400/2.8vs500/f4

[Charles Senkus]

i am considering taking the big leap! and would be interested in hearing some pro's and cons as to which lens would be best. i am leaning toward the 400 for better general use as i feel i would only be loosing a little over the 5 on the long end with a tc. thoughts?

[Maxis Gamez]

500mm any day. IF you travel, you will appreciate that! :) the 400 is HUGE and weight a lot more.

[George DeCamp]

Depends what you are after. As Maxis said the 400/2.8 is heavy compared to the 500 by a couple pounds. If you after birds it is all about reach, reach, reach.

[Robert O'Toole]

Hey Charles,

I agree with MG and GD, the 500/4 is the way to go.

I have quite a bit of experience with almost all the Canon IS Tele lenses, 300-400-500-600, having shot and owned all of them at one time or another.

Go with the 500/4 for birds and general use, no question in my mind.

Robert

[Don Kates]

Charles,
I too have all the big Canon lenses. Just recently sold the 500. I also shoot motorcycles, often in close proximity and the 500 was too much. For birds however it was great with outstanding image quality. For "walking around" general use, the 400 2.8 works extremely well. It is heavy, but weight has never been an issue for me. But the images are incredible, slightly better than the 500 in my opinion. It is very fast focusing, sharp, great color and contrat. I've never used it with a TC but I'm assuming with a 1.4x you'd have quality equal to the 500 and slightly more reach at the same f. Without a doubt, it is my favorite lens.

[c.w. moynihan]

If you like the weight of the 400 f/2.8, then I recommend the 600 f/4. They weigh about the same, but the 600 is a much better weight balanced lense especially if you handhold with far greater reach, . The 400 f/2.8 is extremely front heavy and ackward in this regard.

[Steve Large]

Hi Charles,
Thanks for the comment on my Short-Eared Owl Shot by the way. For me, I presently have the 500mm F/4. It is by far the best lens that I have ever had but there are times when I wonder if I should have gone to the 400mm F2.8. The reason for this is purely utilitarian. With my present body (20D), I am limited to the center spot focus with the 1.4X extender and an equivalent of 700mm. Response time is still faily good in bright light and I really haven't noticed the degradation in quality at all. The lens is fairly light and even my wife has no trouble toteing it around.
If I were to go to a 400mm however I could achieve 800mm equivalent with a 2X extender and still have relatively good quality (although some might disagree). With the brighter 400mm you might also have an advantage in the winter with the lower light limitations.

Cheers,

Steve Large

[Alfred Forns]

Another vote for the 500 Would not consider the 400 2.8 Very large and will be using converters all the time Sharp but slows down the AF !!!!