The New Canon EF 400mm f/4 DO IS II

[jrista]

Yeah, that example you posted doesn't look awesome, pbd, but like jrista I've got quite a few pics taken with my 300 2.8 with less than stellar OOF areas. Different conditions will give different results.

I don't think anyone would say the 400 DO outperforms or even equals modern Canon superteles. Canon does not give them the L designation, after all. I just don't think they are utterly broken, useless garbage like much of the internet seems to think. There's a lot of promise in the tech. Its actually a bit of a mixed blessing that Canon is the one with the patents; they have the resources to put toward development but not much in the way of incentive since they are already King of Lens Hill.

Agreed. I think there is a TON of promise in the concept. Especially if they can figure out the particle dispersion DO stuff (it has the potential to be far superior, but it's a lot more difficult to achieve.)

I mean, imagine and 800mm lens that is half the length of the current 800/5.6. Imagine even an 800 f/4 DO...the smaller package size and more effective bending of light should make it possible to create a hand-holdable f/4 800mm lens. That would be phenomenal.

 

[wtlloyd]

Surprised no one has related this:
Fred Miranda earlier today posted that he has seen the MTF on the new lens and it is excellent, even with a 2X Extender.
He also states that the price will be "way lower than your expectation".
His NDA should be up about 4AM PDT.

http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1318195/0

(See his second post first page)

 

[mrsfotografie]

Surprised no one has related this:
Fred Miranda earlier today posted that he has seen the MTF on the new lens and it is excellent, even with a 2X Extender.
He also states that the price will be "way lower than your expectation".
His NDA should be up about 4AM PDT.

http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1318195/0

(See his second post first page)

Errh so it may be almost within range of mere mortals? We'll wait and see...

 

[Steve]

Well, the person he was responding to was thinking $10-13k. If it comes in at $6-7k that would be "way lower" than they expected but still unbelievably expensive.

 

[123Photog]

Surprised no one has related this:
Fred Miranda earlier today posted that he has seen the MTF on the new lens and it is excellent, even with a 2X Extender.
He also states that the price will be "way lower than your expectation".
His NDA should be up about 4AM PDT.

http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1318195/0

(See his second post first page)

Errh so it may be almost within range of mere mortals? We'll wait and see...

i have asked this on another forums but never got an answer.
is there any statistics from canon how much lenses of each model they sell?

i would be very curious to know how many supetelephoto lenses canon actually sells.
i have no idea what kind of number we are talking about.

 

[GMCPhotographics]

If they solved their bokeh problems, perhaps the lens would have more appeal, but I think that bokeh is a problem inherent in the DO design?

The 400 didn't have a bokeh problem. The 70-300 DO was the lens with the sometimes weird bokeh. The internet seems to have lumped both lenses together as if they were one and the same. Spec highlights on the 400 could have a bit of a bullseye effect but that was about it. The OOF areas aren't as nice as the 300 2.8 or 400 2.8 in my opinion, but they aren't really problematic either.

I think the 400 f4 DO II would be pretty amazing if it were about 2/3rd or 1/2 the cost of a 300 2.8 IS II but that's really unlikely.

That depends on your definitions of "problem" and "bokeh".

I think the 400 MkI does have bokeh problems, I used one for a day and got it to do stuff like this, I am sorry but for >$6,000 I want much better than that. Now I will admit that I personally shot over water like this regularly, so for me it was an unsurmountable issue, and I can well understand others happy and extensive use that never induces such low quality, but for me the 300 f2.8 IS MkI and 1.4TC was a much better, and cheaper, buy and in my opinion DO sucks, yes the 400 DO sucks less than the 70-300 DO (which really sucks) but they both suck.

I'm not seeing any Bokeh or contrast issues with that pic you've posted. Shooting into the light (contre-jour) with sparkly waves regardless of the supertele will pretty much give you what you've posted.
In the image you posted, I would be more concerned with your burnt out highlights than the quality of the Bokeh.
The contrast in this image is particular high and prolly needed better post prod to pull more out of the RAW file.

