September 30, 2016, 09:57:05 PM

Author Topic: Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II USM  (Read 45535 times)

Menace

  • 5DSR
  • *******
  • Posts: 1375
  • New Zealand
Re: Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II USM
« Reply #75 on: June 11, 2014, 08:27:52 PM »
Teeth!

1/1000, ISO 640, f2.8

Great shot Menace.

Thanks Click :)

Awesome shot Menace. That 200-400 might become handly.

Funny you say that as I was at my Canon dealer ONLY yesterday and he was tempting me with a 200-400 as well as a near new 800! Good deal too but I managed to refrain - just.
1Dx | 5D III
85 1.2L II | 100 2.8 | 400 2.8L IS II 
24-70 2.8L II | 70-200 2.8L IS II

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II USM
« Reply #75 on: June 11, 2014, 08:27:52 PM »

Dylan777

  • Canon EF 600mm f/4L IS II
  • **********
  • Posts: 5326
Re: Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II USM
« Reply #76 on: June 11, 2014, 09:12:13 PM »
Teeth!

1/1000, ISO 640, f2.8

Great shot Menace.

Thanks Click :)

Awesome shot Menace. That 200-400 might become handly.

Funny you say that as I was at my Canon dealer ONLY yesterday and he was tempting me with a 200-400 as well as a near new 800! Good deal too but I managed to refrain - just.

Be strong my friend... :)
ML: A7R II & A7s -- FE35f1.4 -- FE35f2.8 -- FE55 -- FE85GM -- FE2470GM -- FE70200GM
DSLR: 1Dx + 200L f2 IS  -- sadly replaced this combo with a7s + 70200GM

eml58

  • 1D X Mark II
  • *******
  • Posts: 1827
  • 1Dx
Re: Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II USM
« Reply #77 on: June 11, 2014, 09:33:25 PM »
Funny you say that as I was at my Canon dealer ONLY yesterday and he was tempting me with a 200-400 as well as a near new 800! Good deal too but I managed to refrain - just.

The 600f/4 II + 1.4X III will give you marginally better IQ @ 840 & f/5.6 when compared to the current V1 800f/5.6, and the 600 is a deal lighter & easier to pack as well.

That may be the reason Canon are dragging the chain on a VII 800f/5.6 when you see that Nikon have had their new VR 800f/5.6 (with 1.2x Converter included) on the Market for some time now.

But you did well to restrain yourself on the 200-400f/4, there are very few situations where I miss my 400f/2.8 II, but then I have the 300f/2.8 II as a filler for low light, without that ?? Maybe tears.
The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing

Eldar

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • ********
  • Posts: 2969
    • Flickr
Re: Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II USM
« Reply #78 on: June 11, 2014, 11:37:59 PM »

Funny you say that as I was at my Canon dealer ONLY yesterday and he was tempting me with a 200-400 as well as a near new 800! Good deal too but I managed to refrain - just.

Be strong my friend... :)
Wrong advice Dylan ... The right advice (for the 200-400) is cave in and GO FOR IT!!  :P

I sometimes miss my 400/2.8 II for low light (as Edward pointed out), but it is very rare. I have been close to buying the 300/2.8 II, but the low light performance of the 1DX, combined with the flexibility of the 200-400, has kept me off so far. Up here in the North we have good light from 2:30 to 23:30, so the situation is a bit different than if I had spent my time further south.

Of all the lenses I have bought over the years, the 200-400 may be top of my list. If you can live with the size and weight, you´ll love its performance.
Canonite and Zeissoholic ...

Menace

  • 5DSR
  • *******
  • Posts: 1375
  • New Zealand
Re: Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II USM
« Reply #79 on: June 11, 2014, 11:59:10 PM »
Funny you say that as I was at my Canon dealer ONLY yesterday and he was tempting me with a 200-400 as well as a near new 800! Good deal too but I managed to refrain - just.

The 600f/4 II + 1.4X III will give you marginally better IQ @ 840 & f/5.6 when compared to the current V1 800f/5.6, and the 600 is a deal lighter & easier to pack as well.

That may be the reason Canon are dragging the chain on a VII 800f/5.6 when you see that Nikon have had their new VR 800f/5.6 (with 1.2x Converter included) on the Market for some time now.

But you did well to restrain yourself on the 200-400f/4, there are very few situations where I miss my 400f/2.8 II, but then I have the 300f/2.8 II as a filler for low light, without that ?? Maybe tears.

Thank you guys.

This was my reasoning for refraining from both the 200-400 and the 800 5.6:

I shoot with two bodies: 400+1Dx and 70-200 2.8 on 5D3.  It's f2.8 all the through and suits my shooting style so 200-400 is redundant.

 800 5.6 is simply old and NOT a Version II big white.

