Canon 400mm f/5.6 USM 'L' lens review with samples (APS-C and full-frame)
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 6 сен 2024
- Here's a lens with difficult parameters but apparently legendary optical quality - in fact I had a surprisingly fun time testing it out. Could this be the ultimate wildlife lens for those on a 'budget'?
Find it here (Amazon affiliate link):
geni.us/canone...
If you've found this or other videos I've made to be helpful, then support me on Patreon! www.patreon.co...
All pictures and footage shot by me on Canon 6D and 70D cameras.
Be sure to follow my Photostream on Flickr, to see sample pictures of lenses I've reviewed and to see previews of upcoming lenses, too! www.flickr.com...
Music:
'Opportunity Walks', Kevin MacLeod (incompetech.com)
Licensed under Creative Commons: By Attribution 3.0
creativecommons...
I own the 400 5.6 I love it. It's very sharp, good bokeh, light weight lens. In the beginning I have missed some shots. Due to the 12 foot minimum focus distance. Now I know. I step back a bit before I take the shot. Bright daylight no problem. Low light MUST have a sturdy tripod. I photograph autocross and wildlife with this lens.
All spot on. The main disadvantage is that 12ft min focus but if we'd like to do dragonflies, there's hardware for that ;)
Try the rf 800 mm 6m min focus the 400 is a dream compared to that lol 😂
This is one heck of a lens! I’ve tried a Tamron 150-600 G2 lens, but it’s heavy and far from sharp. Its VC is nice to have though, but I’m back to my Canon 400mm f/5.6. There’s always enough light for shooting. I just love this lens!
the mkii 100-400 is supposed to replicate this lens. at about $900 more ha
Thank you Chris, for this accurate review. I recently bought one second-hand and I've loved it from the start. The AF is razor sharp, even though I use it with a 1.4 extender (my body is a 7Dmk2). I often use my car as a shelter, and with a window stand the absence of image stabilization is no big deal. I agree with you: highly recommended!
I own both the 400mm f5.6 and the 500mm f4. I agree that the 400mm f5.6 is a down right fantastic lens that will provide 80% of what my 500mm can for 15% of the cost. My 12 yr old son uses the 400 on a T5I/700d and hand holds it all day while capturing some amazing images.
Conclusion. If you're on the fence about this lens. Don't be. It is a proper "L" lens and in my opinion is the best bang for your buck lens that either Canon or Nikon makes.
Zombiesniper i wish my dad could've given camera gear lol
Your son is one lucky guy. Also, thanks for the info, now I think I'm probably going to get it.
I am gonna buy one tomorow after I tried one earlyer on my 5D. It outperformed 150-600 Tamron easy. Long live the prime lens.
Great review! I have the exact same set up as your review (Canon 6D with 400mm 5.6 L) and have been using it for wildlife and bird photography. I think it's the best possible combination for producing professional quality images without breaking the bank!
I have this myself. Absolutely amazing lens. Supernaturally sharp and so light-weight. But, you do need a lot of light.
No you don't. Long as it daytime you good. Even crack of dawn.
@@KandiKlover 1/400s or so (since it's not stabilised), at f5.6. You're going to get noisy photos easily.
This is a pretty sharp lens in my opinion i paid £569 this week. On crop camera - 90D its doing well on. Tripod. I’m impressed
A lot of people don't care about image stabilization very much. Many professionals throughout history never had it, and it can hinder skill development. Proper skill will make awesome images with this lens and fast shutter speeds are often used witb wildlife and sports anyway. You mention IS over and over but a skilled photographer doesnt really care.
Great review! I am still using this wonderful lens in 2020!
Is it worth it I’m looking for a 400mm Lens is this the right one
Austinatetoes same
Chris iPad is it nice?
Austinatetoes yes it’s fantastic
@@jakob2049 It's worth it for sure!
Another great and useful lens review.I literally spent Months trying to decide between this,and the Canon 300mm F4.0L IS and a Canon 1.4 Ext.I love the 300mm for the close focus ability and IS,however the 1.4 Ext does slow the Autofocus and you end up with a f5.6 aperture,however the combination will give you 420mm with IS.The images are very good,however,you would not ever get the Bitingly crisp images you could with the 400mm 5.6L.Even though I made my choice & got the 300F4 IS,& 1.4 Extender,I could still see the day when the 400 F5.6 could still be added to the collection!
