different ef 400 models

KIPAX

KIPAX

Seriously Likeable
Messages
21,410
Name
KIPAX Lancashire UK
Edit My Images
No
Anyone know a source or any info re the difference..

ef 400 mkII and ef 400 IS (f2.8 models)
 
400II

Basic specification:
Focal length 400mm
Max aperture f/2.8
Minimum focus 400cm
Filter size 48mm
Mounts

* Canon EF USM

Weight 5910g
Dimensions 348mm x 167mm

IS specs can be found on Canon website
 
hmm yeagh got them with google thanks.. I think I asked wrong..SORRY! :) . more source of reviews.. ie whats the difference in real usage terms. is one sharper than the other.. is one a complete donkey.. that sort of thing :) if I dont need IS is the mkII betetr than the mkI as you would presume or did canon mess up again.. :)
 
Tony,

The 400/2.8 II was last produced in 2000 (according to my records) and spares are probably becoming a little scarce (as with the non-IS 600). I think it likely that Canon support will be discontinued in the not too distant future....third party outfits may carry on longer though.

Bob
 
Yeagh they stopped support for the 300 non IS but thats quite a lot older than 2000 "i think"

Juts with sports I hardly ever use IS on the 300.. the 400 is is still a bit out of my range but know where theres a 400 mKII in perfect nick i could buy... But is it as good as the current model.. I ahve a feeling I ahve read somewhere that it was a donkey.. not sure though.. Would be ideal if its considered a brill lens :)
 
Just found this quote from someone who owned all 3 versions of the 400mm f2.8.

From SportsShooter.com......I've had all 3 versions; and as covered already little weight difference between Mk 1 and 11; but a noticeable focus speed improvement. Version 3 (IS) is noticeably lighter but little difference in focus speed to the MK 11; plus the weather seal. I did have a water leak through the lens mount on my Mk 1 which nearly wrote off a camera. If you can afford it go IS, worth it for the weight alone !;
Click to expand...

So if it's a MKII then just an issue of weight.
 
The earlier versions of the 400mm f4 DO weren't very good either, and although they say the lastest version is far improved, A friend has one and personally, I haven't been overly impressed with its performance for motorsport or aviation, its quite soft.
 
pete.rush said:
The earlier versions of the 400mm f4 DO weren't very good either, and although they say the lastest version is far improved, A friend has one and personally, I haven't been overly impressed with its performance for motorsport or aviation, its quite soft.
Click to expand...

I didn't raise the DO before as it isn't 2.8. I had one for a while and do miss it. It isn't as sharp or contrasty as the 500 I sold it to buy, but I miss the flexibility of such a light lens with razor fast AF - especially for birds in flight.

If I find myself with "spare" cash in the future, I may even get another!
 
grumpybadger said:
I didn't raise the DO before as it isn't 2.8. I had one for a while and do miss it. It isn't as sharp or contrasty as the 500 I sold it to buy, but I miss the flexibility of such a light lens with razor fast AF - especially for birds in flight.

If I find myself with "spare" cash in the future, I may even get another!
Click to expand...

That was the reason he bought it was because it was less than 2kg and hand holdable. Must admit, the wildlife shots he's got with it are good, but I've told him to use it with the 50D he's just purchased, I think for motorsport / aviation it will be better than the 5D, which isn't renowned for its autofocus, hopefully he'll give it a try out on saturday at Brands for the BSB.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top