# 300mm f/2.8L IS II vs. 400mm f/4 DO IS II ---> price difference



## Ming-Tzu (Aug 17, 2016)

I've read tons of reviews comparing the two lenses. Seems there are supporters in both camps. Not here to argue over which lens is better for what purpose.

One of the common arguments with getting the 300 over the 400 DO is price:

- CPW price for 300: $5600
- CPW price for 400: $5800

The $200 difference is minimal if you're spending that much on a lens. Given that both lenses are practically on equal footing as far as price, what would people choose? Is it still a matter of picking the FL you're after? Is the IQ difference between the two (e.g. bare, 1.4x, 2x) minimal enough to where it IS really about FL?

Just curious about what people say now that the price for the 400 DO II is a lot less than retail ($6900).


----------



## AlanF (Aug 18, 2016)

How is an authorised USA Canon dealer able to sell at such a discount?


----------



## candc (Aug 18, 2016)

If you are wanting a bird/wildlife lens then you want at least 400. The doii is really good with extenders so I would recommend it over the 300.


----------



## Ming-Tzu (Aug 18, 2016)

candc said:


> If you are wanting a bird/wildlife lens then you want at least 400. The doii is really good with extenders so I would recommend it over the 300.



I've been debating between the two lenses for a few weeks. The 300 seems more versatile for birding, indoor sports, etc. Here's my thinking:

300mm
- 300 f/2.8
- 420 f/4.0
- 600 f/5.6

400mm
- 400 f/4.0
- 560 f/5.6
- 800 f/8.0

However, if I use my current 7D, getting the 300mm amplifies everything by 1.6x. So, with the 300mm, I get a reach of 960mm @ f/5.6. Seems like 960mm is decent enough for birding, while still having the versatility of the lens without the teleconverters.

The draw of the 400mm is that it's in sale by a substantial amount at the CPW street price. Retail price is $6,900 but the street price is $5,800, which is a pretty good discount. I figure jump on that discount because the 300mm is probably not going to go on sale or refurb anytime soon.

Not sure though. Gotta think it through more.


----------



## Skatol (Aug 18, 2016)

Ming-Tzu said:


> candc said:
> 
> 
> > If you are wanting a bird/wildlife lens then you want at least 400. The doii is really good with extenders so I would recommend it over the 300.
> ...


I went through the same process a couple of years ago and decided on the 300. My reasoning was the minimum focusing distance, and F/5.6 with the 2X TC. At the time my camera did not have the capability to focus at F/8. I don't recall if the 7D can now auto-focus at F/8 with the last firmware update. I use the 300+2X+36mm extension tube like a macro setup quite often, not a true 1:1 obviously.
I also use it as a secondary lens to my 600 w/ 1.4TC on a second body when out shooting wildlife. The combination is easily hand hold-able for short duration's when I can't spin the 600 around quickly or quietly.
300 was also long enough for shooting from the sidelines at high school football games (American football).
I find with the 2X TC stopping down to F/11 gives me the best results, F/8 provides acceptable results, rarely ever shoot at F/5.6. Would rather bump up the ISO if possible.


----------



## RBC5 (Aug 18, 2016)

Ming-Tzu said:


> However, if I use my current 7D, getting the 300mm amplifies everything by 1.6x. So, with the 300mm, I get a reach of 960mm @ f/5.6. Seems like 960mm is decent enough for birding, while still having the versatility of the lens without the teleconverters.



The 300mm does not amplify (magnify) anything by 1.6x, nor does the camera. The only thing that can magnify an image is a longer focal length lens. A crop sensor merely cuts off field of view you would normally get with a full frame sensor. You are not getting any more reach, you are simply getting a smaller sensor area onto which the image is projected by the lens. A 300mm lens will project the same physical size image onto the sensor of a 5Ds as it will onto a cropped sensor. The only way to get more magnification with a DSLR is with more focal length.


----------



## Mikehit (Aug 18, 2016)

RBC5 said:


> Ming-Tzu said:
> 
> 
> > However, if I use my current 7D, getting the 300mm amplifies everything by 1.6x. So, with the 300mm, I get a reach of 960mm @ f/5.6. Seems like 960mm is decent enough for birding, while still having the versatility of the lens without the teleconverters.
> ...



True

The traditional response to your argument is 'but the APS-C puts more pixels on the subject' - but even that is now semi-redundant with the 5DSR.


----------



## RBC5 (Aug 18, 2016)

Mikehit said:


> True
> 
> The traditional response to your argument is 'but the APS-C puts more pixels on the subject' - but even that is now semi-redundant with the 5DSR.



I know, and hopefully people new to the crop sensors realize that that response is not the case. Just as there are varying pixel counts in full frame sensors, there are varying pixel counts in crop sensors, so an older crop sensor may have far fewer pixels than the 7D II. If pixel count equals magnification, then the 5Ds series can be said to be a 2x zoom over a 1Dx II, which of course is not true. Resolution does not equal focal length, but it seems like a really difficult thing for some people to grasp.


----------



## Random Orbits (Aug 18, 2016)

It comes down to how you'll use it. If you plan on using it indoors or in low light, the f/2.8 of the 300 is the better option. If you plan on hiking with it or generally don't need f/2.8, then the 400 DO II is better. It's 0.5 lb lighter than the 300 f/2.8 IS II and that doesn't even count the weight and hassle of a 1.4x, and it gets you to a longer FL with a 2x.


----------



## bholliman (Aug 20, 2016)

I agree, it depends on your intended use.

I considered both of these lenses last year and decided on the 300 f/2.8 II and for me it was the right choice. Pricing has changed since then, the DO II was considerably more expensive last year compared to the 300 II. Today the prices are close enough to not be a major factor in the decision.

For me, the ability to shot at f/2.8 for indoor sports and portraits was the deciding factor to go with the 300. I was doing very little wildlife or bird photography at that time, so my needs for longer reach minimal. Last winter, I started shooting eagles and other large birds and had occasional second thoughts when a longer lens would have been useful. I think I'll eventually add a 500 f/4 II for wildlife, but the 300 with extenders does an admirable job until then. It's a wonderful lens!


----------



## Ming-Tzu (Aug 20, 2016)

Thanks for the advice everybody! After further research, I opted out of the 400 DO and got the 300L instead. For longer reach, I also purchased the 500L. So should be set there. And to add to the trifecta, I went ahead and bought the 35L, since I've been wanting that one for a while lol


----------



## Click (Aug 20, 2016)

Congrats on your new acquisitions. 8)


----------



## chauncey (Aug 20, 2016)

Just be sure that you micro-adjust that new puppy.


----------



## RBC5 (Aug 20, 2016)

Ming-Tzu said:


> Thanks for the advice everybody! After further research, I opted out of the 400 DO and got the 300L instead. For longer reach, I also purchased the 500L. So should be set there. And to add to the trifecta, I went ahead and bought the 35L, since I've been wanting that one for a while lol



Good job! That's a nice pair of super telephotos, and with a 1.4x III converter, you've got a great bird setup to cover all the bases. Ditto on Chauncey's advice re microadjusting. 

Post some photos when you get the new gear!


----------



## Act444 (Aug 20, 2016)

I've been having the same debate for perhaps a year now...

Currently leaning towards the 300 though, especially since giving up the 7D2 a couple months ago. However, the 400 is tempting for animal shooting work...although having used the 100-400, perhaps a 500 or 600 would be ideal for that...

Choices...


----------



## bholliman (Aug 20, 2016)

Ming-Tzu said:


> Thanks for the advice everybody! After further research, I opted out of the 400 DO and got the 300L instead. For longer reach, I also purchased the 500L. So should be set there. And to add to the trifecta, I went ahead and bought the 35L, since I've been wanting that one for a while lol



Congrats! An excellent trio of primes! I'll have to wait a year or two for my 500L, it will take me that long to convince my wife I really need it. I'm lobbying for the new 24-105 II currently...


----------



## Jack Douglas (Aug 20, 2016)

Ming-Tzu said:


> Thanks for the advice everybody! After further research, I opted out of the 400 DO and got the 300L instead. For longer reach, I also purchased the 500L. So should be set there. And to add to the trifecta, I went ahead and bought the 35L, since I've been wanting that one for a while lol



Ming, on your next lens buying spree maybe you could pick up a 400 DO for me as a gift - I'd be very appreciative! 

I'm mainly shooting birds and typically needing the reach although in fairness I have a lot of photos that, when cropped, are still very much praised by the average Joe who doesn't appreciate the things that CR folk do. The 300 2.8 II X2 III has served me very well and I've hiked a lot with it so weight isn't a big complaint, and it is seldom on a tripod. However, I'm now in a mood of .... not sure what to call it but, I'm getting either the 1DX II or the 5D4 soon and if it's the 5D4 then a bit of cash remains and I'd sure like the 400 DO. I think that is feasible for poor old me if I sold the 300, otherwise I can't really justify it although I'm not sure why I tend to add the words, justify it.

Wondering if anyone has thought about this camera/lens combo in the light of this thread topic. Two cameras, two lenses; what combo makes the most sense?

Jack


----------



## RBC5 (Aug 20, 2016)

Jack -

I had the first 400 DO a long time ago and I didn't like the backgrounds it gave me; really weird bokeh in many cases. I'm sure it's on this forum somewhere, but do you know if that particular quality has improved in the new model?

Anyway, I sold that and got the 300 2.8 and the 500/4, and I am really happy with that combo. After shooting many birds, especially in flight, I would much rather have a 500/4 rather than a 400/4. And if 500 ever happens to be too much, I always have the option of 420/4 with the teleconverter. 

Also, in the majority of cases, the simple fact that a lens exists justifies it purchase. 

-Jeff


----------



## Jane (Aug 20, 2016)

The 400DO II is much improved over the original version. Makes a great birding set up combined with a 2x III and 1DXII. Not very heavy; great performance.


----------



## Steve Balcombe (Aug 20, 2016)

Ming-Tzu said:


> Thanks for the advice everybody! After further research, I opted out of the 400 DO and got the 300L instead. For longer reach, I also purchased the 500L. So should be set there. And to add to the trifecta, I went ahead and bought the 35L, since I've been wanting that one for a while lol



I have the same two big lenses, plus the 100-400L II. Currently the 300 is not getting much use - if I want maximum power I take the 500, and if I want portability and versatility I take the 100-400. The 300 gets kind of squeezed out.

There are situations where the 300/2.8 is perfect, and paired with the 2x III it did a great job for the three years I owned it before getting the 500. It's also a bit lighter of course which could sometimes be a factor. Overall though, I think the 500 and 100-400 will continue to be used much more.

An interesting question for me is what would I do if I had to cut all that down to one lens, with as much reach and image quality as possible but without the size of the 500? The 400 DO II would have to be a very strong contender. I'd lose the close up capability of the 100-400, but as a fairly light long lens it looks superb.


----------



## candc (Aug 21, 2016)

Steve Balcombe said:


> Ming-Tzu said:
> 
> 
> > Thanks for the advice everybody! After further research, I opted out of the 400 DO and got the 300L instead. For longer reach, I also purchased the 500L. So should be set there. And to add to the trifecta, I went ahead and bought the 35L, since I've been wanting that one for a while lol
> ...



The doii's place in the lineup gets questioned. I suppose that's understandable. Its not the fastest, longest, smallest, or cheapest and people generally want things that are at the top of their category in some regard. I think the doii has about the perfect spec/performance/iq mix. Its what I use most of the time and what I would keep if I had to bet rid of everything else.


----------



## Act444 (Aug 21, 2016)

I think the DO's main problem is that unlike other lenses in its price range, it's a compromise lens - you've got the 2.8 version sitting above it and providing better quality. And seen that way, 6K is a LOT to pay for such a lens. Whereas the 200 f2, the 300 2.8 II (both less expensive) are best in class, and you know you are getting top quality for your hard-earned $$$. Same with the 500 F4 and 600 F4. 

Having said all that, the lens certainly has its niche...unlike the 2.8, this one is handholdable and portable which is part of its (potential) appeal to me...


----------



## Ming-Tzu (Aug 21, 2016)

Yeah, the reason why I decided against the 400 DO II was the odd looking bokeh when the background was complex. Also, I knew I wanted the 300 so my logic was that the 400mm FL would be kind of too close to the 300, so my next decision point was between the 500mm and 600mm. My choice of the 500L boiled down to being able to potentially handhold and portability. I believe the 600mm most definitely needs to be on a tripod/monopod, whereas the 500mm can maybe do without one. Will test it out when received!


