Results 1 to 19 of 19

Thread: Canon 400mm f/5.6 questions

  1. #1
    BPN Viewer
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Linden, AL
    Posts
    121
    Threads
    29
    Thank You Posts

    Default Canon 400mm f/5.6 questions

    Does anyone have experience with this lens??? Would it be possible to maintain autofocus with the Canon 1.4 TC? I'm also thinking that I could probably shoot this on one of my Bogen heads and not have to rent a Wimberley-thoughts there? Thanks for any input y'all can provide.

  2. #2
    Forum Participant
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Phoenix, AZ
    Posts
    2,267
    Threads
    560
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    I have this lens and love it with my 7D. It will not AF with a TC and a crop sensor camera. I usually shoot it handheld rather than on a pod, but others can weigh in here. I do use it with a pod when I put on a 1.4x or 2x TC and then I manually focus.

    Here it is with the Sigma EX 2X TC and my 7D at 800mm

    http://www.birdphotographers.net/for...ning&highlight=
    Last edited by Ian Cassell; 11-02-2010 at 11:28 PM.

  3. #3
    BPN Member Kerry Perkins's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Simi Valley, California
    Posts
    8,310
    Threads
    1,048
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    Jason,

    With champagne tastes and a beer budget, this is my long lens. :cool: I have used it for two years on both the 50D and now the 7D. It is possible to get sharp images with the 1.4x if you are steady enough. I have even made decent BIF shots with this setup and manual focus. Here is a hand-held shot with the 50D and 1.4x II. I don't really recommend it, as a tripod will give much more consistent results, but it can be done.

    http://www.birdphotographers.net/for...1&d=1262755141
    "It is an illusion that photos are made with the camera... they are made with the eye, heart, and head." - Henri Cartier Bresson

    Please visit me on the web at http://kerryperkinsphotography.com


  4. #4
    BPN Viewer
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Linden, AL
    Posts
    121
    Threads
    29
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    Thanks for the input guys. I'm thinking of renting this lens with a 7D soon and maybe purchasing something like that in the near future. Nikon doesn't offer a "mid-range" prime, but this option looks like it will work well. Especially on a crop factor body.

  5. #5
    Lifetime Member Doug Brown's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Albuquerque, NM
    Posts
    11,879
    Threads
    917
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    Attached Images Attached Images
     
    It's simply an excellent lens. The 400 f/5.6 is super sharp, has very fast AF, is extremely lightweight, and is quite usable wide open. I hand hold this lens exclusively. With a 1.4x it will AF on a pro body but not particularly well. Here's a 100% of an unprocessed RAW file from a 400 f/5.6 image I took this weekend. And my 400 is pretty beat up!
    Upcoming Workshops: Bosque del Apache 2019, Ecuador 2020 (details coming soon)
    Website -
    Facebook - 500px

  6. #6
    BPN Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Dallas, Texas.
    Posts
    6,260
    Threads
    426
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    Jason, all my bird photography is done with this lens. Strengths of this lens are AF speed, sharpness, colors, contrast, light weight, balance and build quality. And of course great price as Kerry mentioned.

    Weaknesses would be lack of IS and high min. focussing distance.

    I use 40D so it does not AF with TC. And since I dont use tripod a lot, MF is quite hard. I have tried 'taping the pins' trick but even with that, AF performance isn't very consistent. At times, it does a good job but hunts a lot in most real world situations. With TC, better to stop down at least to f/9...but the problem is at f/9, in many situations, you dont end up getting good shutter speed to hand-hold. Net net, I dont use it with TC much.

    go for it...you won't regret it. On a 18Mp camera, it should be a great fit.
    Last edited by Kaustubh Deshpande; 11-03-2010 at 10:45 AM.