Careful metering & careful post prod. Notice the quality of the bokeh is very similar and the contrast is less.
These were taken with a 5DIII, ef 400mm f2.8 LIS and with 1.4x or 2x TC's
I choose the far more heavier f2.8 version because it's IQ is a lot better than the f4 DO version (I can use a 2x TC and get amazing sharpness wide open) and I really like the extra stop...sometimes f2.8 is the only way to go!

 

[jrista]

Surprised no one has related this:
Fred Miranda earlier today posted that he has seen the MTF on the new lens and it is excellent, even with a 2X Extender.
He also states that the price will be "way lower than your expectation".
His NDA should be up about 4AM PDT.

http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1318195/0

(See his second post first page)

Well, we should know pretty soon here, since his 10-hour wait is almost up. I'm very interested, if it has a high MTF and the price really is "way lower than your expectation".

 

[Quest for Light]

Surprised no one has related this:
Fred Miranda earlier today posted that he has seen the MTF on the new lens and it is excellent, even with a 2X Extender.
He also states that the price will be "way lower than your expectation".
His NDA should be up about 4AM PDT.

http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1318195/0

(See his second post first page)

Well, we should know pretty soon here, since his 10-hour wait is almost up. I'm very interested, if it has a high MTF and the price really is "way lower than your expectation".

6899$

 

[jrista]

Surprised no one has related this:
Fred Miranda earlier today posted that he has seen the MTF on the new lens and it is excellent, even with a 2X Extender.
He also states that the price will be "way lower than your expectation".
His NDA should be up about 4AM PDT.

http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1318195/0

(See his second post first page)

Well, we should know pretty soon here, since his 10-hour wait is almost up. I'm very interested, if it has a high MTF and the price really is "way lower than your expectation".

6899$

Is that official? I mean, that's still a hell of a lot better than $10000 or more.

 

[Quest for Light]

Surprised no one has related this:
Fred Miranda earlier today posted that he has seen the MTF on the new lens and it is excellent, even with a 2X Extender.
He also states that the price will be "way lower than your expectation".
His NDA should be up about 4AM PDT.

http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1318195/0

(See his second post first page)

Well, we should know pretty soon here, since his 10-hour wait is almost up. I'm very interested, if it has a high MTF and the price really is "way lower than your expectation".

6899$

Is that official? I mean, that's still a hell of a lot better than $10000 or more.

yes:

http://www.dpreview.com/articles/0082658045/canon-introduces-ef-400mm-f-4-do-is-ii-usm-ef-24-105mm-and-ef-s-24mm-f-2-8-lenses

Pricing and Availability
The EF 400mm f/4 DO IS II USM and EF-S 24mm f/2.8 STM are both scheduled to be available in November for estimated retail prices of $6,899.00 and $149.99 respectively.

MFT look superb!

 

[jrista]

EF 400mm f/4 DO IS II USM - The Portable Super Telephoto Lens
Super telephoto lenses are essential whether on a safari or the sidelines to bring the image in tight on a subject, but they often are not the lightest lenses to carry around. Canon’s new compact and lightweight EF 400mm f/4 DO IS II USM super telephoto lens will help lighten the load of professional and advanced amateur photographers. At only 4.6 lbs., it is roughly half the weight of the EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II USM lens. The new EF 400mm f/4 DO IS II USM lens features newly developed gapless dual-layered diffractive optical (DO) elements that help improve optical performance while maintaining virtually the same size and weight as its predecessor. The DO element in the new lens is optimally positioned deeper within the optical formula than in the original EF 400mm DO lens to help reduce flare around backlit subjects. Other optical improvements include the use of a large-diameter ground and polished aspherical element and a UD glass element that work together with the DO elements for thorough correction of spherical, chromatic and other optical aberrations. Canon’s original SWC (Sub Wavelength Structure) lens coating is also used internally to help improve resistance to flare. Fluorine coating is applied to the front and rear lens elements to repel dust and make lens cleaning easy. A nine blade curved diaphragm is also incorporated to help produce smooth, natural-looking bokeh in areas outside the depth of field surrounding the main subject.

