300mm f/2.8L IS II vs. 400mm f/4 DO IS II ---> price difference

[arbitrage]

I have now done a lot of testing, comparing the 400mm DO, 300mm f/2.8 II, 100-400mm II, Sigma 150-600mm C at different distances to charts and different lighting on the 5DS R.

Under all conditions, the 400mm DO and +1.4xTC at 560mm is spectacular in terms of both resolution and accuracy. As mentioned, I am not happy with the 2xTC. It might be my 2xTC III, but in the past it was excellent on the 5DIII. Interestingly, the Sigma holds its own at longer distances and in bright light, but deteriorates at closer distances and lower light. The 100-400mm II is much better at 12m than 20m.

Here is a female blackbird this morning, about 12m from me. f/4 gives nice backgrounds and foregrounds. It's difficult to pick out the plumage of these birds, but the lens has done a good job at 1/320s.

Hi Alan, thanks for this. Now about 400 X2, you had said it's all over the place or some such phrase. That could mean different things so is it just that the AF is unreliable but the IQ is fine. Did you manually tweak and then shoot to compare lens IQ between the candidates?

Jack

Jack
What I meant that the FoCal plots were horrible. Very shallow and not very reproducible. I tweaked the focus by taking lots of shots of charts at different AFMA.

Arbitrage
I am very interested what you found for the lens at 800mm on the 5DS. Did FoCal behave similarly to mine? 800mm out resolved the bare lens at 400mm, but the best performance was with the 1.4xTC at 560mm. Please show more shots when convenient.
Alan

I only had time to run the 5DSR at 800mm so haven't seen what the plots look like at 400 and 560 yet. However, at 800 the plot was really flat and down in the red zone of resolution. My light source was poor and I ran them at ISO 800 so I really need to do it again with proper light. However, moments earlier I ran all 3 focal lengths on the 1DX2 in those same conditions and it had normal looking plots up in the green zone of resolution for all the combos.

My shots from the field with 5DSR at 800mm when in focus looked very good but I was using only 1/1000 and handholding so a lot of images aren't in good focus. Not sure if that was AF issues from f/8 or motion blur from the SS and handholding. I will be testing lots more this weekend and report back.

 

[arbitrage]

BTW would you mind posting an uncropped for reference.

Jack

Here are 4 of those shots uncropped....

 

[arbitrage]

Here is another 5DSR shot at 800mm, ISO 1600...

 

[arthurbikemad]

They have fabric on the inside too (unless yours are very old?), which they advertise as being there to stop neoprene particles forming by rubbing and getting inside the lens.

No they are new, this is the new style as far as I know, soft nonslip rubber inside..

https://www.dropbox.com/s/83gz3j6d5xqr7oj/IMAG3766.jpg?dl=0

 

[Jack Douglas]

Not sure about this being acceptable but it represents what I got, manual focus, 6D, 800mm, 1/800 sec, ISO 1250. Uncropped

 

[AlanF]

They have fabric on the inside too (unless yours are very old?), which they advertise as being there to stop neoprene particles forming by rubbing and getting inside the lens.

No they are new, this is the new style as far as I know, soft nonslip rubber inside..

https://www.dropbox.com/s/83gz3j6d5xqr7oj/IMAG3766.jpg?dl=0

You are of course right about your ones. They advertise their "Premium quality" as having rubber backed material and their standard as a neoprene between two layers of fabric. Their standard is excellent and much cheaper than lenscoat. Are yours "premium"?

 

[arbitrage]

A few from today....so far I'm very happy with the IQ at 800mm and the AF on the 1DX2. I still need to give the 5DSR a proper run but it was too dark today for that camera. I was shooting the 1DX2 at 4000-6400ISO just to get 1/500 SS for the warblers and juncos.

 

[Jack Douglas]

Hey geoff,

Those are very nice so I'd agree 800 with 1DX II cuts it. Now will the 5D4? Now that I own the 400 it will factor into the purchase of the camera since I'll be using the 400 maybe 75% of the time - they have to work together! The bokeh in bright background shots is definitely different and generally not quite as smooth as the 300, but I'll live with it.

Where in the Yukon are you? I'd like to google and see what the roads and countryside are like since we're always looking for places to go within Canada.

I went out with 560 for a hour or so and it was so cloudy and hardly a bird around but for the first time ever (40 years) at my pond a Belted kingfisher appeared (before I had grabbed the camera). Of course he took off. I am really impressed with 560 AF, considerably better than 600 with the 6D so it must be lightening with the 1DX II.

I was chuckling - we sure diverted this thread from 400 vs. 300, well kind of.

Here's a 560 shot., cropped but not downsized, ISO 1250.

