Please give me an advice for an prime lens 300/400mm

[daniela]

Hi Guys!

As my children have grown up now, I can invest more time in my hobby. So I am looking for an mide-sized "L" prime lens to shoot animals.
I saw the 300mm II 2.8 L an the 400mm 4 DO II. For the 300mm I would suggest buying an 2x III extender, for the 400mm an 1.4 III extender.

Which combination would you prefer - if you look at the lens image quality?

The cameras I would use with the lens would be the 6D and the 7D MK 1.

Does anybody own the new 400mm DO IS II and can tell me, if this lens is as sharp as the 300mm?


Greeting from the white Tyrol
Daniela

 

[Jim Saunders]

Try a 300 f/4 and see if the extra stop is worth the weight and size; I had one and miss it. The 2.8s aren't monsters but the f/4 is light enough to hand-hold.

Now to wander back to the question you actually asked, I don't know how the two lenses you mention compare without extenders but the 400 would do well to match the 300 f/2.8 (IS II) never mind improve upon it.

Jim

 

[jebrady03]

If you're interested in a 300 f/4 L IS USM at a great price, get in touch with me!

 

[NancyP]

What size animals or birds?

 

[AlanF]

The 7D1 doesn't AF well with the 300mm f/2.8 II + 2xTC and I would not recommend the combination. It does work well with the 6D. There are insufficient reviews of the 400mm DO II. I love the 300mm f/2.8 II + 2xTC with the 5DIII and am very happy with the new 100-400mm II on both the 5DIII (including + 1.4x TC) and 7DII although it isn't a prime. You really need to try out all three. The 300mm f/4 with an extender is not as good as the 400mm f/5.6 or 100-400mm II.

 

[Karl XII]

Go for the 400mm DO II.
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-400mm-f-4.0-DO-IS-II-USM-Lens.aspx
http://www.ephotozine.com/article/canon-ef-400mm-f-4-do-is-ii-usm-lens-review-26785
http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2015/01/more-canon-400m-do-ii-comparisons

 

[Mt Spokane Photography]

I'd go for the 400 DO, its definitely sharper than the 300 plus TC.

 

[Steve Balcombe]

I have a 300/2.8L II and both Mk III Extenders. I haven't used the 400 DO II, but since it was announced I've been considering whether I should switch. At first it looks very attractive:
- 300 g lighter
- Theoretically better AF performance, and a further 100 g weight saving, due to using the 1.4x instead of the 2x.
- More chances to use no Extender, especially good for BIF.

But it has a couple of downsides:
- No 300 mm option. I don't get many opportunities to use the bare lens for wildlife but sometimes 400 mm is too long.
- Minimum focusing distance is 3.3 m, compared with the 300's 2.0 m.
- Still very expensive as prices haven't dropped much from launch price.

Also I would want to be certain there are no IQ issues associated with backlighting. Canon promises a big improvement compared with the original version but I'd need to be sure.

Unfortunately I can't afford to own both and see which works out best. For the time being I'm sticking with the 300 - and highly recommend it.

 

[takesome1]

Do you want the best 300mm that Canon makes or the second best 400mm.

Your question is hard to answer, even though you say you shoot animals the answer would depend on how you shoot and when you shoot.

There is no beating the IQ out of the 300mm when you shoot and need the f/2.8.

I shoot wildlife in the field, out of the truck or wherever the opportunity arrises. If I had to choose just one of these two I would go with the longer focal length of the 400mm.

After upgrading my 500mm F/4L to 500mm F/4L II I have been looking at it to see what advantages I have gained.
The IQ in the corners is just slightly better, but that wouldn't really apply as much to the 7D. You do not use the corners with the crop. Overall the IQ difference isn't that great. The new version looses some weight which is nice. The new version IS is much better. But other than that the differences are not that great and the 500mm F/4 L I is still Canons second best 500mm and a superb lens.

