• 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 200-400 f/4L announced (1 Viewer)

HokkaidoStu said:
Ah but that's what interest free installment plans are for.............

I can't get my head round a 3KG lens costing quite a bit more than the very nice used car I bought last year.
Click to expand...

My credit rating is a sad, sad sight, unfortunately. Still, that stops me getting into the financial crap (been there done that :-C ) so I have to save for what I want - which is not really a bad thing when you think about it.

I know what you mean about the car, Stu. Mine cost somewhere in the region of £6000 in 2007 and I still can't believe a lens can cost more than that.
 
Last edited:
Jaff said:
Yep. This is what I realised, you can change TC's with the flick of a switch, massive time saver in the heat of the moment like if you see a bird heading straight for you. This lens is in effect a 200-560mm f4-5.6.
!
Click to expand...

I don't understand.. so why don't they just make a 200-560mm F4-5.6 lens?!
you wouldn't even need to flip a switch then.

LOL.. I can almost feel people tutting and shaking their heads slowly at me!
 
Vectis Birder said:
I know what you mean about the car, Stu. Mine cost somewhere in the region of £6000 in 2007 and I still can't believe a lens can cost more than that.
Click to expand...

On the bright side, a good lens doesn't have the same appalling depreciation or running costs of a car. I know what I'd rather spend my cash on nowadays... my car's 10 years old, and if can eke another 10 years out of it, I will! ;)

ce
 
Keith Reeder said:
Got to admit that I find this to be a potentially interesting alternative (with a 1.4x or 2x as necessary - the built-in TC is a great idea, but not a "must have" IMHO) - and it will be loads less expensive (MSRP is less than $5000).

The non OS version is very highly regarded.
Click to expand...

There was a thread a while back about which lenses we'd like to see Canon make and that Sigma was what I was hoping for from Canon.

The one major drawback with that lens though is the lack of a focus limiter if it's like the prime.
 
CornishExile said:
On the bright side, a good lens doesn't have the same appalling depreciation or running costs of a car. I know what I'd rather spend my cash on nowadays... my car's 10 years old, and if can eke another 10 years out of it, I will! ;)

ce
Click to expand...

I've got no plans to change mine, it's 7 years old with 45500 miles on the clock, so unless I crash it or the engine blows up or something, it stays. Like you, I'd rather spend money (if I had it) on things like lenses.

That Sigma zoom looks good, I wonder what it would be like with a 2x tc?
 
Its just another lens.

Most of my time is spent trying to get close and I don't worry about my lens. Most of this winter I have been using the 100-400 and not lugging the 500 up hills. It's light, portable, small and can produce stunning results. Recently on one of the workshops I asked everyone to leave their juicy primes behind and spend a day on the hill with the 100-400 photographing Ptarmigan and Hare. They were blown away by the results and realised that glass is good but it doesn't beat the ability to get close and the 100-400 (or equivalent) is great for this. I guess if this is a similar weight and can be used hand held it could be very interesting! I just meet so many folk who worry about their glass and don't think about technique and fiedcraft it's really surprising.

I do like the sound of the lens, but I would much rather spend the money on visiting new locations. For now at least.
 
You're right Marcus. I suppose a lot of people get carried away by what I call 'lens envy' - I know I do when I see all this lovely sexy gear! Especially those lovely primes...
I was at Blashford Lakes in Hampshire on Tuesday, I used nothing but my 400mm f5.6 lens and got some nice shots of the small birds in the woods. I still want a 500mm - or the 200-400 with built-in extender - but I know it's not going to happen any time soon, so I remain satisfied with my 400mm which, don't get me wrong, I love to bits, but one reason I want a 500mm, or similar, is that it's f4 so you can use a 1.4x extender with it and not lose AF, unlike the 400mm f5.6.

I wonder how physically large the Canon 200-400 will actually be? At Blashford the other day I met a couple of photographers with Nikon 200-400s, which are physically big zooms; I thought they were 500mm primes at first they are that large.
 
Last edited:
Well it's human nature isn't it. Your neighbour's grass somehow always looks greener. ;)

I really do see the big benefits of this lens myself for if you are physically limited to being in one place like in a hide for example (pop-up or otherwise) which is usually the best way to get close to birds and this gives you a wide range of working focal lengths and apertures like the 300mmf2.8 does but with much less hassle and a lot more freedom. I'm under no illusions that it'll be a very pricey SOB and probably everyone who's posted on this thread won't be able to afford it even a year from now but we can dream can't we? ;)
 
peter.jones said:
I don't understand.. so why don't they just make a 200-560mm F4-5.6 lens?!
you wouldn't even need to flip a switch then.