Both lens are aimed at professional and experienced photographers! They are NOT designed for holiday snaps! I personally don't think IS is worth the cost and weight! I've just been taking test photos with my new 400 L lens on a dull day at 400/800 asa / 1000th and the images are pretty damn good. On a sunny day they would be seriously good! I have a 70-200, but needed extra grunt for wildlife / kingfishers etc! A prime lens is always going to be a tad better ATBE!
I am still in the same dilemma. I think I should do what you did, I get IS, and 20mm extra going that route. Still won't stop me from thinking on it all day though
If it weren’t for that awful minimum focus distance of the 400mm... Sometimes animals do come close and there isn’t enough time to put the extension tube on.
Christopher, you are my go to guy for the best reviews of any lens on the internet. Thanks for your detailed analysis!
I'm using this lens with an autofocus-adapter on my Panasonic G80. Even on the tiny MFT-sensor it's extremely sharp, autofocus is working very quick and accurate (for such a long adopted lens) and thanks to Panasonics fantastic in-body-stabilisation, I get sharp images even with 1/80 of a second handheld. A great "low budget" alternative to Olympus 300mm f4, which costs more than twice as much.
Hi Chris, after years I’m still very happy with this lens! It works very nicely on my Nikon Z6 with the Fringer smart adapter. It is an affordable lens now. And you can use it with the Canon 1.4X Mk. III extender which makes it a 560 mil with largest aperture 8.0. With the Canon 2X Mk. II extender I used it yesterday in order to get pictures from Jupiter and Saturn. It works. Have a nice day, Ralf
Hi there would love to see some images of the 400 with the 2x
i wish you will be able to make an updated video of this, with canon R5 :)
1 thing that wasn't mentioned is that there is a crop factor on an APSC body the 70D is a 1.6 crop factor so it's actually a 640mm f/5.6 equivalent so the Image quality is amazing...
You have a lots of request because you are de best youtube Lens Reviewer. Keep the good work.
Hi Christopher,
I shoot Nikon and I know of nothing Nikon do as a prime 400mm that I can afford a good second hand copy of. It's a great focal length. The old Canon 400L only has 7 elements in 6 groups and must be a cracking lens...can't afford to change brands now, but think this would have been what I needed. I bought a second hand Tamron 100-400 after checking out you and Ken Wheeler's videos, which is performing well, with great VR ..only downer is the F6.3 aperture at 400mm, but it does deliver. Like they say..learn to use what you have and get out and take photos..very good advise. Keep the videos coming always full of know how.
Thanks to your review Christopher I purchased this lens! I went to the San Francisco Zoo to photograph animals! All I can say is... wow wow wow!!!... What incredible sharpness! Thank you for your post!😃😃😃
I do hope you'll get around to doing a review of the Tamron 100-400mm Di VC USM F/4.5-6.3 that came out and the end of the last year I'm on the knife edge of scooping it up. I do realize it's probably not as great as the Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS II USM . I'd mostly be using it for small wildlife , raptors and critters with some bird in flight mixed in.
Not bad on a 70d but as others mentioned @ 1.6 crop its really 640mm; I wonder how it performs on a 7d Mk II?
interestingly much better at 5.6 than 6.3 or 7.1
No it's not 640mm at all. It's really 400mm still. Just with a narrower field of view. Moron.
@@KandiKlover dude be quiet. It’s 400mm on a 1.6x crop so it’s a full frame equivalent of 640. You’re the one that’s wrong here.
@@KandiKlover calling people morons when you're being the dumbest guy in the room.
The lens is 400 f5.6 but in practice the results on APSC are FF equivalent of 640mm and f6.3 or 7.1 (because it's lost light by cropping not just a longer lens)
No need to call people morons and get aggressive with internet strangers.
I'm using it on a 7d mark ii. You can get very nice photos; however, a mono pod or tripod can be very helpful.
Moreover; using this lens is like dating a country girl from Texas - it is going to take a while to get her to behave. When she does behave, you will be impressed.
Haha well that's one way of seeing it!
