• Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.

    Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
ZEISS DTI thermal imaging cameras. For more discoveries at night, and during the day.

Canon EF 400mm f/5.6 L USM - good enough? (1 Viewer)

J

Johnr27uk

Active member
I'm seriously considering buying a Canon 550D with the EF 400mm lens.

It's my first DSLR camera set up, so I know I have a lot to learn, but my question is: -

will this lens be good enough for taking pictures of birds (just birds) or should I be thinking of something more powerful. ie will I be disappointed?
 
It - along with the 100-400mm zoom (my choice) - are probably the most popular Canon birding lenses on the planet, John.

No downsides then unless you absolutely need more reach (most of us would like more, but manage pretty well with 400mm); or if you actually find yourself so close to the birds that you need to focus more closely than the 400mm f/5.6 prime will allow; or if you need zoom capabilities.
 
Also the prime doesn't have IS which may be a show stopper for some. It was, however, not one of the reasons why I picked the zoom over the prime years ago. Loads of people get as good or better hand-held pics with the prime as I get with the zoom.

Thomas
 
That's the exact combination I started with. The 400 5.6 lens is outstanding. You can't beat the sharpness or quick focusing. It is made for birds in flight.

It doesn't have IS and that can be limiting in darker situations where you want to try slower shutter speeds. However you can't have it all and this is an excellent choice.
 
400 prime

Well i have the hefty Canon 500f4 and my other half has the lightweight 400 prime, i find myself constantly looking at her images and thinking how good they, particulary flight shots, horses for courses and all that but you will not be dissapointed with the 400 prime.
 
Bound to have people disagree, but I never use a filter on mine, seems daft to do anything that could degrade the quality.
They have a very substantial hood and feel it provides ample protection without adding extra layers of glass

Excellent lens and glad I chose it over the 100-400mm
 
[QUOTEAnd I'll bet you haven't got a single picture that demonstrates why][/QUOTE]

If i haven't got the 100-400mm how can I prove it, you make some very strange comments sometimes

Got some nice pics from the prime and from my 70-200mm which I use for the lower focal range

So yes pleased I bought what I did and my remark stands as a personal observation
 
"Excellent lens and glad I chose it over the 100-400mm"

And I'm equally glad I chose the 100-400mm despite never having tried the 400mm prime. :) Also a personal observation.
I can add that one reason I favour the 100-400mm is that I value the possibility of zooming out. Oh, and IS is fairly useful too.
But I've seen lots of superb pictures taken with the 400mm so it depends a lot on how you work in the field.
 
Macswede said:
"Excellent lens and glad I chose it over the 100-400mm"

And I'm equally glad I chose the 100-400mm despite never having tried the 400mm prime. :) Also a personal observation.
I can add that one reason I favour the 100-400mm is that I value the possibility of zooming out. Oh, and IS is fairly useful too.
But I've seen lots of superb pictures taken with the 400mm so it depends a lot on how you work in the field.
Click to expand...

Agree 100% with Mcswede here. The ability to zoom was one reason I picked the zoom.
And this image proves the other reason:
http://www.pbase.com/tjsimonsen/image/126568751
It was shot at a focus distance considerably closer than the 3.5m limit of the prime.
But if it is purly for birding purpose, and if you won't go below 400mm, then the prime is probably the way to go.

Thomas
 
lol, this never ending 'war' of the two lenses seems to be getting a bit tamer these days ;).
A lot of folks seem to think that all they have to do is to buy a certain lens and or Camera and they are bound to produce top rate shots, all I will say is that the ability of the person behind the lens is far more important than the lens itself.

To answer the originators question, Yes the lens is good enough if you are.
 
I have a helper/guide for the Mountain Hare workshops. He has both the 100-400IS and the 400f5.6. He shoots hand held or from a monpod.

He uses the 100-400 on dull days and the 400f5.6 on sunny days. He believes the IQ is better on the prime when he is shooting faster than 1/800, but below good speeds it is less reliable handhekd. He also feels there is more reach with the 400f5.6 and has done some side by side tests and suggests the 100-400 actually is only 370mm at the top end.

Given one lens to take he opts for the 100-400, due almost entirely to the IS. This is not just for Hares but also when we are photographing Crested Tits, Ptarmigan etc. Not sure what he would choose for BIF - I'll ask.
 
For what it is worth Art Morris raves about the 70-200/2.8 II + 2x tc III - so much so that he has dumped his 100-400 !. Could be another option if you wanted a Zoom with I.S. this will give a 4 stop I.S.and a super fast bare lens for low light stuff - although it is more expensive.
 
Last edited:
Roy C said:
lol, this never ending 'war' of the two lenses seems to be getting a bit tamer these days ;).
A lot of folks seem to think that all they have to do is to buy a certain lens and or Camera and they are bound to produce top rate shots, all I will say is that the ability of the person behind the lens is far more important than the lens itself.

To answer the originators question, Yes the lens is good enough if you are.
Click to expand...

:t::t::t:
 
Warning! This thread is more than 13 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.

Similar threads

F
New Equipment Starting over
Replies
3
Views
497
Luvfatbirds2
L
B
Canon EF 400/f5.6 L USM + EOS 7D Mk II combo anyone???
Replies
2
Views
980
BoldenEagle
B
ermine
Canon EF USM L 100-400 Mk1 repair -
Replies
0
Views
788
ermine
ermine
O
Canon EOS 80D always slightly "fuzzy"
Replies
14
Views
2K
nikitasius
N
A
Beginner camera recommendations?
Replies
6
Views
785
Ash Anne
A

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Back
Top