LOL.. I can almost feel people tutting and shaking their heads slowly at me!
Click to expand...

Just spotted this. Are you familiar with Sigzilla? That's the Sigma 200-500mm f2.8, would you want to carry that around!? :eek!:

Your link ain't working Keith.
 
Jaff said:
Just spotted this. Are you familiar with Sigzilla? That's the Sigma 200-500mm f2.8, would you want to carry that around!? :eek!:
Click to expand...

Not exactly portable, is it? Juza didn't hand-hold his for very long. You'd need one of the large tripods for astronomical telescopes to support this monster.
 
Keith Reeder said:
Nikon and Canon play the same game, and historically, Canon lenses are always cheaper than "equivalent" Nikons.
Click to expand...

Keith right here to a point, Canon marketed their lenses just below Nikon's cost.

It got people caught into a product brand, they also applied some very clever advertising. Nikon at the moment are also in a massive campaign which will increase during the summer when the 'D4' is launched.

Looking at the the new costs for the big Canon lenses they have to be above Nikon.

Thom Hogan has written his views.

"Lens choice is one of the things that have locked people into the Nikon/Canon duopoly over the years. While other players produce a number of lenses, the sheer choice in the Nikon and Canon mounts has led people towards Nikon and Canon cameras. For the first-time purchaser who just goes all-in-one, that isn't a big thing, but the camera companies make good money hooking people into systems. And those systems have been proprietary for far too long"

The main market for N&C lenses is the middle, you and I. The pro sector isn't that big, I can't see either of them changing their strategy until there is a serious rival.
 
Link sorted now, Jaff.

Peter, the beauty of this lens is the fact that you can choose between f/4 and 560mm: sometimes you'll want the former, sometimes the latter, and being able to get the preferred option at the flick of a lever is pretty appealing.
 
Last edited:
Keith Reeder said:
Funny you should mention that, Marcus (see especially, post no. 8).

Mind you, if you try and persuade me that when you first got your 500mm f/4 you weren't just like a kid at Christmas, I'm tellling you now - I won't believe you!
;)
Click to expand...

Well said that man.

I do love the 500 f4. But, I have not taken it out yet this year, you just made me realise that. Certainly when I do some more work on Otters it is an absolute winner.
 
Got to admit, I'm really enjoying the self-imposed restriction.

I'll still crop if that's the only way to get a picture out of a file, but hand on heart I can say that I've been able to get some cracking images with only minimal - or no -cropping simply by trying harder.

I've been lucky sometimes too - I recently got some lovely full frame-ish images of a Goldfinch feeding on a local beach: a very odd - and interesting - setting for a Goldfinch, but with care the bird was very approachable. It seemed perfectly healthy, I should add.
 
Last edited:
Seeing Keith's pic has reminded me about something. What does the the 3rd IS mode do with these new lenses?
 
Jaff said:
Seeing Keith's pic has reminded me about something. What does the the 3rd IS mode do with these new lenses?
Click to expand...
From a Canon site "Mode 3 enhances Optical Image Stabilizer Mode 2 by functioning only when the shutter release is fully pressed. By remaining inactive until exposure, Mode 3 stabilization control allows for easy panning. Additionally, Mode 3 compensates shake in a direction perpendicular to the direction of panning when panning is detected and gives the equivalent effect of a shutter speed four stops faster"
 
Thanks Roy. Sounds a very exciting prospect if all future Canon IS systems, even in some of the budget lenses (very doubtful though), adopt this new IS system.
 
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

Frank van Drogen
Canon RF 200-800mm IS USM
3 4 5
Replies
91
Views
15K
Barred Wobbler
Barred Wobbler
ermine
Canon EF USM L 100-400 Mk1 repair -
Replies
0
Views
789
ermine
ermine
T
Camera choice for birding around 3000 Euros with lens?
Replies
3
Views
1K
Tsvetan
T
W
Considering a Partial Camera Upgrade - D500 w/ 200-500mm lens
2
Replies
34
Views
4K
BriLee
B
dwatsonbirder
Kowa TSN-501 - a brief review
Replies
11
Views
3K
Rsrjerry
R

Users who are viewing this thread

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