Canon EF 400mm f/5.6: good for birding? (1 Viewer)

[gmax]

Hello everybody,
I've been offered a used Canon Telephoto EF 400mm f/5.6L USM in excellent conditions (don't know the price yet ... ) ... Any opinions on this lens from your experience? With a 2x converter how many stops will it lose? No AF I guess ...
Thank you,
Max

 

[jourdaj]

Hello everybody,
I've been offered a used Canon Telephoto EF 400mm f/5.6L USM in excellent conditions (don't know the price yet ... ) ... Any opinions on this lens from your experience? With a 2x converter how many stops will it lose? No AF I guess ...
Thank you,
Max

Max,

Its a great piece of glass and a great walk-around lens for birding. Many prefer it over the 100-400mm Canon. Expect 2 stop loss w/ the 2x converter, and a monopod/tripod is suggested if you use it. You'll enjoy it!
Check out the reviews at Fredmiranda.com:

http://www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/showproduct.php?product=42&sort=7&cat=2&page=2

Jerry

 

[postcardcv]

I tested this lens earlier in the year and then wished I hadn't... it is excellent, but I could not justify buying one...

For a 400mm prime lens it is relatively small and light, so is very easy to hand hold, making it a great lens for flight shots. Being a L series lens you'd expect quality, and that's what you get, it produces excellent images and is even sharp when wide open. Even new it offers incredible value, not many other lenses produce that quality at that price (actually I can't think of any others), so a good secondhand deal will be hard to resist. If you want to see what the lens can do have a look at Ranga's gallery, he's using this lens to very good effect - http://www.birdforum.net/pp_gallery/showgallery.php?cat=500&ppuser=515

My advice is don't try it if you can't afford it, as I'm sure you'll find you like it a lot. assuming the price is right - snap it up.

 

[postcardcv]

With a 2x converter how many stops will it lose? No AF I guess ...

opps - missed that bit earlier...

indeed you'll lose 2 stops with a 2x and 1 stop with a 1.4x, neither will allow AF on a 350D. I think that if you use a Kenko 1.4x tc it will still AF, thought it will slow the focusing, and may struggle in poor light.

 

[jimtfoto]

We've also been looking into this lens (purchase put on hold since I am now expecting my Sigmonster any day now) after seeing results from several fellow photogs. Some of the best examples are indeed on the Fred Miranda forum. If you search for member Jody Melanson, you'll see some awesome captures. Jody uses this lens with the Mark IIN and a Bushhawk.

cheers,
jim

 

[SMC2002]

Max,
I have to echo Pete, Jim and Jerry's reponses. This lens IMO, is the poor man's birding solution. Lightweight, easy to handhold for hours, super fast AF (it has an AF limiter switch , sharp wide open, built-in lenshood, and it works oh-so-well with the cheap Tamron 1.4X TC (896mm FOV on a 1.6X camera). Even with the 1.4X attached, the AF is still decently fast. I find it to be on par with the Bigma's AF w/o a TC attached.

This lens or combined with a TC delivers stunning results and is definitely useable to capture birds in flight.

Here are a couple of galleries of 400mm shots.
Without the TC: http://www.pbase.com/gaocus/40056_sampler_gallery

With and without the TC: http://www.pbase.com/zylen/birds

And a couple of mine. Here and here

Pete is also correct about making sure you are serious before you attach this lens to your camera. Yes, it is that good

Steve

 

[gmax]

Pete is also correct about making sure you are serious before you attach this lens to your camera. Yes, it is that good

Steve

Thank you all,
now I'm in a hurry, have to go, but ... I'll let you know if next morning will see me wiser than now ...
Should I really dare facing this lens? I'm already trembling (so is my bank account...)

|8.|

 

[tirc83]

Thank you all,
now I'm in a hurry, have to go, but ... I'll let you know if next morning will see me wiser than now ...
Should I really dare facing this lens? I'm already trembling (so does my bank account...)

|8.|

I have hundreds of bird pics with this lens in my galleries http://www.pbase.com/tirc

Gary

 

[christineredgate]

Point and press and the shot is yours,with this lens.The lack of IS is not noticeable as the lens is so light and easy to hold.