  7. #7
    Van Hilliard
    Guest

    Default

    I don't use the lens with converters since I have both a 600 and 800 but at 400mm, it's probably the best flight lens out there. My usual combo is the 800, a Mark IV and the 400 in a belt pouch (ThinkTank). I rarely find I need anything else. When I use the 400, it is always handheld. Like Doug, I have used the 400 wide open with no regrets. When I went out on James Shadle's Hooptie Deux, the 400 was the most useful lens.
    If I had no other lens, I would certainly try it with a TC. It hasn't been all that long ago (Nothing seems all that long ago anymore unless I really think about it.) that we all used manual focus.

  8. #8
    Forum Participant
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    1,647
    Threads
    83
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    I have nothing to add, just piling on to say that this is a wonderful, sharp lens, with ultra fast AF, but it doesn't AF well with any TC. It's very handy, light and compact.

  9. #9
    BPN Viewer
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Blooming Grove, NY
    Posts
    263
    Threads
    17
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    Just wanted to add - I sold this lens when I bought the 500/4, and then 6 months later I bought it again because I missed it so much! :)

    thanks
    Charles

  10. #10
    Forum Participant
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    1,647
    Threads
    83
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Charles Scheffold View Post
    Just wanted to add - I sold this lens when I bought the 500/4, and then 6 months later I bought it again because I missed it so much! :)

    I held on to mine when I bought the 500/4 and then sold the 400/5.6 after a couple of months of not touching it. I don't miss it yet. I to carry the 500/4 on my 7D on a tripod and the 70-200/4 on my 5D MkII. I always have the 1.4x TC with me to put on either lens, depending on circumstances.

    The trick for me in using the 500/4 for BIF was practice. It was tough at first, but the added reach really gives dramatically improved results over the 400/5.6 IF, big "IF", you can track the bird. It takes some work. I'm still not very good with the 1.4x TC on the 500mm, but I've been pleased with my efforts with the 500/4 for BIF. For me, the tripod is a given in almost all situations with the 500mm.

  11. #11
    BPN Viewer
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Blooming Grove, NY
    Posts
    263
    Threads
    17
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by David Stephens View Post
    I held on to mine when I bought the 500/4 and then sold the 400/5.6 after a couple of months of not touching it. I don't miss it yet. I to carry the 500/4 on my 7D on a tripod and the 70-200/4 on my 5D MkII. I always have the 1.4x TC with me to put on either lens, depending on circumstances.

    The trick for me in using the 500/4 for BIF was practice. It was tough at first, but the added reach really gives dramatically improved results over the 400/5.6 IF, big "IF", you can track the bird. It takes some work. I'm still not very good with the 1.4x TC on the 500mm, but I've been pleased with my efforts with the 500/4 for BIF. For me, the tripod is a given in almost all situations with the 500mm.
    Your point is well taken, however, I guess it depends on the situation. I tend to take long hikes and the 500/4 is difficult to manage for that type of activity. My feeling is that the tripod is just about required when using the 500/4 and that gets cumbersome to drag around for many miles.

    Instead, I put the 400/5.6 on my 7D and hang it around my neck while I'm walking. It's a great lens and image quality is very good. Are there times when I wish I had the 500/4 or the 800/5.6 with me? Yes, but my back thanks me :)

    Once I get the 70-200/2.8 IS II then maybe I'll only need that and the 1.4x TC for hiking... not sure yet.

    Charles

  12. #12
    Forum Participant
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    1,647
    Threads
    83
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Charles Scheffold View Post
    ...Once I get the 70-200/2.8 IS II then maybe I'll only need that and the 1.4x TC for hiking... not sure yet.
    Yes, different ways to skin a cat, all valid.

    The 70-200/2.8 IS II with the 1.4x AND the 2xTC is also a very tempting proposition to me. Early reports are excellent. That lens would cover a lot of ground. However, carrying it AND the 500/4 is indeed a daunting proposition. As an only-lens, then it'd be incredibly flexible.

    I've added that to my 2011 "To Do" list as something I'll need to try, via rental, before buying.

  13. #13
    BPN Viewer
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Posts
    30
    Threads
    9
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    Hi Doug-
    Do you think that 500mm/f4 will do better job in all aspects than 400mm/f5.6? I am thinking to get one after getting back from NM, Thx.