----------



## Jack Douglas (Aug 21, 2016)

AlanF said:


> How is an authorised USA Canon dealer able to sell at such a discount?



Alan, I had the same thought and checked into it by contacting CPW. I believe it goes like this since lower prices are forbidden from advertising. They have their sellers that are willing to discount. When you are serious about buying they put you in contact with the authorized Canon distributor and then the buyer and seller consummate the sale. Presumably, the increased sales volume allows for the discount. When it's a Canadian store shipping to the US there isn't even any tax according to buyers who have given their reviews. No coupons etc. Since big whites never go on sale this is one way to get a discount.

Now, anyone out there - is there any risk? CPW says no.

Jack


----------



## Jack Douglas (Aug 21, 2016)

Ming-Tzu said:


> Yeah, the reason why I decided against the 400 DO II was the odd looking bokeh when the background was complex. Also, I knew I wanted the 300 so my logic was that the 400mm FL would be kind of too close to the 300, so my next decision point was between the 500mm and 600mm. My choice of the 500L boiled down to being able to potentially handhold and portability. I believe the 600mm most definitely needs to be on a tripod/monopod, whereas the 500mm can maybe do without one. Will test it out when received!



In my case I've been quite happy packing the 300 2.8 II X2 III (weight) with the 6D. Not too often do I use X1.4. Out hiking virtually anytime I had it on I wished for X2, even just to allow more accurate focusing on distant birds. If not for the 70-200, I'd part with X1.4. 

So that's telling me 420 is seldom enough for birds. Now since the 500 is more pricey by far than my 300, which was equivalent to about $US 4500 when I bought it, I really can't fork out for that, as much as I'd love to have that pair. 

Thus, the 400 DO enters the equation since it's lighter and within reach cost-wise. 600mm is on the edge for all the bird photos I've done with a typical crop leaving significantly less than half the 6D frame. I couldn't bring myself to spring for the 7D2 and went for a used 1D4 instead, which whetted my appetite for the 1DX II. This confirmed that I really needed better high ISO capability and that 10 fps was adequate - sold it in anticipation of the 1DX II and now the reach aspect of 5D4 30 MP's is gnawing at me. I must be as nuts as any CR member right now, with all kinds of crazy ideas popping into my head, most of them very expensive ideas!! 

Sadly, my inheritance of a couple years ago is more of less gone.  Life is so terrible when you can't afford all the goodies!

Jack


----------



## BeenThere (Aug 21, 2016)

Jack Douglas said:


> Ming-Tzu said:
> 
> 
> > Yeah, the reason why I decided against the 400 DO II was the odd looking bokeh when the background was complex. Also, I knew I wanted the 300 so my logic was that the 400mm FL would be kind of too close to the 300, so my next decision point was between the 500mm and 600mm. My choice of the 500L boiled down to being able to potentially handhold and portability. I believe the 600mm most definitely needs to be on a tripod/monopod, whereas the 500mm can maybe do without one. Will test it out when received!
> ...


Kinda reminds me of that country song " I ain't rich, but I damn sure want to be".


----------



## BeenThere (Aug 21, 2016)

I have to say, that my 500 does not get out much any more since I got the DO II. For me, it's the hand holdability for all my bird shooting that is most important. Using the 400 DO with or without 1.4x on a 7D II is a near perfect combination. Some more ramblings about shooting this combo here:

http://www.ronbrunsvold.com/tools/canon-400mm-f4-do-ii-lens.html

I really like to hand hold for birds because of the flexibility I have to move fast and the tracking of BIF shots when a bird is jinking in unpredictable ways.


----------



## candc (Aug 21, 2016)

Jack Douglas said:


> AlanF said:
> 
> 
> > How is an authorised USA Canon dealer able to sell at such a discount?
> ...



I've bought several things through cpw "street price". no issues to report. same rebates, warranty, and return policy. canon canada raised the prices a while ago so i don't think you will save any money that way anymore.


----------



## candc (Aug 21, 2016)

Act444 said:


> I think the DO's main problem is that unlike other lenses in its price range, it's a compromise lens - you've got the 2.8 version sitting above it and providing better quality. And seen that way, 6K is a LOT to pay for such a lens. Whereas the 200 f2, the 300 2.8 II (both less expensive) are best in class, and you know you are getting top quality for your hard-earned $$$. Same with the 500 F4 and 600 F4.
> 
> Having said all that, the lens certainly has its niche...unlike the 2.8, this one is handholdable and portable which is part of its (potential) appeal to me...



all the big whites have excellent iq an performance. i wouldn't get too hung up using that for the deciding factor. 

lens rentals did a comparison between the 300ii and doii. their conclusion is that the doii at f/4 is sharper than the 300ii is at f/2.8 but the 300ii is sharper when stopped down to f/4. 
https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2015/01/more-canon-400m-do-ii-comparisons/

they just did a comparison of all the lenses in the 400 range. that thread is running around here as well. that comparison concludes that the doii is as good as the 400 2.8 in the central area but the 400 2.8 is sharper at the edges. the doii is half the size and weight of the 2.8 lens. the doii is also $3100 less so you can get it and the upcoming 5div for about the same price as the big lens.


----------



## Jack Douglas (Aug 23, 2016)

candc said:


> Jack Douglas said:
> 
> 
> > AlanF said:
> ...



Yes the $CDN took a big hit and that killed the advantage to US buyers. However, the expensive gear never gets sale priced and CPW lines you up with a dealer who will discount. I was quoted $7300 vs. $8000 list on the 1DX II which is still not peanuts. The 5D4 would not get discounted for some time if I go that route. 

Because the 1DX II has 20 MP like my 6D, the 5D4 30MP is hard to ignore. So, I started looking at lens options that would get me longer than 600. 

The 500 is quite a bit heavier and longer and I just can't see me hiking with that and it's expensive. 500 X1.4 is quite a bit better than 300 X2 but 500 X2 doesn't fare too well being lower IQ than my present 300 X2. That makes the 700 a very expensive upgrade.

The 400 DO is fine at 560 but not much better than 300 X2 and not impressive at 800. So if 800 loses IQ what's the point of that upgrade. That leaves me back where I started, thinking I should be satisfied with 300 X2. The 100-400 II is a nice handy lens but I think my 70 - 200 is OK with converters, kind of filling the lower gap and also 300 2.8 is a killer. That leaves me thinking I need 30 MP's for cropping in order to better my situation or 50 MP's, but I want more than 5 fps (6D 4.5 is not enough).

So it's 1DX II in a couple weeks or wait for a 5D4, which just my luck won't have illuminated AF points. 

Jack


----------



## privatebydesign (Aug 23, 2016)

Jack Douglas said:


> AlanF said:
> 
> 
> > How is an authorised USA Canon dealer able to sell at such a discount?
> ...



I've bought several things through CPW, no risk at all, it is 100% above board.

I got my 11-24 through them and it came from Canada, I broke it and sent it to Canon USA and they fixed it under warranty for free!

I won't buy anything Canon without emailing Gordon at CPW to find out if there are any deals going.


----------



## Jack Douglas (Aug 23, 2016)

privatebydesign said:


> Jack Douglas said:
> 
> 
> > AlanF said:
> ...



That's reassuring, and thanks for the feedback. It's highly likely that's what I'll be doing.

Jack


----------



## bholliman (Aug 24, 2016)

privatebydesign said:


> Jack Douglas said:
> 
> 
> > AlanF said:
> ...



+1 I've purchased my last 4 lenses and 1 body through the CPW Street Price program and it works great. Easy process and no warranty issues or other hassles. Highly recommended.


----------



## Steve Balcombe (Aug 24, 2016)

candc said:


> Steve Balcombe said:
> 
> 
> > Ming-Tzu said:
> ...



Not at all, I wanted the best fit for my needs. So I have the 500/4 not the 600/4; a 300/2.8 not a 400/2.8; and a 100-400L II not a 200-400/4L 1.4x. (When I bought my 300 there was no 400 DO II.)



candc said:


> I think the doii has about the perfect spec/performance/iq mix. Its what I use most of the time and what I would keep if I had to bet rid of everything else.



Exactly - best fit for your needs.


----------



## Jack Douglas (Aug 25, 2016)

Of course my final decision will be after tomorrow but it's looking like I'll go 5D4 rather than 1DX II. This would give me a little financial wiggle room to also get the 400 DO. I don't prefer tripods when I'm out and about and the 300 X2 has been OK in that regard so a 400 DO will be fine. Not sure if I will keep the 300 since that's a lot of money tied up if it's not getting used. I think my 70-200 2.8 II with converters would fill the void fairly well.

What concerns me is that 400 X1.4 looses me a little FL but IQ will be great, so that's fine. However, I'd really be hoping that the 400 X2 would be very close to as good as the 300 X2 has been, otherwise the 800mm advantage of the 400 would not be working in my favor and I might as well just shoot 600.

I do not want to pack 500 so that's out. Those who actually have, or have had, both or just the 400, what's the consensus?

Was reading Art Morris comments and he's real fan of the lens.

Jack


----------



## tron (Aug 25, 2016)

Jack Douglas said:


> Of course my final decision will be after tomorrow but it's looking like I'll go 5D4 rather than 1DX II. This would give me a little financial wiggle room to also get the 400 DO. I don't prefer tripods when I'm out and about and the 300 X2 has been OK in that regard so a 400 DO will be fine. Not sure if I will keep the 300 since that's a lot of money tied up if it's not getting used. I think my 70-200 2.8 II with converters would fill the void fairly well.
> 
> What concerns me is that 400 X1.4 looses me a little FL but IQ will be great, so that's fine. However, I'd really be hoping that the 400 X2 would be very close to as good as the 300 X2 has been, otherwise the 800mm advantage of the 400 would not be working in my favor and I might as well just shoot 600.
> 
> ...


hello Jack. I do have both. I use the 500 with my 5D3 mostly with static non-bird subjects.

Regarding bird photos:

I have used 500 with 7D2 alot and the results were very good. Half of this shooting had been done from the comfort of my car by resting the lens on the windows. Some shooting had been done with 500 7D2 and 1.4xiii. The only cases where this was successful was when using a tripod.

In some cases 500 had been used handheld with a 7D2 (mostly in a boat). However that was putting a lot of strain to my left hand so I often reverted to 7D2 and 400 DO II combinations. The result was equally sharp and the set was handholdable. I was regretting some loss in FL but my left hand was coping OK.

To sum up, IQ is excellent, the lens is handholdable so there is no way you will regret it. I had tried very few shots with 1.4XIII. I didn't see any problem in IQ. But I have not tried 2XIII at all. No comments on this. Even so 400 + 1.4X must focus faster than 300 + 2X.


----------



## arbitrage (Aug 25, 2016)

If trying to choose between these two lenses reading Arash's review is a good start. Basically if you don't need 300mm at 2.8 I'd go for the 400DOII.

http://arihazeghiphotography.com/blog/canon-400mm-f4-is-do-mark-ii-review-battle-of-the-light-lenses/


----------



## Jack Douglas (Aug 25, 2016)

tron and arbitrage, thanks for the feedback.

I have the 300 2.8 II so it would be a matter of does it get used enough once a 400 DO II appears cause that's quite a bit of money (for me anyway ). Alan F and I are two people among probably quite a few others who have always been fairly pleased with the 300 X2, excepting it's rather poor AF speed. 

I managed by being sure I didn't hit AF until a bird was under the AF point but sometimes you wander and lose it and then it was hopeless (6D and 1D4 not as bad). I shot a fair number of eagle BIF with that extender combo and had pretty good luck. 

What is happening to me is I don't want to go heavier than 300 X2 hiking but I'm always cropping a fair bit more than I'd prefer. If 400 X2 AF was as good as Arash and Arthur M suggest I'd be a happy camper since that would put me at 800. Of course that presupposes that the IQ would be similar to 300 X2. 

I'm confident that with a 5D4 (assuming) and 400 X2, that my cropping would not be as much of a problem since right now it's a borderline problem. I often just sit and let birds visit me rather than jogging along, so I'm generally on the edge of needed reach. Make sense?

I'd probably be satisfied with the 1DX II (20MP) if I had the 400 but I can't/won't afford both of them - even the 5D4 is stretching my finances. 

Jack


----------



## tron (Aug 25, 2016)

Jack Douglas said:


> tron and arbitrage, thanks for the feedback.
> 
> I have the 300 2.8 II so it would be a matter of does it get used enough once a 400 DO II appears cause that's quite a bit of money (for me anyway ). Alan F and I are two people among probably quite a few others who have always been fairly pleased with the 300 X2, excepting it's rather poor AF speed.
> 
> ...