I'm more interested in the roumored 7D II esp with my 400 2.8  ;D

1Dx | 5D III
85 1.2L II | 100 2.8 | 400 2.8L IS II 
24-70 2.8L II | 70-200 2.8L IS II

dolina

  • 1D X Mark II
  • *******
  • Posts: 1784
Re: Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II USM
« Reply #80 on: June 22, 2015, 05:51:53 PM »




Mangrove blue flycatcher (Cyornis rufigastra) by alabang, on Flickr

The mangrove blue flycatcher (Cyornis rufigastra) is a species of bird in the Muscicapidae family. It is found in Brunei, Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, Singapore, and Thailand. Its natural habitat is subtropical or tropical mangrove forests.

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mangrove_blue_flycatcher

Location: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/La_Mesa_Ecopark

EXIF: 1/30 f/4.0 560mm ISO 640

Best viewed at https://500px.com/photo/112821213/the-mangrove-blue-flycatcher-cyornis-rufigastra-by-paolo-dolina?from=user_library
Visit my Flickr, Facebook & 500px and see my photos. :)

Stewart K

  • Canon 7D MK II
  • *****
  • Posts: 465
  • Still learning!
Re: Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II USM
« Reply #81 on: November 04, 2015, 06:32:42 AM »
If you were about to splurge the money required for one of the big whites, and you shoot wildlife; but also some motorsports, would you consider the 400 f2.8 II (plus both versions of the mark III teleconvertors) a better option than the 600 f4 II?
I’m just curious to hear everyone’s thoughts on this as the financial outlay is pretty huge, and as a hobbyist I may only get one shot of spending this kind of money.
Will the 400’s performance be reduced to the point of frustration when using it with the 2x convertor compared to the 600 with the 1.4, or is using a convertor on any of these lenses frustrating?
I would like to be able to catch birds in flight and the like over great distance; as I consistently find that I’m at 400mm with my 100-400 and I’ve noticed that it’s a little erratic with the 1.4xTC on my 5D3 and even more so on my 70D.
I’m extremely grateful for any tips or advice from owners of either of these two great whites.
EOS 5DIII - EOS 70D - EF 100-400L - EF 24-105L - EF 16-35L ƒ2.8 II - EF 100 ƒ2.8 USM Macro - EF 50 ƒ1.4 USM - EF 1.4xIII - Sigma 10-20 ƒ4-5.6 - Speedlight 600EX-RT
Flickr - https://www.flickr.com/photos/126853167@N07/

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II USM
« Reply #81 on: November 04, 2015, 06:32:42 AM »

Dylan777

  • Canon EF 600mm f/4L IS II
  • **********
  • Posts: 5326
Re: Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II USM
« Reply #82 on: November 04, 2015, 09:15:13 AM »
If you were about to splurge the money required for one of the big whites, and you shoot wildlife; but also some motorsports, would you consider the 400 f2.8 II (plus both versions of the mark III teleconvertors) a better option than the 600 f4 II?
I’m just curious to hear everyone’s thoughts on this as the financial outlay is pretty huge, and as a hobbyist I may only get one shot of spending this kind of money.
Will the 400’s performance be reduced to the point of frustration when using it with the 2x convertor compared to the 600 with the 1.4, or is using a convertor on any of these lenses frustrating?
I would like to be able to catch birds in flight and the like over great distance; as I consistently find that I’m at 400mm with my 100-400 and I’ve noticed that it’s a little erratic with the 1.4xTC on my 5D3 and even more so on my 70D.
I’m extremely grateful for any tips or advice from owners of either of these two great whites.

I don't think we can go wrong with 400mm f2.8 IS II + latest 1.4x and x2 convertor. At the same time, the 600mm is also great. It works well with 1.4x, but not so much with x2 TC.

Here are some photos taken with 400mm f2.8 IS II + 2x TC III: https://dylannguyen.smugmug.com/Sports/Surfing/

« Last Edit: November 04, 2015, 09:25:22 AM by Dylan777 »
ML: A7R II & A7s -- FE35f1.4 -- FE35f2.8 -- FE55 -- FE85GM -- FE2470GM -- FE70200GM
DSLR: 1Dx + 200L f2 IS  -- sadly replaced this combo with a7s + 70200GM

Stewart K

  • Canon 7D MK II
  • *****
  • Posts: 465
  • Still learning!
Re: Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II USM
« Reply #83 on: November 05, 2015, 06:54:33 AM »
Thanks Dylan I appreciate your reply.