 

[IanF]

I'm very pleased with this lens as well. A very sharp piece of glass.

Certainly with the 1.4x converter it produces results almost as good as the lens alone. I'm not sure the 2x converter is much use as on the f5,6 lens you'd lose another two stops. The 1.4x loses one f-stop and autofocus - even taping the pins it's painfully slow - not too bad for very static birds.

I certainly wouldn't hesitate in recomeding the lens for it's compactness, weight and overall quality - it the sharpest lens I've ever used.

 

[JohnZ]

I also have this lens and it is astonishing. Lightning fast AF, easily hand held and very very sharp wide open. Who could ask for anything more ?
It is also the sharpest lens I have ever used too.
Attached a few shots. The Plover, not the largest bird, was over 70 metres away when I took the shot. It is also a 100% crop.

 

[Keith Reeder]

Doh!!

I knew this is a fine lens, but I'd kinda settled on the 100-400mm IS USM alternative.

I'm having second thoughts now...

 

[baillieswells]

Hello everybody,
I've been offered a used Canon Telephoto EF 400mm f/5.6L USM in excellent conditions (don't know the price yet ... ) ... Any opinions on this lens from your experience? With a 2x converter how many stops will it lose? No AF I guess ...
Thank you,
Max

Here's a thought.. How about the Canon 300mm f4 L lens with IS. With a 1.4 teleconverter it would be 420mm at 5.6 so would auto focus, and 2 x converter would take it to 600mm at f8 without autofocus but still with IS. Any views.

 

[JohnZ]

Keith, I regularly use the POTN Canon Forum and there are countless arguments/discussions on there regarding the two lenses you are contemplating. I could have afforded the 100-400mm IS but the thought of spending that much money on a single lens frightened me off. As it turned out I am more than happy with the lens I bought.
At the risk of repetition the 400mm is lighter, faster AF, over £200.00 cheaper and very sharp indeed, even wide open. I have seen some excellent shots taken with the 100-400mm so I suspect there is very little between these lenses. Were the 400mm to have IS then it would be perfect but also cost a lot more.
I personally would not go down the route of a 300mm with converter. I would not want to have to rely on a converter to gain the extra length. I suspect it may also affect the amount of light reaching the viewfinder.
With good light the 400mm is unbeatable at the price. Even in lesser light it is still an excellent lens and well worth consideration.

 

[IanF]

I'm in the fortunate position to own both and I wouldn't like to choose between them.

The 100-400mm has the advantage of compactness, IS, closer focus and of course the versatility of the zoom. However it is slightly heavier and wide open not quite as sharp as the prime, though closing down aperture a stop or two makes it just about equal.

The 400mm prime is sleeker with built in lens hood and easy enough to hand hold, though most often I try to brace myself against a tree, wall or whatever. Wide open it's slightly sharper than the 100-400mm.

To my mind 400mm isn't really enough for casual bird photography, so I wouldn't consider the 300mm. At least with the 400mm you still ahve the option of adding a converter. A 400mm lens is still comfortable to carry around all day - once you go longer the lens becomes a burden. Like most things it's a compromise as to what suits your needs best.

 

[SMC2002]

Here's a thought.. How about the Canon 300mm f4 L lens with IS. With a 1.4 teleconverter it would be 420mm at 5.6 so would auto focus, and 2 x converter would take it to 600mm at f8 without autofocus but still with IS. Any views.

I agree with Ian that 400mms is barely acceptable for birding. 300mms is just too short. Now, I have considered the same approach using the F2.8 300mm. A 2X TC does effect image quality, but not all that much on this fine piece of glass. 420mms @ F4 with a 1.4X and 600mms @ F5.6 with a 2X may well be worth the expense.

