Compare your Canon lenses.

[James Shadle]

http://the-digital-picture.com/Revie...omp=0&Lens=404

Pretty cool.
The 300mm 2.8 is the sharpness king.


The 400mm battle.
In order of sharpness- 400mm 2.8, 400mm 5.6 and finally 400mm DO 4.0

[Magnus Thornberg]

Yeah that site is great! I don´t know if you can trust the test to 100%.
I compared the 300/2.8 L IS USM with 2x extender 600/5.6 to 600/4 L IS USM and the sharpness is almost the same! I don´t think that´s true!?
I own the 300/2.8L IS USM and i love it! The sharpness is great even with 2x extender!

/Magnus

[Chris Brennan]

Great site! Only a little disappointed that my 400mm f4 DO + a 1.4x extender "appeared" to be slightly less sharp than the 300mm f2.8 + a 2x extender

[Ben_Sadd]

Had been thinking of getting a 400mm DO for a trip. However, it looks worse naked than my 300mm f4 with the 1.4xTC. The 300mm 2.8 looks very good even with the 2xTC, especially when stopped down a bit. Can anyone confirm this? Although, not many days left to try and grab one.

[Magnus Thornberg]

Had been thinking of getting a 400mm DO for a trip. However, it looks worse naked than my 300mm f4 with the 1.4xTC. The 300mm 2.8 looks very good even with the 2xTC, especially when stopped down a bit. Can anyone confirm this? Although, not many days left to try and grab one.

Hi there!
I own the 300/2.8L IS USM and i use it with 2xTC most of the time! I hade the 400/5.6L USM before and what i have read on the Internet the 400/4 DO is not as sharp as the 400/5.6!

Here you have one example with my 40D and the 300/2.8L IS USM with 2xTC f5.6 no crop and no sharpening!
http://public.blu.livefilestore.com/..._MG_2375-4.jpg

I often stop down to f 6.3 and the sharpness is very good!

here is one image with f6.3
http://public.blu.livefilestore.com/...thane_alt4.jpg

[Chris Brennan]

My "long lens" of choice a year ago was the 300/2.8 + 2x converter.... and it was outstanding except for AF acquisition, and BIF. Sharpness was terrific. I have since switched to the 400mm f4 DO but it's not great with the 1.4x on a 7D. On the other hand, I can crop extensively...

[Roy Churchill]

Had been thinking of getting a 400mm DO for a trip. However, it looks worse naked than my 300mm f4 with the 1.4xTC. The 300mm 2.8 looks very good even with the 2xTC, especially when stopped down a bit. Can anyone confirm this? Although, not many days left to try and grab one.

I had the 400/5.6 but now shoot with the 300/2.8 + 2x tc. I still cannot believe how well this lens takes a 2x - I try to stop down one to f8 if possible when using the combo. AF is greatly speeded up if you use a focus limiter(I often use 6.4m to infinity).

All the shots HERE were taken with the 300/2.8 + 2x tc and 7D

[Joseph Kurkjian]

That's a great review site but I wonder if the outcome of the 400mm battle truly matters to most folks?

AFAIC the 400 f/5.6 is all I'm willing to carry around if long hikes are required ... so it's sharpness is whatever it is.

AFAIC the 100-400 is the most important lens when I go to the zoo ... so it's sharpness is whatever it is.

AFAIC the 800 is the only game in town ... so it's sharpness is whatever it is.

Don't get me wrong, I love lens reviews when they compare Canon and Nikon head-to-head; those reviews are really important when you are choosing one system over another or picking the best parts of both systems in your bag.

Regards,

Joe Kurkjian