# Firmware: Canon EF 400mm f/4 DO IS II USM v1.0.9



## Canon Rumors Guy (Nov 5, 2020)

> Canon has released new firmware for the Canon EF 400mm f/4 DO IS II USM, which fixes an issue with the IS jumping.
> *Firmware Version 1.0.9 incorporates the following fix.*
> 
> Fixes a phenomenon, in rare cases, the IS mechanism may cause the image to jump.
> ...



Continue reading...


----------



## Bishop80 (Nov 5, 2020)

The EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS II USM received a similar update on Nov. 5 2020:

*EF100-400mm F4.5-5.6L IS II USM Firmware Version 1.0.7 :*
"Fixes a phenomenon, in rare cases, the IS mechanism may cause the image to jump."


----------



## AlanF (Nov 5, 2020)

Has anyone had the image jump with the 100-400mm II?


----------



## Khatgs (Nov 5, 2020)

Finally, i report this issue few month ago, after that Canon report to japan...

I try the new FW, it work perfectly


----------



## BirdDudeJosh (Nov 5, 2020)

I would say I have definitely observed the image jumping in a way that did not feel like normal IS operation with the 400 DO II. When I first saw this firmware updated I was hoping it would be more in the way of AF speed or performance with the R5.


----------



## Bert63 (Nov 5, 2020)

AlanF said:


> Has anyone had the image jump with the 100-400mm II?




I just asked the same question over in the 100-400L II Firmware thread.

I've never seen this "jumping" phenomenon.

On a separate note - how would those of you who own/have owned this lens rate it against the IQ of the 100-400L II. How well does it take extenders?

The f4 is appealing and it looks like it's a pretty light lens. (relatively)


----------



## AlanF (Nov 5, 2020)

Bert63 said:


> I just asked the same question over in the 100-400L II Firmware thread.
> 
> I've never seen this "jumping" phenomenon.
> 
> ...


I used the 400mm DO II and the 100-400mm II regularly over a number of years, taking 10s of 1000s of shots. Using the bare lens, I could see only a small increase in IQ of the bare prime over the bare zoom at 400mm on the 5DIV and 5DSR, and maybe a bit more on the 90D. The difference was greater with the 1.4xTC, which the DO took very well. However, it didn't really take the 2xTC well on the 5DSR and not that great on the 5DIV - it's better on the lower pixel cameras. When travelling with the wife, she used the 100-400mm II + 1.4xTC on the 5DSR and got sharper shots than I did with the 400mm DO II + 2xTC on the 5DIV. For the past few bird safaris abroad, I stopped taking the DO and we both took 100-400mm IIs. The DO was slightly too heavy for me and I ended up carrying it on a double BlackRapid strap across both shoulders as I got a strain over just one shoulder when hiking. If I hadn't sold the lens, and I do have sellers remorse, I would probably use it on the R5, but I am not going to buy a used one to replace it as the zoom is more than good enough for me and more convenient. I wait to see what Canon has in store for us.


----------



## BirdDudeJosh (Nov 5, 2020)

Bert63 said:


> I just asked the same question over in the 100-400L II Firmware thread.
> 
> I've never seen this "jumping" phenomenon.
> 
> ...


The 400 DO II Image quality with the 1.4X and 2x TC III's is really good on the R5. It's even better on the Sony A7RIV. I have absolutely no complaints about the optical qualities of the 400 DO II. 

I never owned the 100-400 II at the same time as the 400 DO II but did own the DO version 1 and the 100-400 II at the same time when I was shooting with the 5DIV. The 1.4x TC III lived on the 400 DO I for me and I absolutely loved that lens till I got the DO II which is no doubt better. I liked the DO I more than the 100-400 II other than it's MFD.

I will say I am disappointed at the the 400 DO II on the R5 when it comes to shooting birds in flight. I feel like for whatever reason be it the camera or lens the the auto focus is just a little bit behind. It's like the R5 just can't drive the the lens fast enough. For Static subjects I have no complaints. The 400 DO II is not on the list of lenses in the R5 manual that get 12 FPS but the H+ icon is solid green with a fully charged battery. I also don't find that I get anywhere near the same IS performance with it that I do with the RF 800 or RF 100-500. My disappointment in the 400 DO II is based on having the the RF 100-500 and the RF 800 which are both amazing to me and batter than I expected. 

The RF 1.4x TC is also so much better than I expected. A lot of the time I use the DO II with the 2x TC so 800mm f8 feels comfortable to me and the way I shoot. A 700mm f10 and 1120mm f16 are so much more usable than they sounds and you still have full eye AF, subject detection and tracking. 

