Quote:
Originally Posted by ddk632
For those of you guys that shoot the long lenses, I have a question. I've noticed the Canon EF 400 f/5.6 is an oddball as far as pricing goes in the Canon "Super-tele" lineup.
My question is, besides the fact that it's f/5.6 and has no IS, any other reason why it's so cheap compared to the others?
The longest telephoto I have ever used is my EF 70-300 (variable aperture, non-L, has IS, was about $550 brand new). I have not many people who have a good opinion of this lens.
Just curious if the 400 f/5.6 is viewed similarly in the super-tele world, or if it's a great lens at a great price and has great IQ, but is just priced so low due to not having the wider aperture and IS?
Welcome any thoughts on the topic!
|
It's one stop slower than the DO version, and 2-stops less than the non-DO version of that lens. Both of those lenses are a significant bump in price. If you compare this 400 mm f/5.6L with those two, I'd say they all have excellent glass and excellent IQ. However, the other two have IS and additional stops (if you need it). IS makes a huge difference especially when you're out at 400 mm on a FF (or 640 mm on an APS-C).
Personally, I wouldn't buy a super telephoto without IS. That being said, if you primarily (almost always) will use it on a tripod, then go for the 400 mm f/5.6.
To answer your question, yes... it's that much cheaper mainly because it doesn't have IS and is at f/5.6. You can read a review here:
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/R...ns-Review.aspx
Additionally, to compare to the 70-300 mm lenses... it's like comparing apples to oranges. In this case, the L designation is significant. I used to have the 70-300 mm non-L, and in terms of IQ, my 70-200 mm f/4L IS runs circles around it. It's not even on the same playing field, imo. Not to sound like a douche, but if you're looking for the best IQ, go L or go home (it's true in 90% of the cases, and of course there are exceptions).
If you plan on selling your 70-300 mm, I recommend checking out the 100-400mm L IS lens. It's the only one in my collection with a variable aperture across all focal lengths, and I don't mind it. It's pretty sharp across the range as well. Additionally, the IS allows me to shoot handheld at 400mm without any issues.
I'm sure Dave, Ed, and others who shoot a lot of wildlife will chime in with their opinions and expertise.