I use this on a 7d mk2 as well and it seems the PERFECT combination to me. You can't really can't get more IQ for less $$$
I'm a newbee at this, but with the research I'm doing I want to throw something out their and welcome imput to fine tune this idea. It's that Canon Newer generation camera bodies ( including 7D MK ii APC and full frame bodies) are being designed to accommodate newer improved tech and that older camera bodies ( especially canon with their lagging sensor tech) especially APC bodies can't really translate better glass to the end result images. I'm wondering if the canon 70D is up to using all the optical brilliance of the canon 400 5.6, because everywhere I read and talk to people the prime 400 is A staple choice of almost all wildlife pros, who assure me thru experience that the canon 5.6 400 mm cannot be bested ( equaled maybe or short by a hair) by the 100-400 L ii in the optical sharpness dept. maybe af speed has been improved. Seems the color/ image quality might be better, image stabilization and close minimum focus distance is all improved. I hear the 400 5.6 prime does great on the 7D MK ii and newer FF bodies. So what say east thou ? I also think canon is trying to make people buy the new gen cameras because of profit of course. I'm no expert so I would appreciate feedback on this and I'm not trying to knock 70D fan boys.
I've actually never had an issue with the 400mm on my T3i believe it or not, no IS isn't an issue especially for wildlife due to he fact that your speed will be at least 1/2000. I don't know if you can always say APS-C is going to be bad, I've always had sharp images.
Great review ! I will keep this lens in mind.
Please consider reviewing the 16-35 f/4L IS USM and the 24-70 f/4L IS USM !
Thank you Chris !
This is a lovely lens, even on a crop-sensor body and wide-open. I have used it on both a 70D and a 7DM2 and it does wonderfully, especially for birds in flight where it is very fast on AF. Many, many wildlife shooters use it on a crop-sensor body. Also, I can handhold at 1/640 for good results despite there being no IS on this lens.
youre not handholding a 400mm at 1/640. no offense
Po Tato Sure I did. It was good practice and I did it all the time for an entire year until I moved on. On a crop, it’s effective 640 mm, so that is no big claim.
I'm steady and unless my ISO is cranked to 800 min, not a chance my image is sharper than a 1/1600 or preferably, 1/2000th. On a tripod 1/200th is fine or lower for landscapes. 1/1200 for a common Anna's Hummingbird and no wings are frozen. I've handheld at 1/250 a few times. Mostly ducks or geese in flight and I was really lucky.f7.1. Finally learned the lens tho. f5.6 on a crop sensor is as sharp as 6.3 or 7.1 within a certain range. it's been my work horse going on a decade.
I appreciate your style and clarity. Thanks for the review.
This is a great lens indeed👍
Toby, a few years ago I did a bit of long range shooting, 600 to 1000 yards. We used powerful 30X to 50X rifle scopes. Heat waves were a problem sometimes. Do heat waves have an effect on image quality when using high magnification lenses?
Yup, they can do
As always Christopher best in lens review!, Thank you for the review!
Every lens I want reviewed is on this channel.
I was confused by a comment that 5.6 didn't let in much light. f/5.6 is not that bad, is it? f/4 and higher seems quite common, it's half the light of an f/4 which doesn't seem too bad. Maybe I am just used to lenses f/4 or higher. Only my macro is 2.8
F/5.6 is fairly dark, although it won't really be a problem if you're shooting in daylight
Very nice work. One of my favorite lens reports.
Another awesome video I Just got the lens yesterday from mpb in excellent condition I tested it today on the R6 and love it have the rf 800 but the high iso with our dull weather was doing my nut in .
great to be able to use the animal eye tracking focus on all the lens not just the centre area like in the rf lens would love you to do a review of the 400 with both the 1.4 and the 2x teleconverters to see how they compare with. Each other specialy on the new mirrorless bodies with their better low light af ability
Christopher Frost Photography Thank you for all the videos you put out here Christopher! They are quite a help! :D And it must be a lot of hours you put into making them. So thanks again!
However, I wonder about what perspective you have on making them as "scientific" as possible, without having a large studio and controlled environment of course.
