Canon 400mm f5.6 L lens - upgrade needed.

[FarQinell]

This small lightweight lens desperately needs an IS upgrade.
Stop down say 2/3 stop it yields very sharp results - on a tripod.
It is marginally sharper than the the 100-400mm L at 400 (I've checked both sided by side) and I have read user reports that it is optically a better performer than the expensive 400mm f4 DO.
With the 200-400mm f4 available this year and a possible upgrade to the 100-400 coming up will Canon even bother?
It even has a sliding hood - so much convenient than the clip-ons you get these days. But without IS it is obsolete!
I am sure that an IS version would be a big seller for Canon - but maybe Canon have decided the profits are with the 8,000+USD big prime and zoom lenses rather than with this little one!

 

[neuroanatomist]

I'd certainly consider purchasing a 400mm f/5.6L IS. If Canon makes one, it will likely run between $2-2.5K, a bit less than a new 100-400mm which will likely be close to $3K. But I'd probably pick a new 100-400mm over the 400mm prime, mainly for the physically shorter length (when the zoom is retracted).

 

[jm345]

I have wanted an EF 400mm f/5.6 IS for years. But now I would rather have an upgraded 100-400 IS with better IQ. And a 500mm f/5.6 IS if it could be half the price of the 500f/4 or the new 200-400.

 

[Panurus]

I have wanted an EF 400mm f/5.6 IS for years. But now I would rather have an upgraded 100-400 IS with better IQ. And a 500mm f/5.6 IS if it could be half the price of the 500f/4 or the new 200-400.

I think near the same.

I dream about a new 400mm for years but:
The EF 400mm f/5.6 L is a very good choice for the price. For action shoot, the IS is not very important.
If canon upgrade it, all the new birders will have to pay twice more for a very little improvement. :'(
Actually, the user of the EF 400mm f/5.6 can work on monopode or tripode with good result for cheap.

The quality of a new 100-400 IS will be near the 400f/5.6. So the IS and sharpness will be for 3k$.
But not the bokeh.

A 500mm f/5.6 IS would be a new exclusivity for CANON's users.
Can Canon construct it for 4k$? Maybe 5k$.

 

[neuroanatomist]

The quality of a new 100-400 IS will be near the 400f/5.6. So the IS and sharpness will be for 3k$.
But not the bokeh.

Near? Maybe better. The 400/5.6 is an old lens design, older than the 200mm f/2.8L II. The new 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II zoom lens at 200mm beats out the older prime for IQ across the frame. The 70-200 II also has less longitudinal CA, making the bokeh slightly better than the older prime. So...it would not surprise me at all if a new 100-400mm zoom equals or surpasses the old 400/5.6 for IQ.

 

[Hillsilly]

The 400mm is well placed price-wise. I'd be sad to see Canon make changes that might significantly increase the price. If the rumoured $3,000 price of the new 100-400mm is true, there won't be many affordable options in the 400mm focal length range. This would be a bit disappointing for a company that enjoys a lot of support from amateur sports and wildlife photographers.

 

[Michael7]

This is the biggest needed upgrade in Canon's lineup, IMHO. I'd buy one in a second. I've been runnig a 300 F4 L IS for years, and prior to that the 400 5.6 and 100-400. I find the 300 F4 superior to the 100-400 with TC attached, but not as good as the 400 5.6 bare.

I'd probably keep my 300 and add the 400 5.6 IS. I'm not interested in a 100-400. I keep a 24-105 ony my belt if animals get close, which isn't too often.

 

[Mt Spokane Photography]

The 400mm f/5.6 is a very sharp lens, it is pretty much equal to the 100-400m L, maybe a bit sharper. However, without IS, you need to keep a high shutter speed.

I sold mine due to its short MFD and its overall length, which made it difficult to fit in my camera bag. For a low cost BIF lens, its excellent.

 

[wickidwombat]

I still think the 300 f4L IS is very under-rated and stick a good TC on it you get 420mm f 5.6 with IS
its old i know but you can pick them up cheap (i got mine for $800 off ebay)
I also love built in lens hoods i wish more newer lenses had them (the 600 Fd has the built in lens hood setup too).
on the 5Dmk2 the balance of this lens (300f4L IS) with the tripod foot removed is awesome its a really nice comfortable to hold setup

 

[weixing]

Hi,
I'm a Canon EF 400mm F5.6L user. Although the design is old, but it still perform very well and IMHO, if the price is going to increase for an upgrade, I would prefer Canon leave it as it is.

Super telephoto lenses are expensive and not everybody can afford $2K++ (I'm one of them) for a lenses. So for those who are interested in wildlife or bird photography, but had limited $$, IMHO, this is basically the most suitable lenses out there in the market... fast AF, sharp, light weight and very cheap (compare to other super telephoto lenses).

Anyway, if you look at the pricing of super telephoto lenses, there is a big jump in pricing after EF 400mm F5.6L... may be Canon can put a new super telephoto lenses (eg. a non-DO 400mm F4L IS) at that price level for those who can afford a bit more especially if EF 300mm F2.8L IS is going to be discontinoued.

Have a nice day.

 

[Steve Campbell]

I'll go one further. I agree, the 400 f5.6 could use an upgrade with the latest generation IS. I would also like this upgraded IS on the 300 f4 IS, which has an older system. I love my 300 f4 IS, but why not a refresh? I agree, the retractable hoods are awesome.

 

[AmbientLight]

Given that Canon is updating those small, relatively obscure non-L wide angle lenses like the 28mm f2.8 with IS there may be a real chance that the two older 300mm and 400mm telephoto primes will also receive an update. This may be an excellent addition to Canon's lineup as lightweight telephoto primes are a very nice thing to have, especially considering that upcoming cameras can be expected to provide improved ISO performance, so the aperture maximum will be less of an issue.