I say all that to get to this.
I wouldn't buy either one. I would find a good used 500mm F/4L and go with it.

 

[Chisox2335]

Do you want the best 300mm that Canon makes or the second best 400mm.

Your question is hard to answer, even though you say you shoot animals the answer would depend on how you shoot and when you shoot.

There is no beating the IQ out of the 300mm when you shoot and need the f/2.8.

I shoot wildlife in the field, out of the truck or wherever the opportunity arrises. If I had to choose just one of these two I would go with the longer focal length of the 400mm.

After upgrading my 500mm F/4L to 500mm F/4L II I have been looking at it to see what advantages I have gained.
The IQ in the corners is just slightly better, but that wouldn't really apply as much to the 7D. You do not use the corners with the crop. Overall the IQ difference isn't that great. The new version looses some weight which is nice. The new version IS is much better. But other than that the differences are not that great and the 500mm F/4 L I is still Canons second best 500mm and a superb lens.

I say all that to get to this.
I wouldn't buy either one. I would find a good used 500mm F/4L and go with it.

Interesting input regarding the 500s. I am looking to get the mkii. I used the mki and loved it. As I plan to primarily hand hold I decided the weight and improved is was worth it. My main concern is the long term serviceability of the mki by canon.

 

[takesome1]

Do you want the best 300mm that Canon makes or the second best 400mm.

Your question is hard to answer, even though you say you shoot animals the answer would depend on how you shoot and when you shoot.

There is no beating the IQ out of the 300mm when you shoot and need the f/2.8.

I shoot wildlife in the field, out of the truck or wherever the opportunity arrises. If I had to choose just one of these two I would go with the longer focal length of the 400mm.

After upgrading my 500mm F/4L to 500mm F/4L II I have been looking at it to see what advantages I have gained.
The IQ in the corners is just slightly better, but that wouldn't really apply as much to the 7D. You do not use the corners with the crop. Overall the IQ difference isn't that great. The new version looses some weight which is nice. The new version IS is much better. But other than that the differences are not that great and the 500mm F/4 L I is still Canons second best 500mm and a superb lens.

I say all that to get to this.
I wouldn't buy either one. I would find a good used 500mm F/4L and go with it.

Interesting input regarding the 500s. I am looking to get the mkii. I used the mki and loved it. As I plan to primarily hand hold I decided the weight and improved is was worth it. My main concern is the long term serviceability of the mki by canon.

The Weight and IS are a huge benefit. Just holding it up I can tell the difference in how much steadier it is than the old version. Then with the 4 stops of IS I have been getting more keepers at the lower shutter speeds.

I would think were a few years away from Canon not servicing the version I.

 

[daniela]

Hmmmm.....

Thats tricky for me.
Yes, an 500mm would be my first choice. But a new 500mm II is to expensive for me. I have been looking for one some weeks ago, but the 500mm lenses, where I am sure, that the product is ok, is still beyond 8500-9000€ (2-3 years old and signs of usage).
(I learned from an mistake I made some years ago, buying an 70-200mm 2.8 IS from an photographer, where the Is was not working correct and I had to invest another 600€). If you know an serious seller, tell me.

I like to shoot birds and other animals that are not near to me, so the longer the focal lenght is, the better it is.

I tried the 400mm II DO on monday in combination with the 1.4x extender in an shop. But the AF did not work proper with my 7D (long time of hunting for sharpness) the 6D was much faster. And I was allowed to use the 300mm 2.8 with and without the 1.4x extender. The 300mm 2.8 is a dream. An super image quality, but only 300mm... The shop assistent told me not to use an 2x extender, as the picture quality will go down al lot.

So there is still an big "?", what to do... 6500€s or more are still a lot of money for me

 

[Steve Balcombe]

And I was allowed to use the 300mm 2.8 with and without the 1.4x extender. The 300mm 2.8 is a dream. An super image quality, but only 300mm... The shop assistent told me not to use an 2x extender, as the picture quality will go down al lot.

