value of a good and clean ef 400mm f/2.8 NON-IS mkII

Hi, everyone!

I just bid on a used 400mm/2.8 NON-IS lens (MKII), I wonder what the value it is? Does anyone have this lens?
There are paint chips cosmetic but the glass appears to be good. It does come with the hard case and hood with a crack, I am going to fix it. I am well aware of the lens is non-serviced.
Can anyone give me a ballpark number so I can bid accordingly? Any input is welcomed.

Thanks in advance!
 

Attachments

  • s-l1600.jpg
    s-l1600.jpg
    145.1 KB · Views: 116
Thank you! Nancy.
It is 13lb as I remeber, and I can not find one on KEH, MPB, LensAithority etc so your info is very valuable.

DZY

NancyP said:
Your best guide is to watch results of a given lens type on FleaBay. Absent that, look at KEH or Roberts Camera or any other large used gear outlet.
I think I saw one of these at my local dealer for somewhere around 3K to 5K USD. It weighed about 15 pounds. Here's the specs.
https://global.canon/en/c-museum/product/ef301.html
 
Upvote 0

unfocused

Photos/Photo Book Reviews: www.thecuriouseye.com
Jul 20, 2010
7,184
5,483
70
Springfield, IL
www.thecuriouseye.com
AlanF said:
One sold on eBay UK for £900 recently. Search under “completed listings”.

Yes, go to eBay and search for the lens. After you find one, go to the sidebar and change the filters to "show only sold items." Looks like around $2,200 U.S. is typical, but they also look a lot better than the one you are asking about.
 
Upvote 0
unfocused said:
AlanF said:
One sold on eBay UK for £900 recently. Search under “completed listings”.

Yes, go to eBay and search for the lens. After you find one, go to the sidebar and change the filters to "show only sold items." Looks like around $2,200 U.S. is typical, but they also look a lot better than the one you are asking about.

Thanks all for the info. now I am much clear where to go :)
 
Upvote 0
johnf3f said:
If it's any help I used to have the Mk1 version - very nice lens despite the age. Happy bidding!

Thanks! I look specifically for the 400/2.8 non-is mk2 because I read online that this lens has much less CA and the IQ is much better than mk1. I think for this focal length and weight, IS is not that important but is welcomed. So for the $/value point, I want this lens. Any 400L is superior.
Another question, do I need the 300/2.8 IS mk1 if I have the 200/2? I think I don't, but the beauty of the 300/2.8 is too alluring. ;)
 
Upvote 0
D

Deleted member 91053

Guest
DZY said:
johnf3f said:
If it's any help I used to have the Mk1 version - very nice lens despite the age. Happy bidding!

Thanks! I look specifically for the 400/2.8 non-is mk2 because I read online that this lens has much less CA and the IQ is much better than mk1. I think for this focal length and weight, IS is not that important but is welcomed. So for the $/value point, I want this lens. Any 400L is superior.
Another question, do I need the 300/2.8 IS mk1 if I have the 200/2? I think I don't, but the beauty of the 300/2.8 is too alluring. ;)

Well the IQ was pretty good on my Mk1, it even stood a 2 x extender reasonably well. Naturally the newer versions are better - but costlier!

Do you already have the 300 F2.8 L IS Mk1? If so then I would prefer that lens to the 400 Non is. It works extremely well with the Mk3 2 x extender and a Mk2/31.4 extender + it is MUCH lighter too. Of course if you specifically need a 400 F2.8 then the 300 is a compromise.

As to IS there are differing opinions on this facility/feature. Personally I dislike IS and do not want it on my lenses - unfortunately they come with it and Canon refuse to remove it, so I have to be content with just turning it off. However I still have the weight and price penalty. These days the Canon 800 F5.6 L IS is my long lens and the only use I have found for IS is when using it as a spotting scope (Live view) I never use it for photography as it just mucks up the AF too much.
 
Upvote 0