Jack

 

[AlanF]

I have now done dozens of comparisons of the 1.4x and 2xTCIII on the 400mm DO II with the 5DS R. The 1.4x uprezzed 1.4x in Photoshop gives a slightly better image than the 2xTC. I think it boils down to a combination of the hit the 2xTC makes on IQ combined with the shift from f/5.6 to f/8 going through the diffraction limited aperture of f/6.7. The diffraction hit doesn't happen on the lower pixel full frames and you see an improvement in resolution from 400mm - 560mm - 800mm.

The 400mm DO II is spectacularly sharp at 560mm on the 5DS R. Here are two shots of a kingfisher with a fish I took yesterday afternoon. The little bird was over 12m away. There is some Moire, which I don't usually get with my less sharp lenses. I am tempted to get a new FF with fewer pixels and an AA filter. But, 560mm on the 5DS is so good. Maybe I'll use it on the 7DII.

 

[privatebydesign]

I have now done dozens of comparisons of the 1.4x and 2xTCIII on the 400mm DO II with the 5DS R. The 1.4x uprezzed 1.4x in Photoshop gives a slightly better image than the 2xTC. I think it boils down to a combination of the hit the 2xTC makes on IQ combined with the shift from f/5.6 to f/8 going through the diffraction limited aperture of f/6.7. The diffraction hit doesn't happen on the lower pixel full frames and you see an improvement in resolution from 400mm - 560mm - 800mm.

The 400mm DO II is spectacularly sharp at 560mm on the 5DS R. Here are two shots of a kingfisher with a fish I took yesterday afternoon. The little bird was over 12m away. There is some Moire, which I don't usually get with my less sharp lenses. I am tempted to get a new FF with fewer pixels and an AA filter. But, 560mm on the 5DS is so good. Maybe I'll use it on the 7DII.

If you uprez and view at 100% your CoC and 'diffraction limited aperture' changes because your magnification changes. The differences can then only be down to the optics of the 1.4 vs the 2x TC's.

 

[AlanF]

I have now done dozens of comparisons of the 1.4x and 2xTCIII on the 400mm DO II with the 5DS R. The 1.4x uprezzed 1.4x in Photoshop gives a slightly better image than the 2xTC. I think it boils down to a combination of the hit the 2xTC makes on IQ combined with the shift from f/5.6 to f/8 going through the diffraction limited aperture of f/6.7. The diffraction hit doesn't happen on the lower pixel full frames and you see an improvement in resolution from 400mm - 560mm - 800mm.

The 400mm DO II is spectacularly sharp at 560mm on the 5DS R. Here are two shots of a kingfisher with a fish I took yesterday afternoon. The little bird was over 12m away. There is some Moire, which I don't usually get with my less sharp lenses. I am tempted to get a new FF with fewer pixels and an AA filter. But, 560mm on the 5DS is so good. Maybe I'll use it on the 7DII.

If you uprez and view at 100% your CoC and 'diffraction limited aperture' changes because your magnification changes. The differences can then only be down to the optics of the 1.4 vs the 2x TC's.

Please elaborate and explain more clearly as your comment is not clear to me. Thanks.

 

[candc]

I have now done dozens of comparisons of the 1.4x and 2xTCIII on the 400mm DO II with the 5DS R. The 1.4x uprezzed 1.4x in Photoshop gives a slightly better image than the 2xTC. I think it boils down to a combination of the hit the 2xTC makes on IQ combined with the shift from f/5.6 to f/8 going through the diffraction limited aperture of f/6.7. The diffraction hit doesn't happen on the lower pixel full frames and you see an improvement in resolution from 400mm - 560mm - 800mm.

The 400mm DO II is spectacularly sharp at 560mm on the 5DS R. Here are two shots of a kingfisher with a fish I took yesterday afternoon. The little bird was over 12m away. There is some Moire, which I don't usually get with my less sharp lenses. I am tempted to get a new FF with fewer pixels and an AA filter. But, 560mm on the 5DS is so good. Maybe I'll use it on the 7DII.

Nice ones of the kingfisher. Very good looking bird. The belted kingfishers we have here are not as colorful. I get a lot of moire when I use the lens with or without extenders on the a7rii but haven't seen it in the 7dii.

 

[arbitrage]

I got to do some more in the field work from my kayak today. I took the 5DSR along but only shot it a little as light was low most of the morning. What I did shoot at 800mm on the 5DSR looked good but I didn't do any comparisons with 560mm as Alan has done.

The first three are 5DSR at 800mm.
The next two loony loons are 1DX2 at 560mm
And the final three are 1DX2 at 400mm

 

[AlanF]

You Canadians have a really great lifestyle! I'm jealous.

 

[tron]

arbitrage great shots. I see that you have both 1DxII and 5DsR.
So this is great but doesn't it present a dilemma?