That's shop assistants for you ;-) Standard advice probably learned from another shop assistant. The 300/2.8L II with the 2x III is a very popular choice for wildlife photographers who don't want to be weighed down by a 500/4 or 600/4 and a big tripod. I know several and we all get superb results. I'm not saying there is no penalty at all - a bare lens will always be better - but the Mark II 300 with the 2x is very, very good.

But, if you know the downsides of the 400 DO II won't be a problem for you then you nicely side-step this issue anyway.

 

[AlanF]

I am getting very tempted by the 400/4 DO II. I'd be using it with the 2xTC, having seen the resolution the 100-400mm II gives, but at an inconvenient f/11 and liveview. So, any first-hand reports would be most welcome.

 

[Steve Balcombe]

I am getting very tempted by the 400/4 DO II. I'd be using it with the 2xTC, having seen the resolution the 100-400mm II gives, but at an inconvenient f/11 and liveview. So, any first-hand reports would be most welcome.

I do agree, but any advantage over the 300/2.8 II is going to be "evolutionary not revolutionary" so I'm going to wait for prices to drop which probably means not this summer. In the meantime I'll be looking out for any opportunity to gather information on image quality.

 

[Tiosabas]

You couldn't go wrong with either of these lenses really. However I myself am looking forward to Sigmas revision of their telephoto range.

 

[mackguyver]

If I was buying right now, I would strongly consider the 400 DO II. According to the handful of reviews out there, the lens is excellent and has the best IS of any Canon lens yet. 300mm can seem a bit short at times and unless you're shooting large animals (deer, bears, etc.) you'll probably want the 1.4x and 2x all of the time. I had the 400 f/5.6 and it's an excellent lens but the lack of IS makes it much harder to use. Here's a review of the 400 DO II and you can compare it to the 300 f/2.8 II - pay particular attention to their notes in the IS test.

400 DO II
http://slrgear.com/reviews/showproduct.php?product=1747

300 f/2.8 II
http://slrgear.com/reviews/showproduct.php/product/1369/cat/10

 

[krisbell]

I own the 300II and use it almost 100% of the time with a 2x extender. As others have mentioned the image quality is still excellent though it does often focus hunt for me (with 5DIII). If i was starting again now I would probably go with the 400 DO II with 1.4x instead. I can afford a 500/600mm but portability is a must so the 300 and 400 plus extenders are the only options. Like others I am also waiting for more reviews to back up what looks to be an excellent new DO lens.

 

[AlanF]

If I was buying right now, I would strongly consider the 400 DO II. According to the handful of reviews out there, the lens is excellent and has the best IS of any Canon lens yet. 300mm can seem a bit short at times and unless you're shooting large animals (deer, bears, etc.) you'll probably want the 1.4x and 2x all of the time. I had the 400 f/5.6 and it's an excellent lens but the lack of IS makes it much harder to use. Here's a review of the 400 DO II and you can compare it to the 300 f/2.8 II - pay particular attention to their notes in the IS test.

400 DO II
http://slrgear.com/reviews/showproduct.php?product=1747

300 f/2.8 II
http://slrgear.com/reviews/showproduct.php/product/1369/cat/10

See also: http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2015/01/more-canon-400m-do-ii-comparisons
and
http://www.ephotozine.com/article/canon-ef-400mm-f-4-do-is-ii-usm-lens-review-26785

 

[NancyP]

The 400 f/5.6L is a budget bargain and extremely lightweight, a great bird-in-flight lens, but as it has no image stabilization, there is a steep learning curve and there is a need to use ridiculously high ISOs when hand-holding and shooting moving subjects at dawn or dusk. I think that it is one of the lenses a beginning bird photographer ought to consider, before they are ready to take the plunge and buy one of the $8,000.00 to $13,000.00 lenses.

Do you have any lens rental businesses accessible to you? Why not rent your top contenders, one at a time, to see which has the feel and reach you need?