The 400 f2.8 seems to be a more versatile option as it can be used bare, or with the 1.4 and 2xTC’s
So all this from the same lens;
400 @ f2.8
560 @ f4.5
800 @ f5.6
Only thing is that I’m always looking for more telephoto properties to help fill the frame, and already have the 100-400, so straight away I’ll be using it with my 1.4xIII, then I’ll also need to buy the 2xIII; but on the same hand I will have a seriously powerful lens for my track activities………this ain’t gonna be an easy decision!!!
If anyone wants to share their findings/feelings with using the 400 f2.8 with a 2xTCIII then please feel free to jump in! I’m feeling the pressure of this decision :o
EOS 5DIII - EOS 70D - EF 100-400L - EF 24-105L - EF 16-35L ƒ2.8 II - EF 100 ƒ2.8 USM Macro - EF 50 ƒ1.4 USM - EF 1.4xIII - Sigma 10-20 ƒ4-5.6 - Speedlight 600EX-RT
Flickr - https://www.flickr.com/photos/126853167@N07/

tomscott

  • 1D Mark IV
  • ******
  • Posts: 932
  • Graphic Designer & Photographer
    • Tom Scott | Photography
Re: Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II USM
« Reply #84 on: November 05, 2015, 09:11:11 AM »
Thanks Dylan I appreciate your reply.

The 400 f2.8 seems to be a more versatile option as it can be used bare, or with the 1.4 and 2xTC’s
So all this from the same lens;
400 @ f2.8
560 @ f4.5
800 @ f5.6
Only thing is that I’m always looking for more telephoto properties to help fill the frame, and already have the 100-400, so straight away I’ll be using it with my 1.4xIII, then I’ll also need to buy the 2xIII; but on the same hand I will have a seriously powerful lens for my track activities………this ain’t gonna be an easy decision!!!
If anyone wants to share their findings/feelings with using the 400 f2.8 with a 2xTCIII then please feel free to jump in! I’m feeling the pressure of this decision :o

Im in the same boat really.

If your instantly looking at the lens to use it with a tele and its not long enough your looking at the wrong lens. Teleconverters are extremely useful but if you find 400mm on the 100-400 short it will be short with the 400F2.8, the 500 or 600 might be more useful for you, you can still put a 1.4 and get a F5.6 lens.

Both teles will work very well on the 400 with good technique with not a huge amount of slow down certainly more than manageable. Have you tried the 1.4 on the 100-400mm to see the extra reach? I use it on my 100-400mm when I need to and it still focuses quickly. Only downside is subject isolation but at 560mm DOF its still good but obviously noting like F4 would be.

For me the 400DO MKII looks more attractive because of weight and size makes it more useable in more situations imo. but the 200-400mm is even more versatile but again weight. 500 is great too but then I think will 100mm make the difference? Probably not.

I will use mine for motorsport and wildlife, so F4 will be fine for motorsport and ok for wildlife can never have enough DOF with wildlife but again usually poor light. The other combo I've been looking at is the 300mm F2.8 because of its size and cost then maybe adding something else later. But it will be used with teles all the time probably which puts me off.

For the time being the 100-400mm is proving the best bang for buck and its IQ is really very impressive 80% of the 200-400mm half the weight and size and again 1/3rd the price. 1.4 in a pinch, used on a 7DMKII because again its performance has really impressed me. 
« Last Edit: November 05, 2015, 09:17:19 AM by tomscott »
5D MKIII 7D MKII 40D 17-55mm F2.8 16-35mm F2.8 II L 24-70mm F2.8 L 24-105mm F4 L 100mm F2.8 L 70-200mm F2.8 II L 100-400mm F4.5-5.6 II L 2x II 1.4X III 580EX

hendrik-sg

  • Rebel T6i
  • ****
  • Posts: 112
Re: Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II USM
« Reply #85 on: November 05, 2015, 10:10:56 AM »
about the 100-400 (Version 2 i guess?): If 400 is to short, then maybe get a 7dii first, it will give you 640 aequiv with full AF capability.  This gives great results. Add the 1.4iii in between gives 900mm but not great AF and significantly reduced IQ. If light is critical (that you have to push up ISO on top), then in my opinion the bare lens is better with cropping in post.

i could try a 500 f4 ii in a shop with the 7dii and i tried both converters as well. the bare lens was amazing, and with the 1.4 i saw no significant reduction at 1120mm aequivalent. With the 2x (and 1600 äquiv) i am not absolutely sure, but it seemed it was similar like the 100-400 1.4x Combo.

i have no expierience with the 400 2.8 ii but i would expect it to take the 2x better than the 500ii



if you need so long focal lenght i would not recommend the Version i superteles, because the image stabilizer is so much better on the new ones. Before the 100-400ii i had a 300 2.8 is (vers 1) and with the zoom i got better results, just because the image stabilisation is so much better, but this depends on the shooting conditions
« Last Edit: November 05, 2015, 11:41:48 AM by hendrik-sg »

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II USM
« Reply #85 on: November 05, 2015, 10:10:56 AM »