Alan is very experienced and I value his opinion a lot. He likes his 5DsR very much. So this could be a solution...


----------



## Skatol (Aug 25, 2016)

tron said:


> Jack Douglas said:
> 
> 
> > tron and arbitrage, thanks for the feedback.
> ...


I would second the 5Ds/R route. I went from using a 1DMIV to the sR and haven't looked back. There are few instances where the extra 5fps would have been nice but those are minimal. Forces me to practice my timing. I also tend to shoot far fewer frames and come out with more keepers. F/8 at all focus points is tempting but for me the only combination that would benefit would be the 600 with 2x TC. Tough times to have all of these incredible options. Decisions, decisions :-\


----------



## Jack Douglas (Aug 25, 2016)

Thanks guys. We are incredibly blessed with super cameras. The 6D has served me well other than 4.5 fps which in my recent dancing foxes lost me some very nice poses and even 7 would have helped a lot but it wouldn't have been 14. I don't really care about 14 and I have a hunch that except for a small number of irritants the 5D4 will be enough of everything at a fair price.

I refuse to get on any Canon bashing bandwagon. Canon delivers solid products as far as I'm concerned. For now, I'll exercise some patience by going back on hold, past my fictitious Sept. deadline. :'(

Too busy for much shooting now anyway.

Here is what was going on in a much too heavy crop and an uncropped frame. 300 X2

Jack


----------



## AlanF (Aug 25, 2016)

I am agonising over a 400mm DO II and have to make up my mind by tomorrow. My local dealer will give me a good discount but Canon is raising the price on 1 Sept. If I didn't have the 300/2.8 II I'd go for it. My wife has agreed as special anniversary present (see Birds in Flight thread today) but I am not sure I can justify it to myself.


----------



## privatebydesign (Aug 25, 2016)

AlanF said:


> I am agonising over a 400mm DO II and have to make up my mind by tomorrow. My local dealer will give me a good discount but Canon is raising the price on 1 Sept. If I didn't have the 300/2.8 II I'd go for it. My wife has agreed as special anniversary present (see Birds in Flight thread today) but I am not sure I can justify it to myself.



My 2c. Get it, in general we only regret the things we didn't do, besides, if the price goes up so will the resale value and they are holding up much better than the MkI did.

Use both, evaluate which is more appropriate for you and sell the other if needs be.


----------



## tron (Aug 25, 2016)

privatebydesign said:


> AlanF said:
> 
> 
> > I am agonising over a 400mm DO II and have to make up my mind by tomorrow. My local dealer will give me a good discount but Canon is raising the price on 1 Sept. If I didn't have the 300/2.8 II I'd go for it. My wife has agreed as special anniversary present (see Birds in Flight thread today) but I am not sure I can justify it to myself.
> ...


+1000000000000000000  plus the other one can be sold only after the prices are increased


----------



## Jack Douglas (Aug 25, 2016)

AlanF said:


> I am agonising over a 400mm DO II and have to make up my mind by tomorrow. My local dealer will give me a good discount but Canon is raising the price on 1 Sept. If I didn't have the 300/2.8 II I'd go for it. My wife has agreed as special anniversary present (see Birds in Flight thread today) but I am not sure I can justify it to myself.



Oh, Alan, you poor soul. Agonizing. If you could only see what I'm going through, a complete nervous breakdown. From the two bird pros, this is a fantastic lens that is easier to handle/carry than the 300 by a little. 

My examination of all I could find is that it beats the 300 X2 when used with the X1.4 although with slightly less FL, so that's fine. It also appears that it will perform quite well with X2 which would give us 800 and here is the sticker - is it satisfactory, as in equal roughly to what we are used to with the 300 X2 for AF and IQ. BIF, you generally don't need or want 800 so the AF issue isn't quite as troubling. However, both of us hang up if we don't get crisp photos. 400 alone is stellar for IQ, excepting some not too common bokeh issues. Losing 2.8 is a bit of a downside of course. As Scot says, we can sell the 300 if we choose, after the fact.

Believe it or not, my wife said buy the 1DX II and 400 and I said no, that's just too much spent on a hobby. I have at this moment a plan to get the 400 followed by a delayed 5D4 purchase no later than April. As of today my price for the 400 is $7435 via CPW as opposed to the local retailers at $9310. Is that similar to your situation? Do you know if the Sept. 1 price increase is local?

Feel free to banter this around or share info with me if that helps. I agree that usually careful methodical types like us miss out by not acting, as Scott has said. We are not the type that ends up bankrupt (well I hope not).

When my wife arrives home tonight (she left me at home; I stayed up half the night and am zonked) I will propose a singular purchase of the 400 DO as I've outlined. She has been getting requested house remodeling of similar value.  End of rambling.

What wonderful problems we have to deal with!

Jack


----------



## mackguyver (Aug 25, 2016)

Alan, just to give you an idea - I just sold my mint condition (with box and all) 300 f/2.8 II on eBay for US$ 5500+shipping, minus feeBay's 10% commission. Not too happy with that considering what I paid, but my health is still not great and I decided to give up on wildlife photography to go back to my commercial work. I bought a 5DSR, which is a phenomenal camera, btw, with much improved DR over the 5DIII, which I wasn't expecting. I think it would make an excellent wildlife camera and is a tough choice between that and the 400 DO II as others have suggested. 

EDIT: I see you have the 5DSR already...


----------



## AlanF (Aug 25, 2016)

Jack
I'll pull the trigger tomorrow if the deal is still on! I can see myself using it at 400 and 560 on the 5DS R, and occasionally at 800mm. Trouble is, I am currently spoiled for choice. My Sigma 150-600mm C is an absolute winner, competing with the 100-400mm II at 400mm, and the 300x2 at 600mm. The 300/2.8 II + 1.4xTC at 420mm is noticeably better than the other 400s, whatever Roger's MTF curves show. I would be disappointed if the 400 DO II is no better than the 300 + 1.4.


----------



## Jack Douglas (Aug 25, 2016)

AlanF said:


> Jack
> I'll pull the trigger tomorrow if the deal is still on! I can see myself using it at 400 and 560 on the 5DS R, and occasionally at 800mm. Trouble is, I am currently spoiled for choice. My Sigma 150-600mm C is an absolute winner, competing with the 100-400mm II at 400mm, and the 300x2 at 600mm. The 300/2.8 II + 1.4xTC at 420mm is noticeably better than the other 400s, whatever Roger's MTF curves show. I would be disappointed if the 400 DO II is no better than the 300 + 1.4.



I would see myself having a little more difficulty rationalizing the purchase if I had those lenses. The thought of just getting the 100-400 entered my head until it registered that X2 is out. Is the 150-600 too big? If my wants were focused on 600 and below, I'd just stick with 300 X2 but I feel 800 would be the big plus for me. So, more info on the 400 X2 performance in real life shooting would be helpful. Tron, it's time you did some serious test shooting with 400 X2, for Alan and me! 

Jack


----------



## privatebydesign (Aug 25, 2016)

mackguyver said:


> Alan, just to give you an idea - I just sold my mint condition (with box and all) 300 f/2.8 II on eBay for US$ 5500+shipping, minus feeBay's 10% commission. Not too happy with that considering what I paid, but my health is still not great and I decided to give up on wildlife photography to go back to my commercial work. I bought a 5DSR, which is a phenomenal camera, btw, with much improved DR over the 5DIII, which I wasn't expecting. I think it would make an excellent wildlife camera and is a tough choice between that and the 400 DO II as others have suggested.
> 
> EDIT: I see you have the 5DSR already...



Hey Mac, welcome back!

Sorry to hear you still have the health issues but glad to see you back. Wish you'd mentioned the 300 to me I'd have traded out my MkI, oh well, next time...........


P.S. Are you keeping the 1DX? I'd drive up to Tallahassee and buy you lunch


----------



## mackguyver (Aug 25, 2016)

privatebydesign said:


> mackguyver said:
> 
> 
> > Alan, just to give you an idea - I just sold my mint condition (with box and all) 300 f/2.8 II on eBay for US$ 5500+shipping, minus feeBay's 10% commission. Not too happy with that considering what I paid, but my health is still not great and I decided to give up on wildlife photography to go back to my commercial work. I bought a 5DSR, which is a phenomenal camera, btw, with much improved DR over the 5DIII, which I wasn't expecting. I think it would make an excellent wildlife camera and is a tough choice between that and the 400 DO II as others have suggested.
> ...


Thanks, Private, and sorry about that, trust me, I wish I'd sold it to you, alas, it's sold. Yes, still struggling some, but I try to stay positive and I have a new project that I'm excited about. Will share the details here in a few weeks if my work is accepted.


----------



## tron (Aug 25, 2016)

Now don't think I have less to miss since I do have the lenses. I try to forget about 5DsR ;D

Alan I do remember what you said regarding 7D2 and 5DsR comparison. If I succumb I will send you ... the bill ;D ;D


----------



## privatebydesign (Aug 25, 2016)

mackguyver said:


> privatebydesign said:
> 
> 
> > mackguyver said:
> ...



Sounds good, hope it works out for you.

If you decide to sell the 1DX let me know


----------



## mackguyver (Aug 25, 2016)

privatebydesign said:


> mackguyver said:
> 
> 
> > privatebydesign said:
> ...


Thanks and I doubt I'll sell the 1DX. It might be 'only' 18MP but I love the 1D series. I chose it over my brand new 5DSR for a portrait shoot yesterday, actually.

I'm curious to see the outcome of this post, too...


----------



## Jack Douglas (Aug 25, 2016)

AlanF said:


> Jack
> I'll pull the trigger tomorrow if the deal is still on! I can see myself using it at 400 and 560 on the 5DS R, and occasionally at 800mm. Trouble is, I am currently spoiled for choice. My Sigma 150-600mm C is an absolute winner, competing with the 100-400mm II at 400mm, and the 300x2 at 600mm. The 300/2.8 II + 1.4xTC at 420mm is noticeably better than the other 400s, whatever Roger's MTF curves show. I would be disappointed if the 400 DO II is no better than the 300 + 1.4.



Alan, what's it going to cost you? $7435 CAD converts today to 4387 GBP, plus I pay 5% GST on top, that's it. Retail here $9310 converts to 5493 GBP. I'll be letting Gordon at CPW know tomorrow so it would be nice to have some comparison.

Jack


----------



## AlanF (Aug 26, 2016)

That is ridiculously cheap. The B&H price converts to £5243.60, which plus VAT would total £6290. Mind you, pre-brexit that would have been only £5726.

Check for a yellow elliptical sticker with FAILED on it.


----------



## Jack Douglas (Aug 26, 2016)

AlanF said:


> That is ridiculously cheap. The B&H price converts to £5243.60, which plus VAT would total £6290. Mind you, pre-brexit that would have been only £5726.
> 
> Check for a yellow elliptical sticker with FAILED on it.



Remember that's CAD, $7800 with tax. Yellow sticker! Alan now I won't sleep for the next few weeks.

Jack


----------



## Eldar (Aug 26, 2016)

mackguyver said:


> privatebydesign said:
> 
> 
> > mackguyver said:
> ...


Hi Mac, good to see your smily beaky face again 

FYI, I bought a 300 f2.8L IS II in mint condition here in Norway a few months ago and paid the equivalent of $5.100 for it and bear in mind that it cost $8.000 new here. So the price you got may not be that bad, all things considered. 

Looking forward to see what you have to share with us!


----------



## Jack Douglas (Aug 26, 2016)

Eldar said:


> mackguyver said:
> 
> 
> > privatebydesign said:
> ...



mackguyver, add me to the welcome back.

Eldar, if you'd waited for mine it'd be cheaper than that.  Of course, I may keep it but I doubt it. It will help with my camera body purchase now scheduled for probably February. I'm glad that decision is postponed since we're not doing our usual September holiday and I've been too busy. So, I will be continuing to balance the trade-offs of the 3 candidates and watching the threads on the cameras.

Jack


----------



## Eldar (Aug 26, 2016)

Jack Douglas said:


> Eldar said:
> 
> 
> > mackguyver said:
> ...


I admire your patience Jack


----------



## Jack Douglas (Aug 27, 2016)

Much easier to be patient after having just bought a 400 DO II. I can play with that on my 6D. Wants get confused with needs!

Jack


----------



## privatebydesign (Aug 29, 2016)

Jack Douglas said:


> Much easier to be patient after having just bought a 400 DO II. I can play with that on my 6D. Wants get confused with needs!
> 
> Jack



Jack, so what did you pay for the 400 in the end? I can't wait to see some of your images from it, well done!


