September 21, 2014, 12:18:00 AM

Author Topic: Review: Canon EF 200-400 f/4L IS 1.4x  (Read 1192 times)

Canon Rumors

  • Administrator
  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *****
  • Posts: 2648
    • View Profile
    • Canon Rumors
Review: Canon EF 200-400 f/4L IS 1.4x
« on: March 25, 2014, 08:03:34 AM »
Dan Carr has created quite an extensive ebook review of the Canon EF 200-400 f/4L IS 1.4x lens. The ebook is free to download and looks great on your Microsoft, Android or Apple tablet.

Please read the instructions below.

Get It For Free, Or Make A Donation If you want to get it for free, just enter a 0 in the pricing section and the credit card form will disappear. We’ll just need your e-mail to send you the download links and any future Shutter Muse updates but we will never share it with anyone else. We hate spam just as much as you do. There’s also the option to make a small donation through Gumroad’s 100% secure system if you want to. $3 to $5 is the suggested amount and all donations go right back into the website to help me bring you more great content like this.

200-400-spread-small800

What You’ll Get:

  • PDF eBook version of the review – Includes images not in the online review
  • Downloadable version of the video review
  • 4 X Full resolution sample images (200mm, 400mm, 560mm, 784mm)

Download the ebook Review | Canon EF 200-400 f/4L IS 1.4x

cr

« Last Edit: March 25, 2014, 08:17:27 AM by Canon Rumors »
canonrumors.com

canon rumors FORUM

Review: Canon EF 200-400 f/4L IS 1.4x
« on: March 25, 2014, 08:03:34 AM »

alexturton

  • EOS M2
  • ****
  • Posts: 204
  • I shoot what i find interesting; nothing else
    • View Profile
    • My flickr
Re: Review: Canon EF 200-400 f/4L IS 1.4x
« Reply #1 on: March 25, 2014, 02:21:59 PM »
Can't find the download link. Hate the ebook idea.
Bodies: 5d mk iii, 60d
Primes: 24L 1.4, Sigma 35 1.4, 40 pancake, 50L 1.2, 85L 1.2 ii, 8mm fisheye, lensbaby, 100L macro.
Zooms: 16-35 2.8 ii, 24-70 2.8 ii, 70-200 2.8 is ii, 120-400

mackguyver

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 2976
  • Who Dares Wins
    • View Profile
    • My Personal Work
Re: Review: Canon EF 200-400 f/4L IS 1.4x
« Reply #2 on: March 25, 2014, 03:29:57 PM »
Can't find the download link. Hate the ebook idea.
Here's the review in plain old HTML - it doesn't have the extras, but has more than enough for most:
Dan Carr's 200-400 1.4x Review
EOS 1D X, 5DIII, M + EF 24 f/1.4II, 50 f/1.2, 85 f/1.2II, 300 f/2.8 IS II || 16-35 f/4 IS, 24-70 f/2.8II, 70-200 f/2.8II || TS-E 17 f/4, 24 f/3.5II || M 22 f/2, M 11-22 f/4-5.6 IS | 18-55 f/3.5-5.6 IS || 1.4x III, 2x III
I only shoot at ISO 100 with perfect technique - should I get a Nikon?

CarlTN

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 2227
    • View Profile
Re: Review: Canon EF 200-400 f/4L IS 1.4x
« Reply #3 on: March 25, 2014, 05:45:40 PM »
The bear shots, although cute, are not really all that good of a test, in my opinion.  I can see why he couldn't tell which was with extender, and which without.  The depth of field is shallow in both cases, really only the eyes on a black-furred animal...there's just not enough subject matter to convey "sharpness".

The eagle shots are more telling.  The internal plus external combo of a 1.4x iii extender, looks quite decently sharp to me.  Certainly more than sharp enough if you get a good filling of subject size within the field of view, as he did here.  It's possible this combo at 784mm, is as sharp or sharper, than the Nikon 200-400, with no extenders at 400mm...lol.

I'm not really encouraged to read further into his review, but if anyone spots anything of interest after reading it all, I'll look.

mackguyver

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 2976
  • Who Dares Wins
    • View Profile
    • My Personal Work
Re: Review: Canon EF 200-400 f/4L IS 1.4x
« Reply #4 on: March 26, 2014, 02:02:49 PM »
The bear shots, although cute, are not really all that good of a test, in my opinion.  I can see why he couldn't tell which was with extender, and which without.  The depth of field is shallow in both cases, really only the eyes on a black-furred animal...there's just not enough subject matter to convey "sharpness".

The eagle shots are more telling.  The internal plus external combo of a 1.4x iii extender, looks quite decently sharp to me.  Certainly more than sharp enough if you get a good filling of subject size within the field of view, as he did here.  It's possible this combo at 784mm, is as sharp or sharper, than the Nikon 200-400, with no extenders at 400mm...lol.

I'm not really encouraged to read further into his review, but if anyone spots anything of interest after reading it all, I'll look.
I agree with you and find that there's an odd white balance on some of the bear shots, and all of the shots were taken in pretty lousy light.  Alas, it's a good review of the equipment from someone who isn't a wildlife photographer.  The crop at 784mm is quite impressive, but the size comparison at the end of the article helps me remember why I chose the little "big white" over the 200-400 1.4x.  Then again, I'm sure having the ability to zoom would be really nice, particularly at an air show.
EOS 1D X, 5DIII, M + EF 24 f/1.4II, 50 f/1.2, 85 f/1.2II, 300 f/2.8 IS II || 16-35 f/4 IS, 24-70 f/2.8II, 70-200 f/2.8II || TS-E 17 f/4, 24 f/3.5II || M 22 f/2, M 11-22 f/4-5.6 IS | 18-55 f/3.5-5.6 IS || 1.4x III, 2x III
I only shoot at ISO 100 with perfect technique - should I get a Nikon?

CarlTN

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 2227
    • View Profile
Re: Review: Canon EF 200-400 f/4L IS 1.4x
« Reply #5 on: March 27, 2014, 03:29:37 AM »
The bear shots, although cute, are not really all that good of a test, in my opinion.  I can see why he couldn't tell which was with extender, and which without.  The depth of field is shallow in both cases, really only the eyes on a black-furred animal...there's just not enough subject matter to convey "sharpness".

The eagle shots are more telling.  The internal plus external combo of a 1.4x iii extender, looks quite decently sharp to me.  Certainly more than sharp enough if you get a good filling of subject size within the field of view, as he did here.  It's possible this combo at 784mm, is as sharp or sharper, than the Nikon 200-400, with no extenders at 400mm...lol.

I'm not really encouraged to read further into his review, but if anyone spots anything of interest after reading it all, I'll look.
I agree with you and find that there's an odd white balance on some of the bear shots, and all of the shots were taken in pretty lousy light.  Alas, it's a good review of the equipment from someone who isn't a wildlife photographer.  The crop at 784mm is quite impressive, but the size comparison at the end of the article helps me remember why I chose the little "big white" over the 200-400 1.4x.  Then again, I'm sure having the ability to zoom would be really nice, particularly at an air show.

Agree.  I think this zoom would be really nice, no matter for what purpose.  The problem is, you really need to own both the 300 and the zoom...hahaha.  One, or the other...is going to leave you wishing you had the one that you don't.  Or maybe it's just me, wishing I had all this stuff!

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Review: Canon EF 200-400 f/4L IS 1.4x
« Reply #5 on: March 27, 2014, 03:29:37 AM »