400 2.8 -- Mk1 or 2

[CDD28]

I'm in the market to purchase a 400 2.8 and I'm looking for some opinions from people who have used both the Mk1 and Mk2 versions. I've used both but can't decide.

The weight isn't an issue for me. The only real draw to the Mk2 for me is IS mode 3 for sports. While I didn't like the results when using it during the day, I noticed it made a difference at night. For those shooting football with the Mk2, are you shooting with IS on or off?

I'm currently using a 300 2.8 IS Mk1 for field sports which I'll be selling to finance the 400.

Looking forward to hearing your thoughts!

 

[TexPhoto]

I have the 400 f2.8 IS L and have handled a II only briefly. If you can swing the II financially, I'd say get the II. Both are wonderful lenses. The review over at the Digital picture indicates Bryan Carnathan went from not using the IS for sports on Version I to only using Mode 3 IS 100% of the time on VII. http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-400mm-f-2.8-L-IS-II-USM-Lens-Review.aspx That seems like a pretty good endorsement. Is it worth $3-4K more (looking at used prices) It on depends how badly that money is needed for camera bodies, beer, and silly things like rent.

 

[Deleted member 91053]

Interested in your comments Tex, you quote : " The review over at the Digital picture indicates Bryan Carnathan went from not using the IS for sports on Version I to only using Mode 3 IS 100% of the time on".
A while back I had the original Canon EF 400 F2.8L and found no use for IS - good thing as it didn't have it! These days I mainly use the Canon 800 F5.6 L IS and the IS is just a hindrance in all but the most extreme circumstances. haven't used it for 21 Months and am getting more keepers as a result.
What I am getting at is that at the shutter speeds needed for sports (or in my case wildlife) IS, in any form, simply gets in the way. IS cannot help but slow down AF and impair tracking and, more importantly, contributes nothing at the shutter speeds necessary to freeze action at longer focal lengths. The newer IS systems with Mode 3 are better in theory as they allow the camera to achieve focus and only slow the whole business down AFTER focus has been achieved as opposed to doing this before focus is achieved - either way who want's it? Certainly not me.
As to lens recommendations - both are excellent but the 400 F2.8 Mk2 is even more excellent. The OP was not worried about weight - trust me the lighter weigh of the Mk2 IS a significant advantage! Panning and subject acquisition are significantly better with the lighter Mk2. As a bare lens there is not much difference in the IQ or AF but the MK 2 has the edge - only slightly - but that slight improvement can make all the difference! If you intend to use extenders then the Mk2 is simply the better option.
If the budget will allow the Canon 400 F2.8 L IS Mk2 is as good as it gets - period. The Mk 1 IS is wonderful but not quite as wonderful!
With either lens the photographer is the deciding factor. Happy choosing!