    Quote Originally Posted by Doug Brown View Post
    It's simply an excellent lens. The 400 f/5.6 is super sharp, has very fast AF, is extremely lightweight, and is quite usable wide open. I hand hold this lens exclusively. With a 1.4x it will AF on a pro body but not particularly well. Here's a 100% of an unprocessed RAW file from a 400 f/5.6 image I took this weekend. And my 400 is pretty beat up!

  14. #14
    BPN Viewer
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Blooming Grove, NY
    Posts
    263
    Threads
    17
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by John Ling View Post
    Hi Doug-
    Do you think that 500mm/f4 will do better job in all aspects than 400mm/f5.6? I am thinking to get one after getting back from NM, Thx.
    It's like comparing apples and oranges - the OP wanted to know about the 400/5.6, so comparing to the 500/4 isn't completely fair. The 400/5.6 is designed to be a lightweight, fairly compact telephoto lens at a price point that is affordable. The 500/4 is bigger, heavier, and 5x more expensive.

    It all depends on context - I use my 400/5.6 for casual hikes up large hills/mountains. Would not want to drag my 500/4, tripod, gimbal, etc. on those hikes just in case I see something :)

    Charles

  15. #15
    BPN Viewer
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Posts
    30
    Threads
    9
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    Would 500mm/f4 deliver better IQ? I dont have 500mm/f4, so I have to have some sort of idea before action. Let's just focus on IQ. I know it is not fair.


    Quote Originally Posted by Charles Scheffold View Post
    It's like comparing apples and oranges - the OP wanted to know about the 400/5.6, so comparing to the 500/4 isn't completely fair. The 400/5.6 is designed to be a lightweight, fairly compact telephoto lens at a price point that is affordable. The 500/4 is bigger, heavier, and 5x more expensive.

    It all depends on context - I use my 400/5.6 for casual hikes up large hills/mountains. Would not want to drag my 500/4, tripod, gimbal, etc. on those hikes just in case I see something :)

    Charles

  16. #16
    Forum Participant
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    1,647
    Threads
    83
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by John Ling View Post
    Do you think that 500mm/f4 will do better job in all aspects than 400mm/f5.6? I am thinking to get one after getting back from NM, Thx.
    When I moved from the 400/5.6 to the 500/4.0 I noted an improvement in color accuracy, contrast and sharpness. I most often mounted the 400/5.6 on my tripod and the 500/4 even more so, so the sharpness does come from the lens, not technique.

    They're both wonderful lenses, but in two different leagues. It's harder to track a BIF with the 500/4 and the 500/4 weights considerably more and costs WAY more. I think that my copy of the 400/5.6 was a good one, but I just saw little reason to go back to it after I got the 500/4 and started seeing the images.

  17. #17
    Forum Participant
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    1,647
    Threads
    83
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by John Ling View Post
    Would 500mm/f4 deliver better IQ? I dont have 500mm/f4, so I have to have some sort of idea before action. Let's just focus on IQ. I know it is not fair.
    In my case, the IQ of my 500/4 is superior to my 400/5.6 when both are used on a tripod in the field. Color accuracy, contrast and sharpness all seem superior to me based on anecdotal evidence. I did no "scientific" testing. I merely took pictures and decided which I prefered.

  18. #18
    BPN Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Dallas, Texas.
    Posts
    6,260
    Threads
    426
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    John, one thing you have to understand is that when you shoot with f/5.6 with both lenses, the 500 will defnitely give you better sharpness as it is stopped down whereas the 400 is wide-open.

  19. #19
    BPN Viewer
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Blooming Grove, NY
    Posts
    263
    Threads
    17
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    From my experience, I do not believe the 500/4 offers a dramatic improvement over the 400/5.6 in terms of raw IQ. The 500/4 does have noticeably less CA in harsh conditions due to the fact that it has 1 fluorite lens element. But then we are comparing a $1200 lens with a $6000 lens... so I don't know what your tolerance is for CA.

    There are of course other factors that affect IQ besides just the lens itself, which I think have been clearly pointed out above.

    Charles

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Web Analytics