Quick Comparison: Canon's new 400mm Options

[AlanF]

TDP has a second copy analysed on its website
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/News/News-Post.aspx?News=14148
Slight differences in the corners. It's a pity the measurements are not quantitative as you can't tell improvements from looking at images above a certain level.

 

[hoodlum]

Now that Nikon has announced their first DO equivalent lens, I think we see more competitive pricing for this technology. It doesn't have to be that more expensive than non-DO lenses.

 

[East Wind Photography]

I really want to see the in-field performance of the 400 f/4 DO II under different lighting conditions. If Canon has solved the DO weakness of poor contrast and flaring, and knows how to make super-sharp DO lenses, then we should expect to see a 500 or 600 f/4 DO someday - maybe 5.5 to 6 pounds, rather than the 7.0 and 8.5 pounds the version II conventional 500 and 600 f/4 weigh. Yeah, I know - unicorns.

I'm sure its possible, it depends on marketing. Are there enough buyers in the market to go for a 500mm, a 600mm or a 800mm DO? A lot of people recently invested a big chunk of money in the new 500mm and 600mm lenses, and are not likely to change to a DO version, so maybe the 800mm is the next DO lens??

I'm surprised you're so sceptical about DO with how much people raved about the weight difference between the Mk1 and Mk2 Big Whites.

My bet is all Mk3 Supertelephoto lenses will be DO, there really isn't much else they can improve otherwise.

I think by 2020 the 500 and 600 dinosaur primes could be replaced by a single 400 - 600/4 DO zoom unit.

Canon are getting the hang of DO now so this would be a natural developement - two for one! Primes are going to be replaced by zooms.

Primes will always beat zooms in light transmission due to fewer optics. There is an advantage to primes that most people don't realize.

 

[hoodlum]

Primes will always beat zooms in light transmission due to fewer optics. There is an advantage to primes that most people don't realize.

I find primes have about a 1/2 stop advantage over zooms of similar apertures.

 

[Hjalmarg1]

<p>Roger at LensRentals.com has done a quick comparison of the EF 400 f/4 DO IS and <a href="http://www.lensrentals.com/rent/canon/lenses/supertelephoto/canon-400mm-f4l-do-is-ii" target="_blank">EF 400 f/4 DO IS II</a> as well as the EF 100-400 f/4.5-5.6L IS and <a href="http://www.lensrentals.com/rent/canon/lenses/telephoto/canon-100-400mm-f4.5-5.6l-is-ii" target="_blank">EF 100-400 f/4.5-5.6L IS II</a>.</p>
<p><strong>From LensRentals.com on the EF 400 f/4 DO IS II
</strong></p>
<table id="wp-table-reloaded-id-104-no-1" class="wp-table-reloaded wp-table-reloaded-id-104">
<thead>
<tr class="row-1">
<th class="column-1"></th>
<th class="column-2"><b>400mm DO mtf50</b></th>
<th class="column-3"><b>400mm DO II mtf50</b></th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr class="row-2">
<td class="column-1"><b>Center</b></td>
<td class="column-2">1190</td>
<td class="column-3">1490</td>
</tr>
<tr class="row-3">
<td class="column-1"><b>Weighted Avg.</b></td>
<td class="column-2">970</td>
<td class="column-3">1350</td>
</tr>
<tr class="row-4">
<td class="column-1"><b>Corner Avg.</b></td>
<td class="column-2">740</td>
<td class="column-3">1100</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<p><em>“The difference in Canon’s computer-generated MTF charts for the 400mm DO and 400mm DO II is pretty striking, and I think our results confirm that difference shows up in actual optical testing as well as in the computer ray tracing. Canon also says the new design has much greater contrast, and I tend to believe that too, although we’ll all want to see images in a variety of lighting conditions.”</em><strong>
</strong></p>
<p><strong>From LensRentals.com on the EF 100-400 f/4.5-5.6L IS II</strong></p>
<table id="wp-table-reloaded-id-105-no-1" class="wp-table-reloaded wp-table-reloaded-id-105">
<thead>
<tr class="row-1">
<th class="column-1"></th>
<th class="column-2"><b>100-400mm mtf50</b></th>
<th class="column-3"><b>100-400 II mtf50</b></th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr class="row-2">
<td class="column-1"><b>Center</b></td>
<td class="column-2">1300</td>
<td class="column-3">1380</td>
</tr>
<tr class="row-3">
<td class="column-1"><b>Weighted Avg.</b></td>
<td class="column-2">980</td>
<td class="column-3">1020</td>
</tr>
<tr class="row-4">
<td class="column-1"><b>Corner Avg.</b></td>
<td class="column-2">680</td>
<td class="column-3">760</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<p><em>“The Canon computer-generated MTF charts suggest that the center of the image should be similar in both the old and new versions, but that the Mk II should be noticeably better off-axis and particularly in the corners. We do see that difference in the resolution tests, but I had expected the difference to be a bit larger. It’s certainly not nearly as dramatic as the DO difference.”</em><strong>

</strong></p>
<p><strong><a href="http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2014/12/a-brief-400mm-comparison" target="_blank">Read the full comparison at LensRentals.com</a></strong></p>
<p><strong><span style="color: #ff0000;">c</span>r</strong></p>

I wish they had included the 400mm f5.6L in the comparison. This budget telephoto lens is really good, only missing the latest IS technology.