I don't really want to be with out a fast telephoto for those times where there is no light but I do have my DO II for sale and will likely just do without till there is an RF equivalent comes out.


----------



## PrairieShooter (Nov 5, 2020)

I’ve got the 400 DO IS II, 50% of the time I power on the camera I get an image jump from the IS, sounds like a little knock with IS working when it happens. Have to turn the camera off and back on till it stops. This has been with the R and now R5. Assuming this is my problem, it will be a VERY welcomed update for me


----------



## Bert63 (Nov 5, 2020)

AlanF said:


> I used the 400mm DO II and the 100-400mm II regularly over a number of years, taking 10s of 1000s of shots. Using the bare lens, I could see only a small increase in IQ of the bare prime over the bare zoom at 400mm on the 5DIV and 5DSR, and maybe a bit more on the 90D. The difference was greater with the 1.4xTC, which the DO took very well. However, it didn't really take the 2xTC well on the 5DSR and not that great on the 5DIV - it's better on the lower pixel cameras. When travelling with the wife, she used the 100-400mm II + 1.4xTC on the 5DSR and got sharper shots than I did with the 400mm DO II + 2xTC on the 5DIV. For the past few bird safaris abroad, I stopped taking the DO and we both took 100-400mm IIs. The DO was slightly too heavy for me and I ended up carrying it on a double BlackRapid strap across both shoulders as I got a strain over just one shoulder when hiking. If I hadn't sold the lens, and I do have sellers remorse, I would probably use it on the R5, but I am not going to buy a used one to replace it as the zoom is more than good enough for me and more convenient. I wait to see what Canon has in store for us.




Another great answer - thank you.

I'm waffling but I think I'm going to go with the 100-500L and the new RF 1.4X..


----------



## Bert63 (Nov 5, 2020)

BirdDudeJosh said:


> The 400 DO II Image quality with the 1.4X and 2x TC III's is really good on the R5. It's even better on the Sony A7RIV. I have absolutely no complaints about the optical qualities of the 400 DO II.
> 
> I never owned the 100-400 II at the same time as the 400 DO II but did own the DO version 1 and the 100-400 II at the same time when I was shooting with the 5DIV. The 1.4x TC III lived on the 400 DO I for me and I absolutely loved that lens till I got the DO II which is no doubt better. I liked the DO I more than the 100-400 II other than it's MFD.
> 
> ...




Great answer as well and thanks very much!


----------



## AlanF (Nov 6, 2020)

BirdDudeJosh said:


> The 400 DO II Image quality with the 1.4X and 2x TC III's is really good on the R5. It's even better on the Sony A7RIV. I have absolutely no complaints about the optical qualities of the 400 DO II.
> 
> I never owned the 100-400 II at the same time as the 400 DO II but did own the DO version 1 and the 100-400 II at the same time when I was shooting with the 5DIV. The 1.4x TC III lived on the 400 DO I for me and I absolutely loved that lens till I got the DO II which is no doubt better. I liked the DO I more than the 100-400 II other than it's MFD.
> 
> ...


There’s discussion on FM by Arbitrage about problems with the DO II giving soft images for BIF.


----------



## Khatgs (Nov 6, 2020)

AlanF said:


> There’s discussion on FM by Arbitrage about problems with the DO II giving soft images for BIF.


 Do you have a link?


----------



## AlanF (Nov 6, 2020)

Khatgs said:


> Do you have a link?


I would have to hunt for it. In a nutshell, what he said was that he had re-examined images he had taken with a borrowed lens and a high proportion were not sharp. You could PM him. Another FM member Bobamy has had some good results but much prefers his 400/2.8 III (which is out of my price and weight range).


----------



## Khatgs (Nov 6, 2020)

AlanF said:


> I would have to hunt for it. In a nutshell, what he said was that he had re-examined images he had taken with a borrowed lens and a high proportion were not sharp. You could PM him. Another FM member Bobamy has had some good results but much prefers his 400/2.8 III (which is out of my price and weight range).



Same for me, too expensive and 400 2.8 ii is too heavy for travel..

The 400 DO is fine with closer subject for me. When i shoot something far away this is not quite sharp.. i don’t know if it will be better with a 400 2.8 in the same condition or if i except too much from the lens, maybe?!...

I was thinking about the 100-500 for the weight gain but 7.1 is hard at sunset/sunrise and in the woods.. i would like to see future RF Telephoto lens..


