Posted by Jody Grigg on September 4, 2011 at 10:15 PM
I am thinking about getting a Canon Telephoto EF 400mm f/5.6L to shoot outdoor day sports, mainly skiing, I don't want the weight of an f/2.8 or f/4 or the size.
I was curious of those of you have had this or have this lens think about the sharpness of your pictures, I am going to couple this with a Canon 7D. Normally shooting at 1000/th or faster depending on the sport. It will always be a daytime sport.
Thanks in advance for any help.
Posted by Keith Bauer on September 5, 2011 at 12:19 AM
The 400 f/5.6 is an excellent lens. Very sharp. For some the drawback is that it does not have IS.
It is light enough that I don't see that as much of an issue.
Great combo with the 7D
Posted by Lance Warley on September 5, 2011 at 8:54 AM
Ditto what Keith said. However, a trade-off is that you will miss shots that are too close. I shoot lots of bif, and I found I was missing too many shots that were within 400mm. I bought the much-maligned 100-400. It's a little slower and a little softer than the prime (duh), but I get more shots because of the zoom. I stopped using the prime and sold it.
When I look at the flight shots on my site, I can't tell which lens I used.
So if closeness isn't an issue, it's the prime. Otherwise, imo it's the zoom, rather than schlepping another lens.
Anti-100-400ites, start your engines;-)
Posted by Keith Bauer on September 5, 2011 at 9:43 AM
Anti-100-400ites, start your engines;-)
I also have the 100-400 and hear the complaints about the lens. Mine is great. When I can I like to stop down to f/8 at the 400mm end. If I'm able to do that, it is great. Lance's comments were spot on.
I am thinking about getting a Canon Telephoto EF 400mm f/5.6L to shoot outdoor day sports, mainly skiing, I don't want the weight of an f/2.8 or f/4 or the size.
I'm not a Canon shooter, but one of my principal shooting partners is well set up with Canon's from 300 f/2.8 through 600 f/4. I don't know the full array because he has some older ones too, including IIRC a 400 f/2.8.
It's notable that I don't know his full array. That's because on most of our adventures he's carrying a 400 f/5.6. It's as sharp as the others in his opinion and just a whole lot easier for travel, whether on a plane or on foot in rough country. He's obviously impressed, even with a stable full of "better" lenses.
Posted by Jody Grigg on September 5, 2011 at 11:17 AM
I am not looking at the 100-400 I know where I plan to be for shots, I will either move away if too close or use my 70-200 which I plan to use the most of the time anyway. I had a 100-400 few years back for landscapes and was very disappointed with it, too soft. Just want feedback about the 400mm. Thanks again.
Posted by Ramamohan Pai on September 5, 2011 at 12:44 PM
Posted by Jody Grigg on September 5, 2011 at 7:19 PM
Thanks for all the replies, Ram that was what I was exactly looking for.
Posted by Paul DeCesare on September 8, 2011 at 1:43 AM
I owned the 400/5.6 at one point and it was one sharp lens, go for it. For the price and if being too close isn't an issue, it's a no-brainer for outdoor sports. I think the test that Rama posted speaks for itself, and answers the 100-400mm argument... I mean, did you see that mushy 5??? Yuck!
WHOA, that should start some darts flying!
Posted by Mark Seaver on September 8, 2011 at 8:55 AM
I've got the 400 f/5.6 and love it for it's weight. I can carry my entire kit in a medium sized backpack all day long. If close focusing is an issue buy an extension tube set. When you only need close focusing, add the extension. The main drawback is that autofocus doesn't work when you add a teleextender.
Discussion
9 repliesI was curious of those of you have had this or have this lens think about the sharpness of your pictures, I am going to couple this with a Canon 7D. Normally shooting at 1000/th or faster depending on the sport. It will always be a daytime sport.
Thanks in advance for any help.
It is light enough that I don't see that as much of an issue.
Great combo with the 7D
When I look at the flight shots on my site, I can't tell which lens I used.
So if closeness isn't an issue, it's the prime. Otherwise, imo it's the zoom, rather than schlepping another lens.
Anti-100-400ites, start your engines;-)
I also have the 100-400 and hear the complaints about the lens. Mine is great. When I can I like to stop down to f/8 at the 400mm end. If I'm able to do that, it is great. Lance's comments were spot on.
I'm not a Canon shooter, but one of my principal shooting partners is well set up with Canon's from 300 f/2.8 through 600 f/4. I don't know the full array because he has some older ones too, including IIRC a 400 f/2.8.
It's notable that I don't know his full array. That's because on most of our adventures he's carrying a 400 f/5.6. It's as sharp as the others in his opinion and just a whole lot easier for travel, whether on a plane or on foot in rough country. He's obviously impressed, even with a stable full of "better" lenses.
WHOA, that should start some darts flying!