 

[East Wind Photography]

Primes will always beat zooms in light transmission due to fewer optics. There is an advantage to primes that most people don't realize.

I find primes have about a 1/2 stop advantage over zooms of similar apertures.

Yep and for most who require big teles for wildlife also require better low light capability and 1/2 stop can make a difference in the morning or late evening or when adding an extender to the mix.

 

[Lee Jay]

Primes will always beat zooms in light transmission due to fewer optics. There is an advantage to primes that most people don't realize.

I find primes have about a 1/2 stop advantage over zooms of similar apertures.

Yep and for most who require big teles for wildlife also require better low light capability and 1/2 stop can make a difference in the morning or late evening or when adding an extender to the mix.

The actual difference is more like 1/6th of a stop.
Example: 70-200/2.8L IS II T-stop=3.6, 200/2.8L II T-stop=3.3.

 

[East Wind Photography]

Primes will always beat zooms in light transmission due to fewer optics. There is an advantage to primes that most people don't realize.

I find primes have about a 1/2 stop advantage over zooms of similar apertures.

Yep and for most who require big teles for wildlife also require better low light capability and 1/2 stop can make a difference in the morning or late evening or when adding an extender to the mix.

The actual difference is more like 1/6th of a stop.
Example: 70-200/2.8L IS II T-stop=3.6, 200/2.8L II T-stop=3.3.

depends on the number of optics. For that lens 1/6 may be correct.

 

[Lee Jay]

Primes will always beat zooms in light transmission due to fewer optics. There is an advantage to primes that most people don't realize.

I find primes have about a 1/2 stop advantage over zooms of similar apertures.

Yep and for most who require big teles for wildlife also require better low light capability and 1/2 stop can make a difference in the morning or late evening or when adding an extender to the mix.

The actual difference is more like 1/6th of a stop.
Example: 70-200/2.8L IS II T-stop=3.6, 200/2.8L II T-stop=3.3.

depends on the number of optics. For that lens 1/6 may be correct.

What other pairs can be checked? As far as I can think of, the only other one is the 100-400L and 400/5.6L where the f-stops and focal lengths are the same between prime and zoom. The 400/5.6L hasn't been tested.

 

[dufflover]

Keeping in mind the whole premise of a zoom is flexibility over IQ (of which isn't really an issue anymore either) the difference in transmission I doubt will influence the majority of buyers.

 

[East Wind Photography]

Primes will always beat zooms in light transmission due to fewer optics. There is an advantage to primes that most people don't realize.

I find primes have about a 1/2 stop advantage over zooms of similar apertures.

Yep and for most who require big teles for wildlife also require better low light capability and 1/2 stop can make a difference in the morning or late evening or when adding an extender to the mix.

The actual difference is more like 1/6th of a stop.
Example: 70-200/2.8L IS II T-stop=3.6, 200/2.8L II T-stop=3.3.

depends on the number of optics. For that lens 1/6 may be correct.

What other pairs can be checked? As far as I can think of, the only other one is the 100-400L and 400/5.6L where the f-stops and focal lengths are the same between prime and zoom. The 400/5.6L hasn't been tested.

You could also compare the 70-200 2.8L II to the 100 F2.8L Macro and a host of others. Logically one would compare the lenses wide open when possible. You can compare other lenses if you stop down the prime. For example compare a 70-300 to a 300 2.8 stopped down to F5.6.

The light transmission benefit also holds true at similar F-stop settings.

 

[East Wind Photography]

Keeping in mind the whole premise of a zoom is flexibility over IQ (of which isn't really an issue anymore either) the difference in transmission I doubt will influence the majority of buyers.

It really depends on what you shoot...and how deep your pockets will let you go. A zoom is ALL about flexibility and in very few instances do they equate to the same IQ as a prime of the same FL. The only one that comes to mind is the 200-400.

I shoot wildlife with my primes. Sold all of my zooms (except the 70-200 2.8L IS II) and would not buy any of the latest except the 200-400 but my pockets aren't big enough ..yet.

 

[hoodlum]

Roger has posted additional information.

http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2015/01/more-canon-400m-do-ii-comparisons