----------



## Jack Douglas (Aug 29, 2016)

privatebydesign said:


> Jack Douglas said:
> 
> 
> > Much easier to be patient after having just bought a 400 DO II. I can play with that on my 6D. Wants get confused with needs!
> ...



Scott, I'm getting pretty reckless in my old age to shift gears and just up and buy that lens. $7435 CAD plus 5% GST. It arrives on Wednesday. The local camera shops advertise it at $9300, which proves to me that they do have room to discount but they hold firm on the expensive lenses. Until the OP I didn't ever recall CPW, even though I had investigated casually a year or two back.

Thanks Scott. I think I had read all the previous reviews on the lens but didn't take it seriously because at that time I dismissed it as a lens _I would have bought_ instead of the 300 2.8 II, if it had been available _then_. 

You can't imagine how many times I and my buddy that died, ran over what lens would be best. It was all tied into being fully portable and it always came back to the 300. He tried the 400 2.8 and said no way in spite of liking the idea of having the advantage over me. I seriously thought about the 500 but sometimes my arms ache with the 300 if having to hold focus for many minutes so how would I hike and shoot with that? It's great for those who can handle it.

For now the 6D won't focus at F8, as I understand it, so that leaves me at 560, but it should be slightly better than 300 X2. If 800 doesn't work out well with the new camera, I'll be one unhappy guy but I'm pretty confident it will.

Jack


----------



## arbitrage (Aug 29, 2016)

Jack Douglas said:


> privatebydesign said:
> 
> 
> > Jack Douglas said:
> ...



Hi Jack,

I'm also going through the process of getting a 400DOII and then will sell my 3002.8II. I was curious if the CPW deal ended up being from a US or Canadian retailer? I have an offer from a Canadian retailer to buy the lens at $7690 + 5%GST for me and shipping. But if you got one at $7435 then I may try to go through CPW. Was there shipping charges?

Thanks for any info you can provide. I understand you may not be able to disclose the actual store. Thanks

-Geoff


----------



## Jack Douglas (Aug 29, 2016)

Geoff, I don't think there is any problem disclosing but to be safe I won't. The deal must go through CPW but immediately passes to the retailer and everything is 100%, the retailer is well known etc.

I live in Alberta Canada so I'm dealing in Canadian dollars but Gordon at CPW initially quoted assuming I was American and indicating USD. When he gets your request he contacts the retailers to see who is willing to give the best deal and that gets forwarded to you. As someone else stated it seems US residents pay no tax and always shipping is free - usually USPS or Canda Post for me (except the looming strike caused them to opt for UPS in my case). That could be a small issue in your case since USPS insures you don't get dinged with customs charges such as UPS would charge. PM me if there is anything else.

Jack


----------



## lion rock (Aug 29, 2016)

Jack,
Congrats on the new 400II ! I think you'll like it much.
Shoot lots and show us.
I rented the 400 this January and went to Vancouver with it. Nice, able to handhold for a considerable length of time.
-r


----------



## Jack Douglas (Aug 29, 2016)

Thanks Riley. When I can get free for sure the shots will be showing up. 6D doesn't allow F8 focus though.

Jack


----------



## tron (Aug 30, 2016)

Jack Douglas said:


> Thanks Riley. When I can get free for sure the shots will be showing up. 6D doesn't allow F8 focus though.
> 
> Jack


In that case Jack I am afraid that you will have to buy a gift for your new toy errr lens I mean ;D.

The gift must begin with 5 and end in IV or it must begin with 1 and end in xMarkII ;D ;D


----------



## lion rock (Aug 30, 2016)

Jack,
The "1 and end in xMarkII" is the choice!
-r



tron said:


> Jack Douglas said:
> 
> 
> > Thanks Riley. When I can get free for sure the shots will be showing up. 6D doesn't allow F8 focus though.
> ...


----------



## candc (Aug 30, 2016)

Jack Douglas said:


> Thanks Riley. When I can get free for sure the shots will be showing up. 6D doesn't allow F8 focus though.
> 
> Jack



the lens is really good on the 7dii. maybe you would consider getting that camera? it will focus at f/8 center point but its more fl than you really need on a crop body.


----------



## Jack Douglas (Aug 30, 2016)

Nice to have help deciding! 

No question I'd like the 1DX II but as impatient as I am I am determined to wait at least past Christmas, giving me a little time to learn prior to a month or so holiday in May. My daughter and her husband would like us to return to Haida Gwaii so that she can experience that wonderful wilderness and that would give me another opportunity shooting Bald eagles (1D4 did well but ....). Always fun seeing so many eagles and other non-Albertan birds.

Anyway, keep feeding me the info so my decision is wise.  The 5D4 has some enticing goodies though.:'(

Jack


----------



## Jack Douglas (Aug 30, 2016)

candc said:


> Jack Douglas said:
> 
> 
> > Thanks Riley. When I can get free for sure the shots will be showing up. 6D doesn't allow F8 focus though.
> ...



Maybe, but as a single camera I don't really want crop. Now if someone near me had one I could try I'd consider then picking up a used one. Not a bad idea.

Jack


----------



## arbitrage (Aug 30, 2016)

Jack Douglas said:


> Geoff, I don't think there is any problem disclosing but to be safe I won't. The deal must go through CPW but immediately passes to the retailer and everything is 100%, the retailer is well known etc.
> 
> I live in Alberta Canada so I'm dealing in Canadian dollars but Gordon at CPW initially quoted assuming I was American and indicating USD. When he gets your request he contacts the retailers to see who is willing to give the best deal and that gets forwarded to you. As someone else stated it seems US residents pay no tax and always shipping is free - usually USPS or Canda Post for me (except the looming strike caused them to opt for UPS in my case). That could be a small issue in your case since USPS insures you don't get dinged with customs charges such as UPS would charge. PM me if there is anything else.
> 
> ...



Thanks for the info Jack. I'm in Canada also. I think you got the last one from that stores stock. It was the same store that was offering me the deal about 3 weeks ago. Unfortunately I procrastinated and missed out on the deal. The ones they were selling were ones they had purchased from Canon before the April price increases. But oh well I ordered one at the CPS Canada price today...more expensive but I will likely sell my 300 2.8 and maybe 200-400 to cover the expense.

My main reason for getting the 400 instead of just sticking with my 300 is that I want that 800 f/8 option. I have the 1DX2 and the f/8 focus is very impressive. The response is much improved over the 1DX and the ability to use all the points and all the expanded and zone modes is a huge plus. I've tested the 1DX with the 600+2xTC and the 100-400II+1.4TC....both perform so well I really don't feel a huge performance hit for using f/8.

If you plan to use the lens at 800mm than a 1DX2 should be high on your list. 

Anyways enjoy the lens, mine is on its way as of this afternoon but UPS often takes a while to get up to the Yukon.


----------



## Jack Douglas (Aug 30, 2016)

arbitrage said:


> Jack Douglas said:
> 
> 
> > Geoff, I don't think there is any problem disclosing but to be safe I won't. The deal must go through CPW but immediately passes to the retailer and everything is 100%, the retailer is well known etc.
> ...



Well, I'm glad to hear there is another Canadian getting the lens. The cost difference isn't enough to fuss about really but who doesn't like a deal. 

There must be some very nice photographic opportunities up there. I'd love to hear more and maybe consider heading up with the motorhome, just a 20 footer so fairly maneuverable for campgrounds etc. Solar on top so don't need hook-ups and we enjoy the less frequented areas.

800 F8 is my objective too so if there is a big difference in AF once the 5D4 is tested that would influence my decision. I'll be looking for feedback from you on how much 800 can be cropped on your 1DX II before it's not really acceptable (subjective I know but that's what I'll be trying to figure out). AlanF will be helping in this regard I'm sure since his standard is pretty high. For now I'm glad I've delayed the camera purchase. Funny, three of us buying at exactly the same time! 

If you camera suggestion is heard by my wife she'll be unrelenting in pushing the 1DX II, believe me, cause it's "the best". 

Jack


----------



## Jack Douglas (Aug 30, 2016)

No work is getting done ... wonder why? Except ye become as a little child .....

Then buyer's remorse!??

Jack


----------



## Ming-Tzu (Aug 30, 2016)

I received the 300L II and 500L II yesterday. First impression is that the boxes that the lenses came in are HUGE. And I don't mean the hard-cover lens case. And I also don't mean the cardboard box that contained the hard-cover lens case. I am referring to the second cardboard box that contained the first cardboard box, which contained the hard-cover lens case. And it was HEAVY too lol

In all seriousness, LOVE the secure packaging. Much appreciated. Once I got through all the packaging, and managed to attach the lens to my 5dm3, I was floored at how heavy everything was, esp. the 500L. Before receiving these two lenses, my biggest (e.g. physically) lens was the 100-400L II, so the 500L is quite an arm breaker lol

Can't wait to use both though!!


----------



## Jack Douglas (Aug 30, 2016)

Ming-Tzu said:


> I received the 300L II and 500L II yesterday. First impression is that the boxes that the lenses came in are HUGE. And I don't mean the hard-cover lens case. And I also don't mean the cardboard box that contained the hard-cover lens case. I am referring to the second cardboard box that contained the first cardboard box, which contained the hard-cover lens case. And it was HEAVY too lol
> 
> In all seriousness, LOVE the secure packaging. Much appreciated. Once I got through all the packaging, and managed to attach the lens to my 5dm3, I was floored at how heavy everything was, esp. the 500L. Before receiving these two lenses, my biggest (e.g. physically) lens was the 100-400L II, so the 500L is quite an arm breaker lol
> 
> Can't wait to use both though!!



And we can't wait to see the photos. Good news is that you do get used to the weight!

Jack


----------



## Ming-Tzu (Aug 30, 2016)

Jack Douglas said:


> Ming-Tzu said:
> 
> 
> > I received the 300L II and 500L II yesterday. First impression is that the boxes that the lenses came in are HUGE. And I don't mean the hard-cover lens case. And I also don't mean the cardboard box that contained the hard-cover lens case. I am referring to the second cardboard box that contained the first cardboard box, which contained the hard-cover lens case. And it was HEAVY too lol
> ...



Never thought I would say this but taking pictures might just be the motivating factor for me to hit the weights. Operative word is "might" lol


----------



## AlanF (Aug 30, 2016)

My EF 400mm f/4 DO II arrived just after lunch today and I spent the afternoon AFMAing it on the 5DS R plus 1.4x and 2xTC III. Then, I tested it on charts to compare with the 300mm f/2.8 II and other lenses. 

My past experience with the TCs on the 300mm f/2/8 II and the 5DS R is that the 1.4xTC gives little decrease in IQ whereas the 2x TC gives a big hit. On the 5DIII, there is much less of a hit by the 2xTC, in line with MTF measurements by objektivtest.se. I found today in resolution tests:

400mm DO II at 400mm f/4, marginally better resoltuion than 300mm f/2.8 + 1.4xTC III @ 420mm.
400mm DO II +1.4xTC III at f/5.6 better resolution than 300mm f/2/8 + 2xTC III @ 600mm
400mm DO II + 2xTC III at f/8 still very sharp, with less of a TC hit on IQ than for the 300mm.

The IS at 800mm is quite remarkable - the image is rock steady in the viewfinder.

So, my initial feelings are very positive, and I'll be using the 400 DO II a lot, and can't wait to use it in the field at 800mm and for birds in flight at lower focal lengths. My intuition is that 800mm on lower pixel FF will outperform, just, 560mm on the 5DS R.

Will this lens transform my bird photography? No, but it will increase my range and number of keepers.

(By the way Jack, I found this packing note left in the box by mistake: "High specification copy for UK. Reroute 2nd grade to Canada at discount prices.")


----------



## Jack Douglas (Aug 30, 2016)

Alan, you made my day! ;D

BUT, How is it possible you got yours ahead of me! 

800 news is what I've been most interested in, seems our wants/needs align.

Jack


----------



## AlanF (Aug 30, 2016)

Yours is delayed because it takes time to put the sticker on it,


----------



## AlanF (Aug 30, 2016)

Jack, I'll give it a field test tomorrow after the protective camo is delivered.


----------



## Jack Douglas (Aug 30, 2016)

Protective camo! Have you been wearing gloves to handle it? This is not fair. I will not have a new camera to use!!

Jack


----------



## arbitrage (Aug 31, 2016)

My lens coat for the 400DOII is coming from B/H. I think the lens is going to beat it here. I won't be able to wait for the lens coat so I will shoehorn on my 300II lens coat so I can take it out in the kayak and shoot. UPS says it will be here on Thursday so I am hoping to have it for the long weekend. My first shots will likely be at 800mm.