----------



## AlanF (Nov 6, 2020)

Khatgs said:


> Same for me, too expensive and 400 2.8 ii is too heavy for travel..
> 
> The 400 DO is fine with closer subject for me. When i shoot something far away this is not quite sharp.. i don’t know if it will be better with a 400 2.8 in the same condition or if i except too much from the lens, maybe?!...
> 
> I was thinking about the 100-500 for the weight gain but 7.1 is hard at sunset/sunrise and in the woods.. i would like to see future RF Telephoto lens..


Same here about waiting for an RF telephoto. Distance of shooting does make a difference for sharpness of images as some telephotos seem to be optimised for closer distances.


----------



## AlanF (Nov 6, 2020)

Khatgs said:


> Do you have a link?


Here's the link https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1626732/4
I am tempted slightly to try a used copy, but it's against my better judgement.

Edit - just seen you have posted there.


----------



## PrairieShooter (Nov 7, 2020)

As I stated above I’ve got the 400 DO IS ii, I’ve also got the RF 100-500, both I’ve had hooked up to the R and R5. Both have superb sharpness, RF auto focus has been stellar, 400 is stellar when it doesn’t jump (hopefully much better with the new firmware I just plugged in). The obvious measure for me is the 7.1 max Ap on the RF. If you shoot wildlife in any setting other than well lit prairies/fields/savanna’s/marshes, it’s unacceptable, too slow. Any area with foliage or shading, and your asking for your subject to pose and not breathe. The 400 DO ii still is the workhorse, with the 1.4tc living on it, best BIF or quick shooting, close “combat” combo for mammals you can get, if the price tag is manageable, IMO. 560mm at 5.6 thats super light weight and easy hikeable on a Cotton Carrier. Yeah, the RF zooms, but those of us looking for that reach in a quick maneuvering lens, those are the options from the Canon L’s. We’ll see what Canon can muster up in the RF line to rival the 400 DO ii, till then, nothing can touch it for those purposes.


----------



## AlanF (Nov 7, 2020)

PrairieShooter said:


> As I stated above I’ve got the 400 DO IS ii, I’ve also got the RF 100-500, both I’ve had hooked up to the R and R5. Both have superb sharpness, RF auto focus has been stellar, 400 is stellar when it doesn’t jump (hopefully much better with the new firmware I just plugged in). The obvious measure for me is the 7.1 max Ap on the RF. If you shoot wildlife in any setting other than well lit prairies/fields/savanna’s/marshes, it’s unacceptable, too slow. Any area with foliage or shading, and your asking for your subject to pose and not breathe. The 400 DO ii still is the workhorse, with the 1.4tc living on it, best BIF or quick shooting, close “combat” combo for mammals you can get, if the price tag is manageable, IMO. 560mm at 5.6 thats super light weight and easy hikeable on a Cotton Carrier. Yeah, the RF zooms, but those of us looking for that reach in a quick maneuvering lens, those are the options from the Canon L’s. We’ll see what Canon can muster up in the RF line to rival the 400 DO ii, till then, nothing can touch it for those purposes.


Thanks for reporting. The 400 DO is indeed an absolute cracker of a lens. I'm in two minds about it. I could get a used copy close to the price I got for mine. But, with all the restraints from covid lock downs here for both local and international travel, I'm not getting much chance of using anything. But the R5 with 100-400mm II makes an ideal companion on my daily walks.


----------



## FrenchFry (Nov 8, 2020)

Have those of you who own the lens found that the new firmware makes any IS jumping improvements? I reported the issue to Canon a few months ago, and was glad to see they issued a firmware fix. However, I am not really noticing any difference with the new firmware. Still jumpy.


----------



## Khatgs (Nov 8, 2020)

FrenchFry said:


> Have those of you who own the lens found that the new firmware makes any IS jumping improvements? I reported the issue to Canon a few months ago, and was glad to see they issued a firmware fix. However, I am not really noticing any difference with the new firmware. Still jumpy.



Hi FrenchFry,

I report issue to canon few months ago too!

For me, the jumpy image was 50% rate when i switched on the camera so very often. I did the update and a few turns on / power on the device without having any problem .. I will test this more asap.

If you still have the problem, could you send a video ?


----------



## tron (Nov 9, 2020)

Updated! (as my 100-400II too). I remember this jump happening to me 3 to 4 times in the last 2 years with either 7D2 or 5DsR.I do not remember which one or both of them).


----------