Like the light conditions for example. Most of the tests are in soft light, a cloudy day for example, and that gives less sharp results. Some of the tests have more of a hard light like the sun, hitting that house body, which gives sharper images. Also, what about the distance to the subject? That makes a difference to the sharpness as well. So if all of us take our photos in soft lighted situations like in your tests and with about the same distance, we should get similar results, sort of. But for wildlife and for me especially bird photography, most of the time you want hard light on your subject to get that extra detail and sharpness of your subject. A soft day isn't very tempting to get out there and shoot birds. That's why I don't think that this review of the Ef 400/5.6 is complete and it would be great to see a hard light comparison as well. :)
So which is more enjoyable shooting experience, this or 300 f4 IS?
Well he did say he would prefer a 400mm any day over the 300mm.
I've heard that this lens takes sharper photos than the IS
Mikhail Campbell no, it isn't. you really don't know anything about photo quality
Mikhail Campbell fatso
Canon EF 400mm f/5.6L USM Super Telephoto Lens for Canon SLR Cameras get huge discounts now!
twitter.com/VoveIM/status/892335896623669249
On 7d ii it is crazy sharp lens even wide open. Definitely better than 70-200 4 is on its 200mm when also wide open. In many reviews people tends to say opposite :-)
So Christopher and others have noted that it's sharpest at f8. Question: If you use a 1.4x teleconverter on it, which pushes the max aperture to f8, does that mean it is sharpest at f8 when extended? or should it be stopped down again for peak sharpness?
No, you'd want to stop it down to f11 if possible and there is a noticeable loss of IQ with the teleconverter. Be aware many bodies won't autofucus well (or at all) with an f8 lens (though manual focus will still be fine).
@@jrd33 thank you so much for the answer!
Not many reviews on this lens let alone good ones like the one here. Agree IS and a gasket seal would really knock it out of the park. Still, its a good value. Thanks for the review.
Please, Retest on EOS R5.
Regarding telephoto lenses. If a lens works well on a full frame body there is no reason for it not to work equally well on an aps-c body. The latter is only using the center portion of the lens - which is the sharpest - and getting rid of the corners, which are usually the where distortion and vignetting appear. If anything an aps-c body will demand better technique from the photographer as motion blur and camera movement are more evident in a cropped body with the same number of megapixels as its full frame counterpart i.e a 70D and a 6D.
You're still magnifying the centre part of the image and throwing away the information from the edges of the full frame image circle. This becomes more of a problem as the number of MP increases. Check out Dxomark which rates camera/lens combinations for effective MP.
Nice review. But it appears that click of this lens is darker because of smaller apperture
It is a superb lens, very sharp in good light and one of the best wildlife lenses to own. Remove the tripod mount if using it for any length of time to bring the weight down bit. Superb for birds in flight
I paid $896.73 including shipping from Japan to Wisconsin in December 2021. The lens looks brand new.
Thanks Chris. I like how you always have even the most obscure lenses
Hi Chris, I have one thought after I purchased one copy: One idea perhaps is to use it on my Sony A7 II with its 5-axis image-stabilized sensor along with an appropriate adapter. It should work well since the camera gets the focal length info from the electronic adapter in beween the lens and the Sony. That could mitigate the issue with the aperture, which doesn't let a lot of light in. Best, Ralf
Now the lens is here and I took several pictures with it - with the Canon 6D and the Sony A7 Mk II. The picture quality of the Sony is superior to that of the Canon 6D, but the autofocus is slowed down due to the adapter solution. Even on my Olympus PEN E-P5 the lens delivers very good results at aperture 5.6 and more so at aperture 8.0. Here, due to the crop factor the picture angle is as tight as an 800mm fulframe lens. 5-axis Image stabilization of the Sony and Olympus is of great help, since both cameras recognize the focal length of the attached Canon lens via the adapter.
Great Review!
A review of the 300mm f4 would be very nice.
Hi Chris ! I was wondering: would you be able to test this lens on your Canon M6 mk2 ? I’m really curious to see how it performs on that high-res aps-c sensor ! I would like to consider it for shooting birds with it !
I think it will struggle to be honest - it's an older lens now. Try the Sigma 100-400 instead - it also has image stabilization
hi, why long telephoto lenses don't resolve well with APC-S cameras? thanks!!