I think I linked to this review earlier but if you haven't seen it Arash compares the IQ between 400DOII and 300II with all the TCs. http://arihazeghiphotography.com/blog/canon-400mm-f4-is-do-mark-ii-review-battle-of-the-light-lenses/
It looks like IQ at 400, 560 and 800 should be very good and 400 and 560 vs 420 and 600 from the 300II is very comparable if not better with the 400DOII.

Now if Canon would only release the 600DO lens my lens collection will be complete!!


----------



## candc (Aug 31, 2016)

its good to see the interest in this lens lately. it seems to have been under the radar for a long time. the first year the supply was very scarce. I got mine a year ago july and the serial number is #52. I am curious to know from those of you getting them now what the number is up to?


----------



## Jack Douglas (Aug 31, 2016)

I guess we have enough proof here - gas is a communicable disease!

Jack


----------



## AlanF (Aug 31, 2016)

candc said:


> its good to see the interest in this lens lately. it seems to have been under the radar for a long time. the first year the supply was very scarce. I got mine a year ago july and the serial number is #52. I am curious to know from those of you getting them now what the number is up to?



Mine is 65, just delivered. That is ridiculously low. There can just be only a handful in the UK, and Canada must have some 50% of the World supply. This really is a niche thread.


----------



## Jack Douglas (Aug 31, 2016)

"This really is a niche thread." No,no, no, Alan ...elite! 

I just took the time to reread the Ari 300 vs. 400 review. One reason behind my choice of this lens was that it stood to be an overall good performer at 800 F8; but only IQ was a given. 

AF was reported as struggling with 2X except on the 1DX I, II. That, then presents a conundrum relative to the 7D2, 5Ds for BIF and might be reason for me opting for the 1DX II instead of the 5D4. 

800 on a 20 MP camera would be a step up from my 6D with 600, hopefully leaving me reasonably satisfied, whereas 1DX II with my 300 X2 would not be much of a step up at all other than of course it's 1-series. 

On the other hand the 5D4 (30 MPs) with 300 X2 perhaps would lead to a similar net reach outcome except there is a good chance that 300 X2 would be AF challenged much like it is with my 6D (lose focus, can't get it back, lose shot).

So now I must search out those who have lots of experience with non 1-series cameras and the 400 DO II so I don't end up frustrated with a non 1-series camera/DO combination. Alan can help here. My 6D won't prove anything.

I wonder if we could get some sort of compilation of owners on CR if we tried or do we already have that full information?

Jack


----------



## arbitrage (Aug 31, 2016)

Jack,

I will be happy to give my impressions on the 400+2x on a number of cameras. It may take me a little while to try them all out. I currently have a few to many in my possession (7D2, 5DSR, 1D4, 1DX and 1DXII). Arash is a good reviewer and very critical but he does have a strong preference for 1 series bodies. I have used my 300+2x on all of my bodies and I would agree that the 1DX/1DX2 have an edge but the 7D2 and 5DSR do fairly well with it also. Of course the 300+2x is still f/5.6 and going to f/8 combos does get sketchier still. Most of my f/8 shooting is with 600II+2x and 100-400II+1.4 with a small amount of 200-400+1.4+1.4. The 1DX2 is a significant improvement over the 1DX, 5DSR, 7D2 etc for those f/8 combos.

The 5D4 is the mystery as it does have 61 f/8 points which tells me it should be improved over the 7D2, 5DSR and maybe even 1DX for f/8 AF. However, I personally don't intend to purchase a 5D4 as I plan to mostly use the 1DX2 and 5DSR combo depending on my subjects. The 5D4 just sort of sits in the middle of those two.


----------



## Jack Douglas (Aug 31, 2016)

arbitrage said:


> Jack,
> 
> I will be happy to give my impressions on the 400+2x on a number of cameras. It may take me a little while to try them all out. I currently have a few to many in my possession (7D2, 5DSR, 1D4, 1DX and 1DXII). Arash is a good reviewer and very critical but he does have a strong preference for 1 series bodies. I have used my 300+2x on all of my bodies and I would agree that the 1DX/1DX2 have an edge but the 7D2 and 5DSR do fairly well with it also. Of course the 300+2x is still f/5.6 and going to f/8 combos does get sketchier still. Most of my f/8 shooting is with 600II+2x and 100-400II+1.4 with a small amount of 200-400+1.4+1.4. The 1DX2 is a significant improvement over the 1DX, 5DSR, 7D2 etc for those f/8 combos.
> 
> The 5D4 is the mystery as it does have 61 f/8 points which tells me it should be improved over the 7D2, 5DSR and maybe even 1DX for f/8 AF. However, I personally don't intend to purchase a 5D4 as I plan to mostly use the 1DX2 and 5DSR combo depending on my subjects. The 5D4 just sort of sits in the middle of those two.



That'll be great and I'll be watching your posts with great interest, thanks. I can understand you going to your preferred combinations, that's why you have them, to have the choice. Even if I had money to burn I still would want one camera to hike with using as much lens as I can comfortably carry. 

So of course here we are; the lens history, I have no doubt I'll be pleased, just like with the 300. So basically it remains to be seen, is 30 MPs/7fps better for me than 20 MPs/14fps and (somewhat/much) better F8 AF. Must have by March/April latest. 

Too much time on CR the last week or two!!!

Jack


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Aug 31, 2016)

Jack Douglas said:


> No work is getting done ... wonder why? Except ye become as a little child .....
> 
> Then buyer's remorse!??
> 
> Jack



You should have put the tracking number in the image. That way, I could call UPS and have the shipment diverted


----------



## Jack Douglas (Aug 31, 2016)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> Jack Douglas said:
> 
> 
> > No work is getting done ... wonder why? Except ye become as a little child .....
> ...



I'm surprised I didn't considering the state of mind I'm in lately. Worse than being in love.

Jack


----------



## AlanF (Aug 31, 2016)

Jack Douglas said:


> Mt Spokane Photography said:
> 
> 
> > Jack Douglas said:
> ...



But you are in love - with a lens. At least there won't be a costly divorce if your new partner is not up to expectations.


----------



## Jack Douglas (Aug 31, 2016)

Alan you're my man for feedback on F8 AF, what's taking you so long? 

Jack


----------



## Jack Douglas (Aug 31, 2016)

Well, here's my first, an ugly flower pot, just to beat Alan with a first photo. No AFMA yet. Can hardly tell I'm not packing the 300 but I love the smaller diameter for my smallish male hand. BTW, will my 300 Jobu foot work on this - seems like it might - I sure like to have a handle.

Jack


----------



## Jack Douglas (Aug 31, 2016)

Was it the last 3 #'s - mine is 107.

Jack


----------



## AlanF (Aug 31, 2016)

Jack Douglas said:


> Was it the last 3 #'s - mine is 107.
> 
> Jack



Yes. Yours is 42 on from mine. Collectors (books, prints etc) like having numbers below 100. I wonder how many of these have been made? If it's in the low 100s, Canon would hardly have covered the development and production costs. 

Mine AFMAs at 0 for 400mm and 560mm and shifts to -5 at 800mm. 

Having to decide what to do with the 300/2.8 II. I don't think I can justify keeping it.


----------



## candc (Aug 31, 2016)

AlanF said:


> Jack Douglas said:
> 
> 
> > Was it the last 3 #'s - mine is 107.
> ...



If you often use 2 cameras then you can use the 300 on your ff body and the 400 on your 7dii. I use the sigma 120-300 on a 6d. I like the wide open nicely blurred background look for close animals like raccoons, squirrels, and cats. The 400doii on 7dii is dynamite for bif.


----------



## Jack Douglas (Sep 1, 2016)

candc said:


> AlanF said:
> 
> 
> > Jack Douglas said:
> ...



Alan, Candc, I might be tempted to buy a used 7D2 but I'd rather just have one camera to pack around. I'd say it's about 70%-30% I'll sell the 300. It just wouldn't get enough use, considering the money tied up. Recent steep price increases should allow me to essentially get my money out of it and offset the new camera cost.

The 300 is better low light wide open, no extenders and I use it like that about 5% of the time. It's MFD is better and also with extension tubes for close ups - I'll miss that advantage but again, not more than 5% shot that way. I'm wondering how the 70-200 2.8 II would be with extension tubes as an alternate.
Candc, as you or another mentioned the smaller diameter of the DO will result in less fatigue in the left hand, appreciated. I think us three newcomers are going to really like our lenses! 

Jack


----------



## tron (Sep 1, 2016)

candc said:


> AlanF said:
> 
> 
> > Jack Douglas said:
> ...


It kind of is. It is a light combination, it has 10fps and if bright light the f/4 enables you to shoot with low ISO. I have used mine when my left hand was tired hand holding the 500 II...


----------



## Jack Douglas (Sep 1, 2016)

Just in from trying out the lens but it's a cloudy sunset and lots of mosquitoes so ....

First observation, looking through the viewfinder I noticed the difference in bokeh as I panned around, just subconsciously I could tell I had a different lens.

Jack


----------



## AlanF (Sep 1, 2016)

The tuxedo for mine arrived. It's OK with the 2xTC but I am going to use the bare lens at 400mm for a while to take advantage of its incredible IQ and f/4.

A good combo for me is my having the 400mm II on the 5DS R and my wife having the 100-400mm II on the 7DII for zoom and lightness.


----------



## candc (Sep 2, 2016)

tron said:


> candc said:
> 
> 
> > AlanF said:
> ...



the 7dii and doii were announced together. they are like chocolate and peanut butter. everyone was expecting the new 100-400.


----------



## arbitrage (Sep 2, 2016)

Mine arrived today. Raining out so no real shots.

Instead I did some quick f/8 focusing tests between a few bodies. I did some MFD to far and back focusing and focusing between different medium range targets.

There is no question that the 1DX2 is far ahead of all the other bodies. It never hunted once in any of the tests. The 5DSR and 7D2 and 1DX were very similar to each other. They had some issues going from MFD to a medium range target and back again and always did a quick hunt each time. The 1D4 was terrible with the slowest movement I've ever seen when going MFD to medium range and back.

All the cameras were very good going between different medium range targets, the 1DX2 still was quickest but the others are all very quick also (including the 1D4).

One last test was from a medium range target to infinity trying to focus on bland grey mountain with no contrast. The 5DSR, 7D2, 1DX had trouble focusing on the mountain, sometimes failing until I moved to a slightly more contrasty spot. The 1DX2 grabbed focus on the mountain almost all times but did fail once. The 1D4 actually did the best in this test (I wonder if it was because its AF sensor is larger and found some contrast?).

Anyways, these initial tests are very rudimentary and actually in the field performance may be different. But the 1DX2 does show an advantage overall at f/8. Not to mention being able to use more focus points and all the different AF modes. It will be interesting to see if the 5D4 can perform just as good. I won't be testing the 5D4 as I have no interest in the camera. I will say that back in the day I shot 5D3 and 1DX which also had very similar if not identical (in spec) AF systems and yet the 1DX always resulted in more keepers. Having extra AF processors and the larger battery usually give the 1 series the advantage but I could see the 5D4 besting the 1DX as it is a generation newer.

I'm glad I will have 3 days over the long weekend to test more and more out in the field.


----------



## Jack Douglas (Sep 2, 2016)

arbitrage, thanks for that and congratulations. I was able to get slow live view focusing with the 6D at 800, F8 and otherwise tried manual focus @ 800. That lens, being thinner is nice to focus, I like it also for balance.

Sounds like I may be happier with a 1DX II than a 5D4 but I'll have to see how the 5D4 stands up to cropping and how it performs at higher ISO. Today shooting at 800 was a first for me and it is pretty significant compared to 600 so I think a 1DX II and 400 DO II would serve me pretty well. But it's F8 - just have to be thankful and not complain.

Jack


----------



## arbitrage (Sep 2, 2016)

AlanF said:


> The tuxedo for mine arrived. It's OK with the 2xTC but I am going to use the bare lens at 400mm for a while to take advantage of its incredible IQ and f/4.
> 
> A good combo for me is my having the 400mm II on the 5DS R and my wife having the 100-400mm II on the 7DII for zoom and lightness.



I like the look of that tuxedo. It looks like a nicer fit than what LensCoat provides. What brand of "tuxedo" is that? Thanks.


