Canon 400mm f2.8

B

bensherman

Suspended / Banned
Messages
272
Name
Matt
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi I'm looking at getting one of these lenses in the near future. Would the non-is version be a worthwhile purchase as I will have to be getting one second hand and can't stretch to the £6ooo plus price of the new one.
 
the non is versions are no longer serviced or supported by canon, parts would be very hard to find
 
Have you looked at the 300mm f/2.8 IS? You can handhold it and it takes the TCs very well. I went with the 300 over the 400 just due to the sheer size, weight and what I felt was 'too long' focal length on the 400.
 
^I have the Sigma 120-300mm f2.8 which I handhold but looking for a 400mm to give me a bit more reach into pitch. Thing is I need the f2.8 as most the stuff I shoot is not under flood lights.
 
Cheers for the reply Gary I didn't know about Canon not servicing the non-is 400mm but think the wife would gut me like a fish if I spent more than £3500 on a lens. ;)
 
400 non IS is very heavy.. a lot heavier than the newer IS ones.. I have owned both and much prefer the 300mm
 
bensherman said:
^I have the Sigma 120-300mm f2.8 which I handhold but looking for a 400mm to give me a bit more reach into pitch. Thing is I need the f2.8 as most the stuff I shoot is not under flood lights.
Click to expand...

I recommend you try the Canon 300mm anyway... you might be suprised but there is a definite difference in field of view between my old 120-300mm and my new Canon 300mm F4.@ 300mm.
 
RichardtheSane said:
I recommend you try the Canon 300mm anyway... you might be suprised but there is a definite difference in field of view between my old 120-300mm and my new Canon 300mm F4.@ 300mm.
Click to expand...

The canon 300l lets you crop in far more than the sigma 120-300 because of the quality of pic.. I also owned the 120-300 and went to 300 prime... deffo able to crop in more..
 
The 400 is SUPERB but its a heavy beast, twice the weight and twice the price of the 300mm. Also with the 400mm its very hard to handhold where as the 300 you can quite comfortably handhold it. I was lucky that i got a 400 before the price increases of last year and if i was looking to buy a long prime again i would go for the 300 over the 400
 
It ain`t that heavy guys, come on.
 
It is heavy compared to the 300mm - wieghs in on the scales with a 1d at approx 15lbs !

But it is worth it and you get used to the weight - fits in a rucksack and can be carried up and down the hills !

Buy it - 300 is great - but if you can do the 400 2.8 - well worth it ! hardly use my 300mm now - though that now feels small enough in comparison to be a "walkabout" lens !

Good luck with it
 
Cheers for the replies, my thinking was 400mm on a monopod then change to backup camera with 70-200mm or perhaps the 120-300mm when action comes closer.
 
bensherman said:
Cheers for the replies, my thinking was 400mm on a monopod then change to backup camera with 70-200mm or perhaps the 120-300mm when action comes closer.
Click to expand...

For Football/Rugby yep thats exactly the way to do it. I ditched the 70-200 though in favour of the 135 f/2
 
bensherman said:
Cheers for the replies, my thinking was 400mm on a monopod then change to backup camera with 70-200mm or perhaps the 120-300mm when action comes closer.
Click to expand...


That would be a good set up, a professional set up really if you are mounting a 1D III on the back etc. A lot of folk ask about the 300mm non-IS as well, but I believe Canon don't service that either which is what puts them off buying one.

Let us know how you get on though.
 
Laudrup said:
It really is.
Click to expand...

It is heavy, i know its not much different to the weight of the 300-800 but i think the problem is the 400 is shorter than the the Siggy IIRC i could be talking bow larks though
 
I've got a 1D mkII and a 450D which will be replaced with a 1D mk3 hopefully in the near future.
 
Quick question how come the 400mm f4 lens is so expensive? Secondhand price is still £4500 ish?
 
bensherman said:
Quick question how come the 400mm f4 lens is so expensive? Secondhand price is still £4500 ish?
Click to expand...

It's a DO lens. Different construction make it smaller and lighter than if it were a standard design.
 
Cheers for that Richard, thought it was strange seeing you would be losing a stop of light. I suppose the fact you could probably handhold it would be a benefit but I really need the extra stop.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top