Thank you for the comparison of the APS-C versus full frame using this lens. I have the 60 D and have a 100-300mm lens. I really want to get a 400mm,(for wildlife) but from what I have seen here I probably wouldn't be that happy being that that the image quality isn't that great on a crop sensor. That and no is :( I would love to see a comparison between cameras with you using the new 100-400mm Canon lens. Hopefully one day I will get a full frame camera.
msmartinigirl1 I'm sure I'll find a sharp one some day. Canon's more expensive lenses should be good hehe
+msmartinigirl1 1 thing that wasn't mentioned is that there is a crop factor on an APSC body the 70D is a 1.6 crop factor so it's actually a 640mm f/5.6 equivalent so the Image quality is amazing...
Wonderful lens on 2021 im still looking.
Thanks Chris, I have lusted after this lens for over a year but as I am a 70D owner, now I am not so sure. Why doesn't it perform as well on APS-C cameras?
Paul Moss Still, the 400/5.6 is a great lens and if you pick an used one up you really can't find better bang for your bucks when it comes to telephoto lenses with good image quality. :)
Well, it kinda does, really, because it's giving you the field of view of a 640mm lens. So a fairer comparison would be with a 400mm + 1.4x extender on a full frame body. A full frame lens on a full frame body will always out-resolve a crop sensor camera because of physics (the crop camera will typically suffer less vigneting and have sharper corners due to a smaller image circle but this lens is so good that the crop camera doesn't gain here).
'400mm is so telephoto' :)
sony would be a 600mm if they have an adapter which Im sure they do so ner
Was wanting to get this lens for my rebel t7 but now this video makes me want to get a Full frame and then get this lens 🤦😂 is the lens still worth it today? I have one available to me for $750 and im trying to decide if i should grab it.
Hi Chris. First, big thanks for all your great videos. They are my first guide to improve my equipment. I have a sony a6000 (aps-c sensor) and I want for a Telephoto (at least 400mm) for static photo with tripod (scenes with full moon...) so it's not quite important for me OSS or AF. In your opinion, and because the quality of these telephoto lenses decrease a lot on APS-C sensors, what's the best option for a small budget and a sharpest image? This old canon 400, the tamron 150-600, any others old lenses you know about your experience. Thanks a lot.
I quite like the Sigma 150-600 'Contemporary', it wasn't bad when I tested it on APS-C
Thanks a lot!!!
Hi Chris....thanks for the wonderful review but you didn't talk about CA, honestly i am looking fwd to use this lens for astrophotography which requires longer exposures so even a small amount of CA is going to show up in star images...what do u say about CA as i will be using it wide open....thank you!
If you watch the review and look at the test scene, you'll see that this lens has almost no CA. When it comes to astrophotography, you will run into problems taking long exposures with a 400mm lens, because planetary movement means that the stars in your pictures will have long trails.
Christopher Frost Photography Thanks Chris.. I know about the star trails and that's why I have tracker mount but I am happy to know that it has almost nill CA.
Ah, I see. Well, it's not a bad choice of lens for that, then :-)
does this lens have a good sharpness? is the focus fast?
Hi Chris, there are two Canon RF lenses coming for your Canon R: An 11.0/600mm and an 11.0/800mm, both of them have an image stabilizer. They are very compact due to diffractic optics. Are they an option for you? Best, Ralf
You mean, do I plan to test them? Yes, I do.
Christopher Frost Photography Thank you!
hi cris ,,thanks for the review .. if we want to compare this lens to tamron sp 150-600mm which one gives you better picture quality and sharpness?
+Yousef Ebrahim At 400mm, the image quality is surprisingly similar
How does this compare to the 400 F4 dos lens
+Freddie Slaughter Haven't tried, I'm afraid
+Mert Kabakci I've only ever seen pretty average reviews for it though.
+Freddie Slaughter In my research at the time the 400 f4 dos was not getting good reviews in my pro circles and my research . The 5.6 was my choice and I am very pleased .
400mm or the new 100-400mm IS V2? :0 they're both 5.6 at 400.. but it being a prime, is it THAT much better then the 100-400 or is it negligible?
Their sharpness will be about the same. The 100-400 will cost more, though
Hi Again Chris,
How does this compare to the Sigma 100-400mm lens in image quality??
This Canon lens is sharper
Can you please review the new Sigma 150-600 contemprory lens, would really appreciate it.
It's an awesome lens, I've been using it on a 5d mkiii for around 8 months and love it, nice and sharp, even at 600mm.