----------



## Jack Douglas (Sep 2, 2016)

arbitrage said:


> AlanF said:
> 
> 
> > The tuxedo for mine arrived. It's OK with the 2xTC but I am going to use the bare lens at 400mm for a while to take advantage of its incredible IQ and f/4.
> ...



Yes I'm interested too.

The first thing that hit me walking with the 400 was that I don't have my Jobu "handle". I wouldn't be without that for my mode of shooting and hiking for a moment. Hard to adequately describe, but I could sure demonstrate the ways in which the handle helps, including allowing for less fatigue via left/right hand support along with the neck strap. I can grasp the handle and hold the lens/camera in my right hand while jumping small obstacles with my arm flex removing any jarring effect, etc. 

I need to see if the Jobu will transfer to the 400 from the 300.

Jack


----------



## arbitrage (Sep 2, 2016)

A few comparisons before selling my 300II (and maybe the 200-400)....one f-stop makes a big difference.

5 ways to 400mm

5 ways to 600mm

3 ways to 800mm


----------



## AlanF (Sep 2, 2016)

arbitrage said:


> AlanF said:
> 
> 
> > The tuxedo for mine arrived. It's OK with the 2xTC but I am going to use the bare lens at 400mm for a while to take advantage of its incredible IQ and f/4.
> ...



Made in the UK. I have bought several sets of lens camo from them - all excellent.

http://outdoorphotographygear.co.uk/


----------



## AlanF (Sep 2, 2016)

arbitrage said:


> A few comparisons before selling my 300II (and maybe the 200-400)....one f-stop makes a big difference.
> 
> 5 ways to 400mm
> 
> ...



Have you heard of the domino effect?


----------



## arthurbikemad (Sep 2, 2016)

AlanF said:


> Made in the UK. I have bought several sets of lens camo from them - all excellent.
> 
> http://outdoorphotographygear.co.uk/



^^^^ good to deal with and great covers, hide netting is great too! I have them on my 70-200, 100-400, 200/2 and 500/4 plus the teleconverters 1.4 and 2.0, they have a rubber inner so don't slip around.


----------



## AlanF (Sep 2, 2016)

I have now done a lot of testing, comparing the 400mm DO, 300mm f/2.8 II, 100-400mm II, Sigma 150-600mm C at different distances to charts and different lighting on the 5DS R. 

Under all conditions, the 400mm DO and +1.4xTC at 560mm is spectacular in terms of both resolution and accuracy. As mentioned, I am not happy with the 2xTC. It might be my 2xTC III, but in the past it was excellent on the 5DIII. Interestingly, the Sigma holds its own at longer distances and in bright light, but deteriorates at closer distances and lower light. The 100-400mm II is much better at 12m than 20m.

Here is a female blackbird this morning, about 12m from me. f/4 gives nice backgrounds and foregrounds. It's difficult to pick out the plumage of these birds, but the lens has done a good job at 1/320s.


----------



## AlanF (Sep 2, 2016)

arthurbikemad said:


> AlanF said:
> 
> 
> > Made in the UK. I have bought several sets of lens camo from them - all excellent.
> ...



They have fabric on the inside too (unless yours are very old?), which they advertise as being there to stop neoprene particles forming by rubbing and getting inside the lens.


----------



## Deleted member 91053 (Sep 2, 2016)

AlanF said:


> arbitrage said:
> 
> 
> > AlanF said:
> ...



I use them too, far better than Lenscoat IMO.

I bought another one a few months ago for my 100-400 Mk2 and initially was a bit disappointed as they had changed the material that they use. However, after using it for a while, I am pleased to say that the new material is even better and grips the lens really well whilst still providing excellent protection and camouflage. If they start using this for the larger lenses then I may well replace my existing ones!


----------



## Jack Douglas (Sep 3, 2016)

AlanF said:


> arbitrage said:
> 
> 
> > A few comparisons before selling my 300II (and maybe the 200-400)....one f-stop makes a big difference.
> ...



;D ;D


----------



## Jack Douglas (Sep 3, 2016)

AlanF said:


> I have now done a lot of testing, comparing the 400mm DO, 300mm f/2.8 II, 100-400mm II, Sigma 150-600mm C at different distances to charts and different lighting on the 5DS R.
> 
> Under all conditions, the 400mm DO and +1.4xTC at 560mm is spectacular in terms of both resolution and accuracy. As mentioned, I am not happy with the 2xTC. It might be my 2xTC III, but in the past it was excellent on the 5DIII. Interestingly, the Sigma holds its own at longer distances and in bright light, but deteriorates at closer distances and lower light. The 100-400mm II is much better at 12m than 20m.
> 
> Here is a female blackbird this morning, about 12m from me. f/4 gives nice backgrounds and foregrounds. It's difficult to pick out the plumage of these birds, but the lens has done a good job at 1/320s.



Hi Alan, thanks for this. Now about 400 X2, you had said it's all over the place or some such phrase. That could mean different things so is it just that the AF is unreliable but the IQ is fine. Did you manually tweak and then shoot to compare lens IQ between the candidates?

Jack


----------



## arbitrage (Sep 3, 2016)

I managed to get out for an hour today. I shot mostly 800mm on 1DX2 and a little on 5DSR. I haven't looked through the 5DSR photos yet but I was happy with AF and IQ from the 800mm. Here are some kingfisher examples. Most of these are fairly decent crops and most at ISO 4000 and 5000 except the last one at 1600.

I did use Focal before going out. On the 1DX2 I got +2, +1 and -1 for 400, 560, 800. So I left them all at 0. The 5DSR I did only at 800 and got 0 from Focal but the resolution numbers were very low. I didn't have the best of light so I will try Focal again with better light when possible. Usually I don't bother with AFMA anyways, for birding there are to many other variables that affect the shot instead of AFMA.

I added one 5DSR shot of the widgeon at the end. The 5DSR hit rate was much less than the 1DX2 but to be fair I was trying to protect the ISO on the 5DSR so shutter speeds were slower and may have been part of the issue with soft shots.


----------



## Jack Douglas (Sep 3, 2016)

arbitrage said:


> I managed to get out for an hour today. I shot mostly 800mm on 1DX2 and a little on 5DSR. I haven't looked through the 5DSR photos yet but I was happy with AF and IQ from the 800mm. Here are some kingfisher examples. Most of these are fairly decent crops and most at ISO 4000 and 5000 except the last one at 1600.
> 
> I did use Focal before going out. On the 1DX2 I got +2, +1 and -1 for 400, 560, 800. So I left them all at 0. The 5DSR I did only at 800 and got 0 from Focal but the resolution numbers were very low. I didn't have the best of light so I will try Focal again with better light when possible. Usually I don't bother with AFMA anyways, for birding there are to many other variables that affect the shot instead of AFMA.
> 
> I added one 5DSR shot of the widgeon at the end. The 5DSR hit rate was much less than the 1DX2 but to be fair I was trying to protect the ISO on the 5DSR so shutter speeds were slower and may have been part of the issue with soft shots.



Arbitrage, thanks for this. So the flight shot was also 800 - that's pretty impressive.

We know that every product brings compromises and my initial reaction is not negative but I can sense the difference in bokeh in some of the shots, primarily for the more brightly lit backgrounds that are busier. Getting 800 reach in this small a package is a huge plus. I'll be watching for more examples and commentary and will try to get some shots to post too but I'm limited to 560, pretty much.

Jack


----------



## Jack Douglas (Sep 3, 2016)

BTW would you mind posting an uncropped for reference.

Jack


----------



## AlanF (Sep 3, 2016)

Jack Douglas said:


> AlanF said:
> 
> 
> > I have now done a lot of testing, comparing the 400mm DO, 300mm f/2.8 II, 100-400mm II, Sigma 150-600mm C at different distances to charts and different lighting on the 5DS R.
> ...



Jack
What I meant that the FoCal plots were horrible. Very shallow and not very reproducible. I tweaked the focus by taking lots of shots of charts at different AFMA.

Arbitrage
I am very interested what you found for the lens at 800mm on the 5DS. Did FoCal behave similarly to mine? 800mm out resolved the bare lens at 400mm, but the best performance was with the 1.4xTC at 560mm. Please show more shots when convenient. 
Alan


----------



## Jack Douglas (Sep 3, 2016)

No question we need/want good performance at 800! Meaning IQ that compares with 300 X2. It probably goes without saying that as cameras are released the f8 AF performance will improve but the IQ is what the lens delivers and isn't going to change. 

I'll have to trust what you guys present since I can't realistically shoot at 800. Crummy weather has followed the arrival of my lens so no shooting today. 

Jack


----------



## arbitrage (Sep 3, 2016)

AlanF said:


> Jack Douglas said:
> 
> 
> > AlanF said:
> ...



I only had time to run the 5DSR at 800mm so haven't seen what the plots look like at 400 and 560 yet. However, at 800 the plot was really flat and down in the red zone of resolution. My light source was poor and I ran them at ISO 800 so I really need to do it again with proper light. However, moments earlier I ran all 3 focal lengths on the 1DX2 in those same conditions and it had normal looking plots up in the green zone of resolution for all the combos.

My shots from the field with 5DSR at 800mm when in focus looked very good but I was using only 1/1000 and handholding so a lot of images aren't in good focus. Not sure if that was AF issues from f/8 or motion blur from the SS and handholding. I will be testing lots more this weekend and report back.


----------



## arbitrage (Sep 3, 2016)

Jack Douglas said:


> BTW would you mind posting an uncropped for reference.
> 
> Jack



Here are 4 of those shots uncropped....


----------



## arbitrage (Sep 3, 2016)

Here is another 5DSR shot at 800mm, ISO 1600...


----------



## arthurbikemad (Sep 3, 2016)

AlanF said:


> They have fabric on the inside too (unless yours are very old?), which they advertise as being there to stop neoprene particles forming by rubbing and getting inside the lens.



No they are new, this is the new style as far as I know, soft nonslip rubber inside..

https://www.dropbox.com/s/83gz3j6d5xqr7oj/IMAG3766.jpg?dl=0


----------



## Jack Douglas (Sep 3, 2016)

Not sure about this being acceptable but it represents what I got, manual focus, 6D, 800mm, 1/800 sec, ISO 1250. Uncropped


----------



## AlanF (Sep 3, 2016)

arthurbikemad said:


> AlanF said:
> 
> 
> > They have fabric on the inside too (unless yours are very old?), which they advertise as being there to stop neoprene particles forming by rubbing and getting inside the lens.
> ...



You are of course right about your ones. They advertise their "Premium quality" as having rubber backed material and their standard as a neoprene between two layers of fabric. Their standard is excellent and much cheaper than lenscoat. Are yours "premium"?


----------



## arbitrage (Sep 4, 2016)

A few from today....so far I'm very happy with the IQ at 800mm and the AF on the 1DX2. I still need to give the 5DSR a proper run but it was too dark today for that camera. I was shooting the 1DX2 at 4000-6400ISO just to get 1/500 SS for the warblers and juncos.


----------



## Jack Douglas (Sep 4, 2016)

Hey geoff,

Those are very nice so I'd agree 800 with 1DX II cuts it. Now will the 5D4? Now that I own the 400 it will factor into the purchase of the camera since I'll be using the 400 maybe 75% of the time - they have to work together! The bokeh in bright background shots is definitely different and generally not quite as smooth as the 300, but I'll live with it.

Where in the Yukon are you? I'd like to google and see what the roads and countryside are like since we're always looking for places to go within Canada.

I went out with 560 for a hour or so and it was so cloudy and hardly a bird around but for the first time ever (40 years) at my pond a Belted kingfisher appeared (before I had grabbed the camera). Of course he took off. I am really impressed with 560 AF, considerably better than 600 with the 6D so it must be lightening with the 1DX II.

I was chuckling - we sure diverted this thread from 400 vs. 300, well kind of. 

Here's a 560 shot., cropped but not downsized, ISO 1250.

Jack


----------



## AlanF (Sep 4, 2016)

I have now done dozens of comparisons of the 1.4x and 2xTCIII on the 400mm DO II with the 5DS R. The 1.4x uprezzed 1.4x in Photoshop gives a slightly better image than the 2xTC. I think it boils down to a combination of the hit the 2xTC makes on IQ combined with the shift from f/5.6 to f/8 going through the diffraction limited aperture of f/6.7. The diffraction hit doesn't happen on the lower pixel full frames and you see an improvement in resolution from 400mm - 560mm - 800mm.

The 400mm DO II is spectacularly sharp at 560mm on the 5DS R. Here are two shots of a kingfisher with a fish I took yesterday afternoon. The little bird was over 12m away. There is some Moire, which I don't usually get with my less sharp lenses. I am tempted to get a new FF with fewer pixels and an AA filter. But, 560mm on the 5DS is so good. Maybe I'll use it on the 7DII.