 

[TheGoondocks]

The 400mm f/5.6 is razor sharp even at 5.6. It is definitely sharper than the 100-400mm and the 300mm+1.4xTC. I don't think they will upgrade it because it is geared at being a cheap birding lens. Its light weight for tracking subjects, it doesn't have IS to slow down the AF speed, and you need 1/1000th for BIF anyway. So even with IS, its only going to work on fairly still objects, which isn't what this lens is really made for. The new 100-400mm IS is supposedly going to be as sharp as the 400 f/5.6 in which case you will have an option of getting IS and a zoom at a cost. I hope they don't change this lens. Its great at what it does and its a great price for the IQ and reach that you get.

 

[Edwin Herdman]

it doesn't have IS to slow down the AF speed

IS doesn't slow down AF speed, at least not in new implementations.

 

[FarQinell]

........... I hope they don't change this lens......

Why on earth would you hope they don't change this lens?
If you have this excellent lens and are happy with it - fine.
But a lot of people would really like a lightweight 400 prime lens with IS to allow them to shoot fast moving objects at say 100 ISO. This is not possible with the current lens which is why the slightly inferior 100-400 L IS lens is so popular.
If Canon had your attitude there would be no IS lenses at all!

 

[wtlloyd]

This has gotta be the single most requested and (endlessly) discussed lens upgrade since digital forever.

Ya, we all want a $1200 400mm f/5.6 L IS lens. Ain't gonna happen.

How about a $4500 400mm f/5.6 L IS lens? That's more realistic.

Don't look for it until Canon announce the discontinuation of the 400 f/4.0 DO IS lens...

 

[FarQinell]

..........How about a $4500 400mm f/5.6 L IS lens? That's more realistic.

Don't look for it until Canon announce the discontinuation of the 400 f/4.0 DO IS lens...

You can get a new 300mm f4 IS for less than $1500 - so where you get $4500 from beats me - especially as the front lens diameter (one of the main factors in lens pricing) on the 400/5.6 is slightly smaller!!

Yes Canon should scrap the DO and replace it with a scaled up version of the 300/2.8 which by most accounts is one of the sharpest lenses they have ever made.

 

[wtlloyd]

The 400DO is an excellent lens, I wish I still had mine.

The 300 f/4 IS lens was introduced in 1997. The new (announced) 24/28mm f/2.8 IS lenses are around $800-$850.

There ain't gonna be no more sub-$2500 supertelephotos from Canon.

I think I'm in the ballpark, but today's news makes it seem the new 100-400 will be positioned to overlay the old 400 f/5.6

 

[ronderick]

Perhaps it is more accurate to say that even if Canon does introduce a new 400 f/5.6 IS in the market, we hope the company won't discontinue the more affordable 400mm f/5.6.

No doubt there's great anticipation for a newer version of this prime (slap on weather-sealing and IS, and there's probably going to be a good demand for it). However, the beginning bird shooter will probably want the older version for a variety of reason - size, weight, price tag, etc.

 

[CanonFanNum1]

Wow... this reminds me of things I used to say a couple years ago. I mean, who would buy a lens made in 1993!?

Well... I can tell you all, if you own'd a GOOD copy of this lens, then you would definitely agree with me that it is an epic lens - as is. *** and it's my favorite lens ***.

To be fair... my first copy wasn't razor sharp, but my 2nd copy was *perfect* at f/5.6. No need to stop it down.

I used it for sports and birding. When you pick up a 7D + 400 f/5.6 and it feels like a feather... when it fits in a small backpack... when you have to handhold it for hours or take it on a long walk... it is just an amazing lens.

IS would be lovely... but I really want to make this clear: unless you've played with a good copy of this lens for any amount of time (like a few days at least), don't tell me it needs an upgrade. It doesn't need one. But if Canon added IS, I'm sure it would be nice to have. They're not stupid, they could have added it a decade ago.

Honestly Canon hasn't needed to refresh this lens. IS is *bonus* feature when you are shooting outdoors and in daylight. For most action and birding usages, you want a really fast shutter speed anyways to stop the action. I have never seen any motion blur with this lens because I never let the time value drop below 1/250.

IS would certainly be nice-to-have when your subject is stationary and far away, helps with framing. But it's so light and I'm a big guy, so I can keep it really really steady for a long time and not get fatigued like using a 500 f/4 or bigger.

Keep in mind, it's f/5.6 to start with. It's not like it was designed for low-light or something. It's meant to be used in the daytime where you have good light. So why is IS a must?

And compared to the 100-400... at 400mm this lens is much sharper. I think my copy is a little sharper than Bryan's, but still, you can see at 400 the 100-400 is just poor. And for my needs (birding mostly) I'd use it out at 400mm all the time anyways.
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=278&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=0&LensComp=113&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=7&APIComp=0

Just look at how simple the lens design is... (page 52, bottom right). Simple is beautiful. This is one of the simplest lenses to design, and that translates to less artifacts that need compensation. http://software.canon-europe.com/files/documents/EF_Lens_Work_Book_3_EN.pdf

For those who don't open the PDF... here is what Canon thinks about this lens

"EF 400mm f/5.6L USM:
This is a high-performance 400mm super telephoto lens featuring an extremely light and compact design ideal for photographers requiring high mobility and portability. The optical system incorporates one element made of Super UD glass and one element made of standard UD glass, thus effectively correcting colour aberration and delivering extremely sharp, high-contrast imaging performance." - EF Lens Work III

Sharp, high-contrast, light? Awesome.

In conclusion... My 300 f2.8/L IS II now takes the role of my 400 f5.6/L. But I have to defend it's honor, it's amazing as it is.