Steve

 

[bpw]

I use the 400mm lens after first trying a 70-200mm IS lens with 2x converter. This was a mistake, as when photographing birds, I always wanted the 400mm focal length, so I lost two stops and the image quality suffered noticeably. I was pleased when the lens developed a fault and I was able to return it!

I have the two Canon teleconverters, but rarely use them. I have not been able to produce an acceptably sharp image with the 2x, and with the 1.4x, the quality is not quite as good as the lens alone, although I accept this might be down to my technique. I have 'fixed' the 1.4x to autofocus (my eyes aren't the best) and the focus performance is slower, but reasonable. I always carry a tripod and use it when birds are stationary, but as stated by others, the lens is very light and superb for flight photography. Arthur Morris is a great fan of this lens for flight shots, and I bought it for this reason (he calls it his 'toy lens').

The truth is, a 500 or 600mm lens would be better (with the 400mm for flight), but can we afford one of these? I'm still saving!

 

[gmax]

I agree with Ian that 400mms is barely acceptable for birding. 300mms is just too short. Now, I have considered the same approach using the F2.8 300mm. A 2X TC does effect image quality, but not all that much on this fine piece of glass. 420mms @ F4 with a 1.4X and 600mms @ F5.6 with a 2X may well be worth the expense.

Steve

Hi Steve, thanks ...
one more question:
Which budget TC is really compatible with this lens (and, in general, with an L-class lens, e.g. a 300mm f/4) apart from the Canon extenders? I'm not referring to AF limitations ... MF could be good enough.
I've read a lot about these TCs, but things are not that clear: for example, what's the difference between these two: Kenko 1.5x SHQ DG and Kenko Teleplus Pro 300 DG 1.4x?
Thank you all
Max

 

[macshark]

Hi Steve, thanks ...
one more question:
Which budget TC is really compatible with this lens (and, in general, with an L-class lens, e.g. a 300mm f/4) apart from the Canon extenders? I'm not referring to AF limitations ... MF good could be good enough.
I've read a lot about these TCs, but things are not that clear: for example, what's the difference between these two: Kenko 1.5x SHQ DG and Kenko Teleplus Pro 300 DG 1.4x?
Thank you all
Max

Tamron 1.4x (MC4) and the Kenko 1.5x SHQ DG are the two budget TCs that would work with 400mm f/5.6L. There were a few tests which showed these TCs to be identical. (There has been several rumors that the Tamron version was just a re-labelled version of the Kenko. I have not been able to find conclusive evidence on this so far). These two TCs do not report the aperture change to the body, so the camera body thinks the aperture remains at f/5.6 with the TC attached and will try to AF. Camera bodies like the 350D/20D/30D are not supposed to AF at f/8 according to the Canon specs. However, when 400 f/5.6L is combined with these non-reporting Kenko/Tamron TCs, most people have found out that the AF works quite well, though it is somewhat slower and slight hunting is possible when there is not enough light and/or contrast.

Kenko Teleplus Pro 300 DG 1.4x reports to the correct aperture to the camera, so if you use it with a 350D/20D/30D, the camera will see f/8 and automatically disable AF. There are two ways to work around this:
(1) Tape the leftmost 3 pins on the TC. (No change to the TC but may the glue from the tape may mess up the contacts on your camera)
(2) Remove the leftmost 3 pins on the TC. (Cleaner solution but you need to disassemble the metal faceplate cover of the TC to get to the pins).

There has been various tests of these TCs (www.dpreview.com is a good place to search), but overall, the quality differences seem pretty minimal, at least when used on 1.6x crop digicams. All of these TCs appear to give very good quality when used with a high quality prime lens (like the 400mm f/5.6L), especially in the center of the frame.

 

[JohnZ]

I am planning to get the Kenko Teleplus Pro 300 DG to use with my 400mm f5.6. It may mean taping the three pins but such is life. I believe it is available from Hong Kong for slightly less than £100.00 as opposed to the diabolical amount Canon are asking for similar. The company selling them will also refund any Import Duty etc you may incur.
After all that I cannot tell you the difference between the two you have mentioned but I have read nothing but good reports about the Pro 300 DG.