----------



## privatebydesign (Sep 4, 2016)

AlanF said:


> I have now done dozens of comparisons of the 1.4x and 2xTCIII on the 400mm DO II with the 5DS R. The 1.4x uprezzed 1.4x in Photoshop gives a slightly better image than the 2xTC. I think it boils down to a combination of the hit the 2xTC makes on IQ combined with the shift from f/5.6 to f/8 going through the diffraction limited aperture of f/6.7. The diffraction hit doesn't happen on the lower pixel full frames and you see an improvement in resolution from 400mm - 560mm - 800mm.
> 
> The 400mm DO II is spectacularly sharp at 560mm on the 5DS R. Here are two shots of a kingfisher with a fish I took yesterday afternoon. The little bird was over 12m away. There is some Moire, which I don't usually get with my less sharp lenses. I am tempted to get a new FF with fewer pixels and an AA filter. But, 560mm on the 5DS is so good. Maybe I'll use it on the 7DII.



If you uprez and view at 100% your CoC and 'diffraction limited aperture' changes because your magnification changes. The differences can then only be down to the optics of the 1.4 vs the 2x TC's.


----------



## AlanF (Sep 4, 2016)

privatebydesign said:


> AlanF said:
> 
> 
> > I have now done dozens of comparisons of the 1.4x and 2xTCIII on the 400mm DO II with the 5DS R. The 1.4x uprezzed 1.4x in Photoshop gives a slightly better image than the 2xTC. I think it boils down to a combination of the hit the 2xTC makes on IQ combined with the shift from f/5.6 to f/8 going through the diffraction limited aperture of f/6.7. The diffraction hit doesn't happen on the lower pixel full frames and you see an improvement in resolution from 400mm - 560mm - 800mm.
> ...



Please elaborate and explain more clearly as your comment is not clear to me. Thanks.


----------



## candc (Sep 5, 2016)

AlanF said:


> I have now done dozens of comparisons of the 1.4x and 2xTCIII on the 400mm DO II with the 5DS R. The 1.4x uprezzed 1.4x in Photoshop gives a slightly better image than the 2xTC. I think it boils down to a combination of the hit the 2xTC makes on IQ combined with the shift from f/5.6 to f/8 going through the diffraction limited aperture of f/6.7. The diffraction hit doesn't happen on the lower pixel full frames and you see an improvement in resolution from 400mm - 560mm - 800mm.
> 
> The 400mm DO II is spectacularly sharp at 560mm on the 5DS R. Here are two shots of a kingfisher with a fish I took yesterday afternoon. The little bird was over 12m away. There is some Moire, which I don't usually get with my less sharp lenses. I am tempted to get a new FF with fewer pixels and an AA filter. But, 560mm on the 5DS is so good. Maybe I'll use it on the 7DII.



Nice ones of the kingfisher. Very good looking bird. The belted kingfishers we have here are not as colorful. I get a lot of moire when I use the lens with or without extenders on the a7rii but haven't seen it in the 7dii.


----------



## arbitrage (Sep 5, 2016)

I got to do some more in the field work from my kayak today. I took the 5DSR along but only shot it a little as light was low most of the morning. What I did shoot at 800mm on the 5DSR looked good but I didn't do any comparisons with 560mm as Alan has done.

The first three are 5DSR at 800mm.
The next two loony loons are 1DX2 at 560mm
And the final three are 1DX2 at 400mm


----------



## AlanF (Sep 5, 2016)

You Canadians have a really great lifestyle! I'm jealous.


----------



## tron (Sep 5, 2016)

arbitrage great shots. I see that you have both 1DxII and 5DsR.
So this is great but doesn't it present a dilemma?

800 at f/8 (or even f/10 to stop down a little to improve IQ due to the ues of 2X) with 1DxII
or 560 at f/5.6 with 5DsR ?

Do the cameras differ more than 1 stop? (I believe so but I have none of them)


----------



## Click (Sep 5, 2016)

arbitrage said:


> I got to do some more in the field work from my kayak today. I took the 5DSR along but only shot it a little as light was low most of the morning. What I did shoot at 800mm on the 5DSR looked good but I didn't do any comparisons with 560mm as Alan has done.
> 
> The first three are 5DSR at 800mm.
> The next two loony loons are 1DX2 at 560mm
> And the final three are 1DX2 at 400mm




Very nice series. I especially like the picture with the Otters. They're so cute. Well done, arbitrage.


----------



## AlanF (Sep 5, 2016)

Having 30 min to spare, I tried out the 400mm DO II on the 7DII, without AFMAing for curiosity. To my surprise, the lens with the 2xTC was sharper at 800mm on the 7DII than on the 5DS R with AFMA. It also held up well at 400 and 560mm. After my Moire experience, I am going to use the 7DII with the DO and use the 100-400mm II etc on the 5DS R, which have given very few Moire problems. 

The 400mm DO II really outperforms all of my other lenses in IS and shutter shock. The IS appears better and the lens appears less sensitive to vibration.


----------



## tron (Sep 5, 2016)

AlanF said:


> Having 30 min to spare, I tried out the 400mm DO II on the 7DII, without AFMAing for curiosity. To my surprise, the lens with the 2xTC was sharper at 800mm on the 7DII than on the 5DS R with AFMA. It also held up well at 400 and 560mm. After my Moire experience, I am going to use the 7DII with the DO and use the 100-400mm II etc on the 5DS R, which have given very few Moire problems.
> 
> The 400mm DO II really outperforms all of my other lenses in IS and shutter shock. The IS appears better and the lens appears less sensitive to vibration.


Sir, you are a wealth of information specializing in Focal Length limited situations. 
Up to now I have tried 500II + 7D2, 500+1.4XIII (needs AFMA and tripod mostly for focusing precision) 400DOII + 7D2 (no AFMA needed) 400DOII + 1.4XIII + 7D2 once (had success handheld) but that's it. No 2XIII tests yet...


----------



## privatebydesign (Sep 5, 2016)

AlanF said:


> privatebydesign said:
> 
> 
> > AlanF said:
> ...



DLA is defined as when the Airy disc covers one pixel. 

For the sake of easy maths lets say your sensor is 6,000 x 4,000 pixels and that resolves 24,000,000 airy discs, it is a simplification but I believe holds true.

Now if you use a 2xTC and the subject covers the whole sensor (again for easy maths) you get those 24,000,000 airy discs and they each cover one pixel, as they should. Now if you swap the 2xTC for the 1.4TC your subject only covers 3,600 x 2,800 pixels giving you 10,080,000 pixels and 10,080,000 airy discs. 

If you upres those 10,080,000 airy discs/pixels to the same pixel numbers as the shot from the 2xTC they each occupy an area equivalent to 24,000,000/10,080,000 or 2.4 pixels. 

Effectively the airy disc is over twice the area from the upresed 1.4TC shot compared to the 2xTC shot. Now the airy disc was the same size at capture, one pixel, but you are now looking at that one pixel upresed so the corresponding airy disc is upsized. The fact that an airy disc now covers more than one pixel destroys the DLA assumption.

Same concept with the CoC and because of that the DOF all change. DOF should be around one stop difference, so you'd need to shoot at f5.6 with the 1.4TC to get the same DOF as the 2xTC at f8 when viewing output at the same subject size.


----------



## Jack Douglas (Sep 5, 2016)

AlanF said:


> You Canadians have a really great lifestyle! I'm jealous.



I'm Canadian and I'm jealous too.

Jack


----------



## Jack Douglas (Sep 5, 2016)

privatebydesign said:


> AlanF said:
> 
> 
> > privatebydesign said:
> ...



Boy, you lost me. Sounded more like a fairy tale. Alan maybe you can translate for me. 

Jack


----------



## AlanF (Sep 5, 2016)

privatebydesign said:


> AlanF said:
> 
> 
> > privatebydesign said:
> ...



Thanks for your helpful reply. I now realise what you are getting at but I don't think your example is fully correct but it is partly right.
1. Your first assumption is that the Airy disk with the 2xTC exactly covers a pixel. This assumption doesn't hold for the case we are discussing of the 5DS, where DLA is 6.7 µ and the aperture of the widest aperture of the f/4 DO with the 2xTC is f/8. The Airy disk is significantly greater than the DLA.
2. Your second assumption is that Airy disk is the same size in the presence of the 1.4xTC as for the 2xTC is puzzling. The diameter of an Airy disk is directly proportional to the f-number of a lens. The Airy disk for the DO with the 1.4xTC is f/5.6, 1.4x smaller than that for f/8 with the 2xTC.

The situation with the 5DS is a little complicated because the DLA is in the middle of the values for the 1.4 and 2xTCs. Extreme situations are easy to analyse. 
Case 1. At one extreme, if the lens is diffraction limited before a TC is added, then a TC won't increase resolution since the increase in focal length is exactly balanced by the concomitant increase in f-number, which increases the diameter of the Airy disk. 
Case 2. At the other extreme, if the lens is way below being diffraction limited, then a TC will increase focal length without a noticeable increase in diffraction and will always increase resolution (unless it is optically cr*p). 

The 1DX has a DLA of f/11, and so both the 1.4xTC and 2xTC keep the 400mm f/4 under the DLA, approaching case 1, and the 2xTC gives more resolution than the 1.4xTC.

The situation with our 400mm DO at 560mm and f/5.6, below DLA of f/6.7, and at 800mm and f/8, above DLA is more difficult to calculate. If there is no hit on IQ with the 2xTC, then it should still outresolve the 1.4xTC. But, as we both agree, the optical quality is lowered so you don't get much advantage.

Does that help Jack?


----------



## Jack Douglas (Sep 5, 2016)

;D ;D Not much. I've never read up on this topic so it's hopeless. OTOH, I did understand the last paragraph. Which leads me to believe you're not quite satisfied with this purchase?? Or, have you got another camera in mind?  If so please do your homework well, so I may benefit. 

If, and it's pretty likely, I sell the 300, I'm OK with my purchase in that 560 is very good and outclasses 600, especially relative to AF snappiness. However, I was really banking on using 800 a lot.

Jack


----------



## AlanF (Sep 5, 2016)

Jack
The take home message is that if you have a full frame like the 1DX and to a slightly less extent the 5DIV, you will notice the increased resolution of the 2xTC. On a 7DII or similar density pixel 5DS R, there is not much extra resolution at 800mm than 560mm. However, the 400 + 1.4xTC on the 7DII or 5DS R is spectacularly good, so I am not disappointed. 

Canon has raised the price of the 300mm f/2.8 II and I will wait until the higher prices filter through to the used market before selling.


----------



## arbitrage (Sep 5, 2016)

Hi guys....

So today I did a few in the field comparisons on a perched bald eagle that stayed around long enough for me to shoot some 1DX2 and 5DSR both at 800 and 560.

I haven't had a good look at the 1DX2 files yet. However, after looking closely and doing some exports at different sizes I am starting to agree with Alan on the 5DSR. I found the up-ressed 560 shot looked just a bit better than the 800 shot. They were very close but obviously that means the 800 is not helping things and having the extra stop at 560 and possibly even a slightly better image makes me wonder about the 2xTC on the 5DSR. 

Downsizing the 5DSR at 560mm and 800mm to the 1DX2 at 800mm, the two 5DSR images showed a bit more detail than the 1DX2 image. Again the two 5DSR images were very similar and probably the 560mm one was a very small amount better.

Later in the day I went and tried shooting some ducks/coots on a local marsh where reach is key. The 800mm on 5DSR was terrible. I'm still not sure if it was atmospheric interference over the water or a MA thing or what. It appeared to be back focusing so I tried some shots at -10MA and then -20MA. I still need to look closer at these shots to see if it is a MA issue. Although a quick look at the -20 shots seem to look better. I'm never happy if a lens needs -20 where it is fine on other bodies. For now I'm not reading much into these results as I need to evaluate it in a more controlled environment. When I had the Sigma 150-600C and tried it with a 1.4TC I had a similar issue where it did well on the lesser MP 1DX and 1D4 but was not good with any amount of MA on the 7D2. The results on the 5DSR today remind me of that scenario.

Still lots more testing to do to figure this all out. If I had a backyard I'd try to set up something controlled but living in an apartment my outdoor space on my deck is limited!!


----------



## Jack Douglas (Sep 6, 2016)

Thanks Geoff.