I just got one for use with a 6D and 7D Mk II. It is a very sharp lens all the way out. It's also an A lens with the 7D Mk II, meaning it will use all 65 focus points.
If I want to use this camera lens with the Sony A6300 bay adapter or convert the passes with the Sony A6300?
You will need an adaptor
Hi Chris! nice job!
Hey Christopher, thank you for this video! It's greatly appreciated! Aside from the IS: Does the combination Canon EF 4.0/300mm L IS in conjunction with the Canon Extender 1.4 Mk III outperform this lens?
Best, Ralf
+Magnetron692 I haven't tried that combination. But the 300/4 is not perfectly sharp at f/4, and with an extender it'll be even softer, so I can pretty much guarantee that this 400mm lens is the sharper optionh
Thank you!
Now I've purchased one 400 :)
do you calibrate the lenses to your cameras?
I manually focus them for my tests
+Christopher Frost Photography did you use manual focus in Liveview for the comparaison on the 70D?
+justin holding Yup, I checked everything
+Christopher Frost Photography is strange cos I'm getting very sharp results with my 70D
Hey guys for bird photography would you choose this over the 100 400 ii going to Morocco for bird photography
+Matt Packer You'll probably want the 100-400 ii lens for the convenience of the zoom range and the image stabilization
+Christopher Frost Photography I have taken images that are well liked internationally with the 400 5.6. For bird photography it may be a toss up at entry level with this and the 100-400 . My images MarCanPhotograhy on Facebook or Flickr, judge for your self
+Marlon Bernard haha birds
do you still like 400 over 300 for an aps c camera body?
im willing to buy a good tele lens for birds, and idk what to choose, the 300 f4 is or this one
thank you for the video christopher
+Amit H 300mm would be fine if you're using APS-C :-)
+Christopher Frost Photography
oh wow thanks for the fast comment ! :D
i believe it will be a huge upgrade from the 70-200 f4 is +1.4 ext
thanks again :D
After I watched your great video I selected another review by Cafetography, posted 4 months after yours, that used almost exactly the same format and almost the same narrative. Are you aware that your videos are being ripped off?
For a year or so I made the odd video for Cafetography (that was a long time ago now)
is this good for low light? more for sports?
Watch the review, and you'll find answers to both of those questions and many more!
should I get this or the 300mm f4 is
300 F4 is a great lens, but the IS makes it pretty heavy. You really have to sort out what you need the lens for! For example, for marine photography you need a zoom, but for most wildlife, you need loads of grunt!! I don't think you need an IS for a 300 lens IMHO
Hi can u please share a review of Canon 400 mm f/4 DO USM lens..
If u could it would be great
Also please advice which telephoto lens is good of apsc Canon mount
Maybe one day
i have cannon 700d and sigma 500m.i am doing bird photograpy
need to change my lense
i am thinking sigma 600mm and cannon 100mm-400mm
what do u think my budet is 1400usd
+deepal buddika Try the Sigma 50-500mm OS HSM
how much is it?
+deepal buddika Look online. DigitalRev is a good company
Hi. If you can, please make review for sigma 15mm f2.8
Антон Кузьмин A review of that lens is coming soon!
Christopher Frost Photography YEAH! Thanks, man!
yaaaay! i know it you would like it when i requested the review for this lens
"I like the 400 mm!" - that's what she said! :D
Great review! Keep up the good work!
Unless you are willing to use a tripod most of the time, there are 2 better options to this lens. The 300mm f/4 IS L and the 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 IS II L.
I use the former with and without a 1.4x TC (which gives something like 420mm f/5.6). The IS does make a big difference and the reduction in image quality because of the TC is minimal. The only real drawback is slower AF, but it's still very usable. I've never missed a shot because of it. And without the TC, you have a fairly fast lens at f/4. The difference in the amount of light you get at f/4 vs. f/5.6 is significant. A final point is that the 300mm is amazing for close shots. It has a 1.5m minimum focusing distance which is much more versatile than the 3.5m on the 400mm.
If you don't want to use a TC, then the 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 IS II L is the cheapest alternative. You then have the benefit of the zoom and the IS, while the optical quality is just as good as the old 400mm f/5.6.
$850 more for the 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS II USM is justifiable for many who want the telephoto and IS. I agree.
potato Depends on your budget.