The new EF 400mm f/4 DO IS II USM lens features Canon’s Optical Image Stabilization with up to four shutter speed steps of correction**. In addition there are three IS modes ─ standard, panning and during exposure only ─ that help to provide superb results in a variety of shooting situations. For greater convenience, the Image Stabilizer does not have to be disabled when shooting with a tripod. Four programmable buttons on the front of the lens allow photographers to customize lens and camera operation to fit their unique shooting style, or simply pause autofocus (AF) adjustment at any point to hold focus on a subject in a busy scene. Even in AF mode, full-time manual focus can be employed at any time. The lens also features a Power Focus mode for smooth focus “pulls” ideal for filmmaking. For those mobile shooters and documentarians truly “on-the-go”, the lens is also highly resistant to dust and water for durability and reliability when shooting in even the harshest conditions.

Still sounds like they are using the same kind of DO element design as they did before...no particle dispersion DO yet. Sounds like they did re-position the DO element to reduce or eliminate the haloing/fringing that used to occur with the old one...that was my biggest complaint about it before. It gets the full L-series treatment as well...all the bells and whistles on the Mark II superteles, which is nice.

 

[privatebydesign]

If they solved their bokeh problems, perhaps the lens would have more appeal, but I think that bokeh is a problem inherent in the DO design?

The 400 didn't have a bokeh problem. The 70-300 DO was the lens with the sometimes weird bokeh. The internet seems to have lumped both lenses together as if they were one and the same. Spec highlights on the 400 could have a bit of a bullseye effect but that was about it. The OOF areas aren't as nice as the 300 2.8 or 400 2.8 in my opinion, but they aren't really problematic either.

I think the 400 f4 DO II would be pretty amazing if it were about 2/3rd or 1/2 the cost of a 300 2.8 IS II but that's really unlikely.

That depends on your definitions of "problem" and "bokeh".

I think the 400 MkI does have bokeh problems, I used one for a day and got it to do stuff like this, I am sorry but for >$6,000 I want much better than that. Now I will admit that I personally shot over water like this regularly, so for me it was an unsurmountable issue, and I can well understand others happy and extensive use that never induces such low quality, but for me the 300 f2.8 IS MkI and 1.4TC was a much better, and cheaper, buy and in my opinion DO sucks, yes the 400 DO sucks less than the 70-300 DO (which really sucks) but they both suck.

I'm not seeing any Bokeh or contrast issues with that pic you've posted. Shooting into the light (contre-jour) with sparkly waves regardless of the supertele will pretty much give you what you've posted.
In the image you posted, I would be more concerned with your burnt out highlights than the quality of the Bokeh.
The contrast in this image is particular high and prolly needed better post prod to pull more out of the RAW file.

Careful metering & careful post prod. Notice the quality of the bokeh is very similar and the contrast is less.
These were taken with a 5DIII, ef 400mm f2.8 LIS and with 1.4x or 2x TC's
I choose the far more heavier f2.8 version because it's IQ is a lot better than the f4 DO version (I can use a 2x TC and get amazing sharpness wide open) and I really like the extra stop...sometimes f2.8 is the only way to go!

Well I have hundreds of 300 f2.8 IS shots with and without the 1.4 TC MkIII and 2 TC MkII that don't look like the 400 DO image I posted, which is why I didn't buy it.

 

[mrsfotografie]

I feel like I could make a new post every day how much I want this lens...

(Un)fortunately winter is coming, a time when I find I have less need for longer lenses - so more time to contemplate and save up

 

[9VIII]

I was about to say that this lens should be a good upgrade in AF with a 7D2 because of the f4 aperture, but alas, the 7D2 is still all f5.6 AF points, with just the center being better.
As opposed to the 1Dx with a dozen or so f4 points, and that nice strip of f2.8 points in the middle.
Given the battery type, the 7D2 won't overdrive your AF either (the 1D runs at a higher voltage for better performance)

 

[Eswanzey]

I don't know if this is the correct thread but cream will rise to the top?

I placed an order for the 400mm DO II I don't know how long ago at B&H. Just got an email that the lens has shipped.

They must be finally clearing out the backlog of whichever California port had container ships to the horizon while some longshoremen or whoever went on strike and caused months of delay in offloading.