cheers
Grant

AlanF

  • Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *********
  • Posts: 3509
Re: Canon 400mm DO
« Reply #25 on: April 01, 2014, 06:04:29 AM »
Canon's own MTF charts show the 300mm f/2.8 II + 1.4xTC III (bottom) to be significantly better than the 400 DO (Top).
ps
Just checked Bryan's TDP comparison: the 300 at 420mm is distinctly sharper

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=338&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=0&LensComp=739&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=1&APIComp=0

Well, I did too, and it's not "distinctly sharper" except in the extreme full frame corners.  I would say "somewhat noticeable" on the full frame borders, and "not much different in the center".

What about Canon's own MTFs? Have they got it wrong showing the distinct superiority of the 300 @ 420mm?
5D IV, 5DS R, 400mm DO II, 1.4xTC III, 2xTC III, EF 1.8 STM,  EF 24-105, 100-400 II, EF-S 15-85, Sigma 150-600mm C, EOS-M5 15-45, f/2 22, 11-22, Samyang 8mm f/2.8 fisheye: sold 7D II, EOS-M, Powershot G3 X,  Sigma 10-20, EF 300/2.8 II, 70-200/4 IS.

CarlTN

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • ********
  • Posts: 2170
Re: Canon 400mm DO
« Reply #26 on: April 01, 2014, 06:06:09 AM »
Here's another real-world image taken with the EF 400 DO IS, and 1Dmk4, handheld, S/speed 1/5000sec at f4, Iso 500, and a downsized image for web with ACR and CS 6.  Cropped to 2 mpixels from a 16mp original.
And I checked out your cardinal at very high iso Carl, in the BIF thread, amazing results that the sensors can produce at such high sensitivities.  Think the highest I have shot at in the field is iso 10 000
Cheers
Grant

Nice work on this one too!  I liked the 1D4 a lot when I rented it, it had amazing speed.  I much prefer the noise performance of the 6D, though.  Yes, I didn't venture too far out in the field for those shots, I was inside my house.  It was pretty dark for the cardinal in flight about to land on the sill.  I would prefer to shoot wide open with such a fast aperture lens, but it's very hit or miss, getting the bird in the plane of focus while it's flying toward me at almost mach...lands...eats its seed...is gone again, sometimes all this in the span of about 1/3 of a second.  So I wind up closing down more and more to try to get a bird that is not "bird bokeh"...!!

CarlTN

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • ********
  • Posts: 2170
Re: Canon 400mm DO
« Reply #27 on: April 01, 2014, 06:20:11 AM »
Canon's own MTF charts show the 300mm f/2.8 II + 1.4xTC III (bottom) to be significantly better than the 400 DO (Top).
ps
Just checked Bryan's TDP comparison: the 300 at 420mm is distinctly sharper

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=338&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=0&LensComp=739&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=1&APIComp=0

Well, I did too, and it's not "distinctly sharper" except in the extreme full frame corners.  I would say "somewhat noticeable" on the full frame borders, and "not much different in the center".

What about Canon's own MTFs? Have they got it wrong showing the distinct superiority of the 300 @ 420mm?

Yes, yes they got it wrong, because they just did, ok?  They can't draw their own charts...Let's not get silly Alan.  Look...I believe I originally said the 300 + 1.4iii combo was "not that far ahead" of the bare 400 DO, or something to that effect.  Their MTF chart shows the 135L as even softer than the 400 DO, but the one I own, is not soft at all.  Why would that be? 

In any case, if you must defend the 300 ii as if it is your child and I'm attacking it or something, go ahead.  But just know that's what you're doing.  Frankly if your 300 were your girlfriend it would have already whooped your ass for cheating on it with the Tamron!!  How do you like them apples?

It doesn't change what shows on Bryan's test...in the center of the image, anyway.  Like I said, by the borders, and especially corners, yes the 400 DO is quite bad, wide open (and even closed down a tad).  But it's a DO, designed perhaps 20 years ago.  It's not a terrible lens given this, especially if it can be bought for $1000 or more, less than the new 300 f/2.8 ii (either new, used, or refurb...but I'll admit not many are out there).  And the 400 is a pound lighter.  The 300 is the more versatile lens overall, and performs better overall...but you pay for that.  It doesn't mean the 400 DO is not worth owning and using, if someone wants lighter weight and doesn't mind the slower AF and lower performing IS...yet still wants f/4 at 400mm.

Canon build both lenses at the present time, and they have not stopped production of the 400, that I'm aware of.  Are you calling them fools for doing so?  I think you are...and they (yes the whole company) want you to step outside and discuss it in the street!

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Canon 400mm DO
« Reply #27 on: April 01, 2014, 06:20:11 AM »

AlanF

  • Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *********
  • Posts: 3509
Re: Canon 400mm DO
« Reply #28 on: April 01, 2014, 09:54:05 AM »
You wrote:
"For all the pomp about the 300 f/2.8 ii, once you slap on that 1.4x iii converter, it's not a vast improvement in sharpness, if any, over the bare 400 f/4 DO...from looking at Bryan's test comparison at the-digital-picture.com."

All I have said was what you wrote does not match up with Canon's own measurements and a simple examination of Bryan's site. I am not defending anything or have any of the motives that you somehow have attributed to me. Could we please restrict this to rational discussion.
5D IV, 5DS R, 400mm DO II, 1.4xTC III, 2xTC III, EF 1.8 STM,  EF 24-105, 100-400 II, EF-S 15-85, Sigma 150-600mm C, EOS-M5 15-45, f/2 22, 11-22, Samyang 8mm f/2.8 fisheye: sold 7D II, EOS-M, Powershot G3 X,  Sigma 10-20, EF 300/2.8 II, 70-200/4 IS.

johnf3f

  • EOS 5DS R
  • ******
  • Posts: 861
  • Canon 1Dx
Re: Canon 400mm DO
« Reply #29 on: April 01, 2014, 08:23:29 PM »
You wrote:
"For all the pomp about the 300 f/2.8 ii, once you slap on that 1.4x iii converter, it's not a vast improvement in sharpness, if any, over the bare 400 f/4 DO...from looking at Bryan's test comparison at the-digital-picture.com."

All I have said was what you wrote does not match up with Canon's own measurements and a simple examination of Bryan's site. I am not defending anything or have any of the motives that you somehow have attributed to me. Could we please restrict this to rational discussion.

Have you tried out a 400 DO?
 What do MTF charts mean in the real world? I don't know, but what I do know is that I tested 2 second hand Canon 400 DO lenses against my Canon 600 F4 L IS at the same range and both out resolved the 600. I recently tried another 400 DO against my, current, Canon 800 F5.6 L IS and it was out of it's depth. However at half the focal length is was FAR from shabby!
I fully accept that images from the 400 DO need more processing and that they don't work well with 2 x extenders - but, as a bare lens, their resolution is top notch.
Do not let me put you off decrying this lens - PLEASE carry on! If more people keep doing this then prices will fall and then I can afford one!
P.S. I do have a Canon 300 F2.8 L IS and with the 1.4 extender I find it does not quite equal the 400 DO as a bare lens.
Canon 1DX, 7D2, 16-35 F4 L IS, 24-70 F2.8 V2, 100 F2.8 Macro, 100-400 L IS Mk2, 300 F2.8 L IS, 800 F5.6 L IS, Holga Pinhole lens.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Canon 400mm DO
« Reply #29 on: April 01, 2014, 08:23:29 PM »