This fix lens???
Holy shit, that is sharp as hell.
Thanks Chris I am a sports photographer who is looking for a budget sports lens. I am thinking about buying this Canon 400mm f/5.6 USM 'L' or Tokina 300mm 2.8 or . Any option between the two? or any other choice please?
I don't know about the Tokina lens. A lot of sports photographers like the Canon 300mm f/4 IS, although it's a bit of an older lens now. I don't really do sports photography
تصلح للقناصه العدسه ذي ولا لا
re-review with r5 etc
Good
I paid £400 for this lens used. It's very well built but dear god it's heavy! I looked at the 100-400 but this one made more sense for me in terms of price and sharpness.
How mach
Google
Christopher Frost Photography thanks
hahahaha epic
صادقين كلكم من انتو منه
put this lens on a sony a7iii review
Nuy me a Sony a7iii, and I will
Hi Chris, long time follower of your very down-to-earth reviews, I was wondering if, since we're talking about the EF 400mm f/5,6 L in particular, I could pick your brains (or anyone else here) to help finally* shed some light on why of this strange artifacts on its bokeh with an excellent-condition copy I had of this lens, back in 2007. Is it just some quirkness from the APS-C sensor?
Though exposure weren't obviously spot on, I shot in RAW on an APS-C body (Canon 30D) with f/5,6 @ 1/200s and ISO 320 for settings and, as far as I can remember, the lens itself was tripod-mounted. Also, the diaphragm's blades were as mint as it can be in a equally mint-condition lens.
Thank you!
i.imgur.com/cEt1udM.png
* back in the day, many of the seasoned members at the Amateur Photographer forum were unable to figure it out.
No idea! Sorry
I have one for sale if anyone is looking
"Difficult parameters." Comments such as this are nonsense. This is a very very good IQ lens for the money and for the size and weight. "Rather have a 400 than 300". Why because "it's bigger?" Are we having a contest? I own an older 300mm 2.8, and the price of a new one (over 6000 US for the IS version) plus it is huge, heavy, relatively complicated to operate makes something like this 400 which is a LOT smaller and lighter seem like a breath of fresh air for an old man. The whole deal is, though "you get what you pay for" and the two lenses are meant for different purposes. "Back in the film days" of the 60's and 70's most of us would have sold our family to get a lens such as this 400mm.
Wow - you are seriously triggered. You're so angry you're not even thinking straight! The lens does indeed have difficult parameters - any 400mm f/5.6 lens without image stabilization will be a little tricky to use and avoid blurry pictures. And if you'd listened to the review properly, I actually agree with you that the lens has excellent image quality for the money. And the reason I said that I'd rather have a 400mm than 300mm lens for wildlife photography is nothing to do with size and weight - it's purely to do with the tighter angle of view which is better for shooting birds etc. Please don't write comments on people's videos when you're too angry to think properly.
i have one for sell 600 usd
I can not stand that awful background music.
what a boring lens to review : perfect sharpness, L lens build and quick af. A chance there was no IS so there was something to complain about !
Quite a lot of limitations. This lens really requires a particular skill
sometimes you get good and bad copy of a lens. maybe the workers were stress at work when making the lens.
Not with this one - it worked great :-)
I'm fed up with trying to use this lens. on average, out of 1000 photos taken with it, two of them will be acceptable, if I'm lucky. no, I don't use a tripod, but doing so is completely impractical for the situations in which I take photos.
I wouldn't recommend this lens to anyone. it's not worth the heartache
If you're shooting wildlife, 2 out of 1000 photos is about right for any lens :) In seriousness tho, it's a tough lens to shoot handheld. What sort of problems do you run into when you're using it? Maybe I can provide some tips that I've learned from bringing home duds from the field.
I have just bought one, but tested it first. Even at 500th on a dull day I got a pretty sharp photo. The secret is to always snap off two or three shots each time. Normally I would use AT LEAST 1000th. The lens is a bit specialised, and mainly for wildlife or sport. It's also a bit heavy to lug around, but hey, you have to suffer for your art! Quality of the images are fantastic. It is NOT a lens for taking holiday snaps, I have a Tamron 18-200 for that!! This lens is the business!
400mm lenses are not designed to be used hand-held.
Quite a lot of limitations. This lens really requires a particular skill