800 at f/8 (or even f/10 to stop down a little to improve IQ due to the ues of 2X) with 1DxII
or 560 at f/5.6 with 5DsR ?

Do the cameras differ more than 1 stop? (I believe so but I have none of them)

 

[Click]

I got to do some more in the field work from my kayak today. I took the 5DSR along but only shot it a little as light was low most of the morning. What I did shoot at 800mm on the 5DSR looked good but I didn't do any comparisons with 560mm as Alan has done.

The first three are 5DSR at 800mm.
The next two loony loons are 1DX2 at 560mm
And the final three are 1DX2 at 400mm

Very nice series. I especially like the picture with the Otters. They're so cute. Well done, arbitrage.

 

[AlanF]

Having 30 min to spare, I tried out the 400mm DO II on the 7DII, without AFMAing for curiosity. To my surprise, the lens with the 2xTC was sharper at 800mm on the 7DII than on the 5DS R with AFMA. It also held up well at 400 and 560mm. After my Moire experience, I am going to use the 7DII with the DO and use the 100-400mm II etc on the 5DS R, which have given very few Moire problems.

The 400mm DO II really outperforms all of my other lenses in IS and shutter shock. The IS appears better and the lens appears less sensitive to vibration.

 

[tron]

Having 30 min to spare, I tried out the 400mm DO II on the 7DII, without AFMAing for curiosity. To my surprise, the lens with the 2xTC was sharper at 800mm on the 7DII than on the 5DS R with AFMA. It also held up well at 400 and 560mm. After my Moire experience, I am going to use the 7DII with the DO and use the 100-400mm II etc on the 5DS R, which have given very few Moire problems.

The 400mm DO II really outperforms all of my other lenses in IS and shutter shock. The IS appears better and the lens appears less sensitive to vibration.

Sir, you are a wealth of information specializing in Focal Length limited situations.
Up to now I have tried 500II + 7D2, 500+1.4XIII (needs AFMA and tripod mostly for focusing precision) 400DOII + 7D2 (no AFMA needed) 400DOII + 1.4XIII + 7D2 once (had success handheld) but that's it. No 2XIII tests yet...

 

[privatebydesign]

I have now done dozens of comparisons of the 1.4x and 2xTCIII on the 400mm DO II with the 5DS R. The 1.4x uprezzed 1.4x in Photoshop gives a slightly better image than the 2xTC. I think it boils down to a combination of the hit the 2xTC makes on IQ combined with the shift from f/5.6 to f/8 going through the diffraction limited aperture of f/6.7. The diffraction hit doesn't happen on the lower pixel full frames and you see an improvement in resolution from 400mm - 560mm - 800mm.

The 400mm DO II is spectacularly sharp at 560mm on the 5DS R. Here are two shots of a kingfisher with a fish I took yesterday afternoon. The little bird was over 12m away. There is some Moire, which I don't usually get with my less sharp lenses. I am tempted to get a new FF with fewer pixels and an AA filter. But, 560mm on the 5DS is so good. Maybe I'll use it on the 7DII.

If you uprez and view at 100% your CoC and 'diffraction limited aperture' changes because your magnification changes. The differences can then only be down to the optics of the 1.4 vs the 2x TC's.

Please elaborate and explain more clearly as your comment is not clear to me. Thanks.

DLA is defined as when the Airy disc covers one pixel.

For the sake of easy maths lets say your sensor is 6,000 x 4,000 pixels and that resolves 24,000,000 airy discs, it is a simplification but I believe holds true.

Now if you use a 2xTC and the subject covers the whole sensor (again for easy maths) you get those 24,000,000 airy discs and they each cover one pixel, as they should. Now if you swap the 2xTC for the 1.4TC your subject only covers 3,600 x 2,800 pixels giving you 10,080,000 pixels and 10,080,000 airy discs.

If you upres those 10,080,000 airy discs/pixels to the same pixel numbers as the shot from the 2xTC they each occupy an area equivalent to 24,000,000/10,080,000 or 2.4 pixels.

Effectively the airy disc is over twice the area from the upresed 1.4TC shot compared to the 2xTC shot. Now the airy disc was the same size at capture, one pixel, but you are now looking at that one pixel upresed so the corresponding airy disc is upsized. The fact that an airy disc now covers more than one pixel destroys the DLA assumption.

Same concept with the CoC and because of that the DOF all change. DOF should be around one stop difference, so you'd need to shoot at f5.6 with the 1.4TC to get the same DOF as the 2xTC at f8 when viewing output at the same subject size.

 

[Jack Douglas]

You Canadians have a really great lifestyle! I'm jealous.

I'm Canadian and I'm jealous too.

Jack