Jack


----------



## AlanF (Sep 6, 2016)

Arbitrage
Thanks for your comparisons. I am now feeling more comfortable with the quality of my own gear now you are getting similar results. My own feeling is that 1.4xTC on the f/4 and 7DIi or 5DS R is similar in IQ to the 2xTC with FF frame. The disadvantage of smaller pixels is balanced by the IQ hit of the 2xTC. It's similar to the 100-400mm II. On the 5DIII I was happy to use it with the 1.4xTC at f/8. But, on the 7DII I use it native. 

Jack, before laying out on a FF, you might want to compare your gear at 560mm with a crop vs 800mm on your 6D.

I wish I could go out and test on a bald eagle. I had to make do with a grey heron at about 100m.


----------



## Jack Douglas (Sep 6, 2016)

AlanF said:


> Arbitrage
> Thanks for your comparisons. I am now feeling more comfortable with the quality of my own gear now you are getting similar results. My own feeling is that 1.4xTC on the f/4 and 7DIi or 5DS R is similar in IQ to the 2xTC with FF frame. The disadvantage of smaller pixels is balanced by the IQ hit of the 2xTC. It's similar to the 100-400mm II. On the 5DIII I was happy to use it with the 1.4xTC at f/8. But, on the 7DII I use it native.
> 
> Jack, before laying out on a FF, you might want to compare your gear at 560mm with a crop vs 800mm on your 6D.
> ...



Good idea except that it's been kind of poor weather and winter is coming and my granite isn't finished - cursed project - why do I get into such things! 

So if I set up on tripod and put a detailed subject like a dry leaf on my stucco wire fence at, what distance would you recommend? ISO 100, wide open, maybe 1/1000 s, anything else. I'd have to manually focus 800, magnified live-view. I've never used live-view as a rule and the other day I wasn't able to set a faster shutter - any idea what I was doing wrong?

So you will be happy and sell the 300?

Jack


----------



## AlanF (Sep 6, 2016)

Jack Douglas said:


> AlanF said:
> 
> 
> > Arbitrage
> ...



Jack
I an a numbers man, and really like this chart prepared by Bob Atkins - version 2 from http://bobatkins.com/photography/technical/lens_sharpness.html

Post it where you can just about resolve the 4 lines per mm and the 2.8 circle, somewhere between 12 and 20m.

Happy to sell? I always have sellers remorse and only rarely buyers remorse. I really regret selling my 5DIII. But, if I had kept it I would hardly ever use it. I virtually never use 300mm f/2.8 but use it with the 1.4x or 2xTC. I'll probably only ever use it rarely in the future. At 420mm with 2xTC, it is a full pound (500g) heavier than the 400 DO and not quite as good in terms of IS, AF and IQ, but not as makes much difference. But, at my age, every pound less helps. The 300 is the more versatile lens, especially on crop or the 5DS R because you can use it at f/2.8, f/4 and f/5.6 whereas I would recommend the 400 only at f/4 and f.5.6, but not f/8. On FF, the 400 is better for birding. Nevertheless, I will regret selling the 300 as sooner or later I will want to shoot at dawn or dusk and will need the extra stop (or stops over my 100-440).


----------



## Jack Douglas (Sep 6, 2016)

Thanks Alan,

I'm pretty much in the same situation as you and appreciate what the 400 brings to those who are not going to get stronger in the future, like forget weight training! 

I will try out the chart and see what my performance is like and post when I can - still haven't done my 2015 income tax! Not to mention a large garden with a bumper crop this year that my dear wife is struggling with.

Yes, there will be regrets not having the 300. I shoot at 300 about as much as you do, hardly ever at 420 and a whole lot at 600 where the AF is less than stellar so 560 is big, but 800 would have been the really sweet item for me. Wishful thinking since the lens comparison resolution tests clearly show 800 somewhat behind 300 X2 and many (contrary to what Alan and Jack have preached) tended to write off that combo. Must be amazing to shoot with 600 F4.

Jack


----------



## arbitrage (Sep 7, 2016)

Here are a few shots from Monday's shooting. I plan to continue to test the TCs on different bodies. I tried to MFA my 5DSR and 800mm last evening and it seemed to be fine at zero using the LensAlign target and angled ruler. I will try it again with Focal tomorrow.

The first 3 and the 5th are with 1DX2 and 400/2x
The 4th is 400mm bare lens
The last 2 are 800mm on the 5DSR

I will say that this lens is quickly becoming a favourite. I'm really considering selling the 200-400 and will sell the 300 2.8. If Canon makes that 600DO they showed the prototype for then I would happily sell off the 600II and have a three lens combo of 100-400II, 400DOII and 600DO....heaven!!


----------



## Click (Sep 7, 2016)

arbitrage said:


> Here are a few shots from Monday's shooting. I plan to continue to test the TCs on different bodies. I tried to MFA my 5DSR and 800mm last evening and it seemed to be fine at zero using the LensAlign target and angled ruler. I will try it again with Focal tomorrow.
> 
> The first 3 and the 5th are with 1DX2 and 400/2x
> The 4th is 400mm bare lens
> The last 2 are 800mm on the 5DSR




Beautiful shots. I especially like the first and 3rd picture. Well done.


----------



## Jack Douglas (Sep 7, 2016)

Thanks and keep posting shots Geoff. I didn't even get out with mine today. I heard the Pileated woodpecker that has been very absent for a while so if he/she shows up that'll spur me on to see how the 400 compares with the 300. I'd be slightly more motivated if my 6D had F8 AF. Very nice photos.

Jack


----------



## Jack Douglas (Sep 7, 2016)

Alan, I posted in the other thread because I noticed you were there?? Is there an official 400 DO thread from some time back? I'm so tired I don't have the energy to look.

Jack


----------



## AlanF (Sep 7, 2016)

Here are some shots of my charts. They are taken at 12.6m. All at a similar time on the 5DS R, widest aperture, iso640. All have noise reduction but no sharpening. The lines on the chart are in lines/mm. The circles are also in linewidths/mm.
First the 300mm f/2.8 II at 300mm, 560mm and 600mm. There was some inconsistency of focussing - these are the best.


----------



## AlanF (Sep 7, 2016)

The 400mm DO under the same conditions. At 400mm, it outresolves my 300mm + 1.4xTC III. Resolution increases significantly at 560mm, and is similar to the 300mm + 2xTC, but much more consistent. 800mm is similar to 560mm.


----------



## AlanF (Sep 7, 2016)

For comparison, the 100-400mm II. It is surprisingly good at 400mm, and approaches the 400mm DO II. At 560mm and f/8 with 1.4xTC, the resolution increases. But, the DO at 560mm is clearly better.


----------



## Jack Douglas (Sep 7, 2016)

Alan, I have a little difficulty keying in on what to look for - any comments? Comparing 560 to 800 (of most interest to me) - these are all sized to be full frame and shot from the same location so how does the magnification or reach factor in. Are you saying that you can just shoot at 560 and produce roughly the same output for viewing or printing (equal quality)? The 300 images did not open in a new window.

Jack


----------



## AlanF (Sep 7, 2016)

Jack
They are all taken 12.6 m away from the target. All are the 100% crops from the centre of the image, 1 pixel in the crop = 1 pixel of the original. The 300mm is so small it doesn't need a separate window to open larger. The 800mm is quite large. The best way to view is to download them. 

Look for distinct resolution of the individual lines in the L-shaped clusters in the top left quarter. Also look to see the resolution of the 2.8 circles in the bottom right. For example, the 560mm DO is close to resolving the 4.5 lines per mm. The 300mm can't resolve the 2.8 circles. The 100-400 and the 400 DO can. The 560s and 800mm resolve the 2.8s very clearly. 
Alan


----------



## Jack Douglas (Sep 8, 2016)

I took a couple shots of the moon tonight and 560 is a little better than my previous 300 X 2 and almost as good as 800. Manual viewfinder focus at 800 was iffy so maybe with perfect focus there would be a greater difference.

Jack


----------



## AlanF (Sep 8, 2016)

Jack
I think the 800 is significantly sharper than 560mm on your FF. There is a significant difference in exposure between the two, which a first sight favours the brighter 560 image. But, if you look at the craters at the bottom at about 5.30 on the clock, you can see the 800m has resolved the pimple in the middle of some craters and the 560mm hasn't.


----------



## Jack Douglas (Sep 8, 2016)

Alan, you mean there is hope?  After a killer day, granite and garden shoveling dirt, then supper at 9 PM, a hand held 800 mm shot of the moon doesn't really stand a chance to be done well. I will try again soon with a tripod and better settings.

Jack


----------



## AlanF (Sep 8, 2016)

Jack - I think the FF-larger pixel results are very encouraging. A really important factor is for me is that the DO has more consistent AF.


----------



## Jack Douglas (Sep 8, 2016)

AlanF said:


> Jack - I think the FF-larger pixel results are very encouraging. A really important factor is for me is that the DO has more consistent AF.



The AF is a big one for me too but 800 was the draw. 560 is great even on the 6D.

Jack


----------



## Jack Douglas (Sep 10, 2016)

I think I'm going to be OK with 400 X2 after finding these dragon flies and having time to manually focus reasonably well. Focusing with 800 hand held is challenging if you're unsteady like me!

ISO 1250 F8 1/1250 6D

Jack


----------



## AlanF (Sep 10, 2016)

Get yourself a decent body to put this fabulous lens on!


----------



## Jack Douglas (Sep 11, 2016)

AlanF said:


> Get yourself a decent body to put this fabulous lens on!



Alan, I will in due course and I promise not later than April 1, 2017. It will be 5D4 or 1DX II after I fuss and fume about the compromises. It works very well with X1.4 in the mean time on my good old 6D. I'm pretty excited about having the lens for sure.

Jack


----------



## candc (Sep 11, 2016)

Jack Douglas said:


> AlanF said:
> 
> 
> > Get yourself a decent body to put this fabulous lens on!
> ...



In the meantime maybe you can pick up a 7dii to use it on. It will do everything you need for bird shooting without much need for extenders.


----------



## Jack Douglas (Sep 11, 2016)

candc, that's a good suggestion but my needs presently are minimal. Next spring it's an entirely different matter. Meanwhile , restraint. 

Jack


----------



## AlanF (Sep 13, 2016)

Jack
I borrowed a 5DIII to compare results. The good news for you is that the 400mm DO II + 2xTC performs very well on it and resolves significantly more than with the 1.4xTC. 
I would judge: 
400mm DO II on 5DS R is sharper than 400mm DO II + 1.4xTC on 5DIII
400mm DO II + 1.4xTC 5DS R is similar to 400mm DO II + 2xTC on 5DIII
400mm DO II + 1.4xTC 5DS R is similar to 400mm DO II + 2xTC on 5DS R

I really regret selling my 5DIII, but it means I'll get a 5D IV when the time is right.


----------



## Jack Douglas (Sep 13, 2016)

AlanF said:


> Jack
> I borrowed a 5DIII to compare results. The good news for you is that the 400mm DO II + 2xTC performs very well on it and resolves significantly more than with the 1.4xTC.
> I would judge:
> 400mm DO II on 5DS R is sharper than 400mm DO II + 1.4xTC on 5DIII
> ...



Alan, I'm so sorry you'll have to get a 5D4. My condolences.

Thanks for you assessments. Now you can do some bloodhound sniffing on why the 5D4 would be better for me than the 1DX II. Probably it'll depend on how 30 MP has affected IQ and how close AF is.

Jack


----------



## bholliman (Sep 13, 2016)

AlanF said:


> Jack
> I borrowed a 5DIII to compare results. The good news for you is that the 400mm DO II + 2xTC performs very well on it and resolves significantly more than with the 1.4xTC.
> I would judge:
> 400mm DO II on 5DS R is sharper than 400mm DO II + 1.4xTC on 5DIII
> ...



Hi Alan,

I'm a little surprised at your results. I don't have a 400 DO II, but with the 300 f/2.8 II and TC's I find my 5DsR consistently sharper than my 6D (slightly larger pixels and better sensor than the 5DIII) in all combinations. Do you think the poor performance with the 5DsR is just with the 400 DO II? 

My comparisons were all at f/6.3 or lower, so diffraction not a factor with the 5DsR in my side-by-side testing. I normally shoot my 2x III at f/6.3 and 1.4x III at f/4.5 on the 300 f/2.8.


----------



## AlanF (Sep 13, 2016)

arbitrage also reports in this thread that the 400 + 1.4x and 2xTCs have similar resolution on the 5DS R. I find with the 300/2.8 II that there is a greater increase in resolution from 1.4x to 2xTC on the 5DIII than 5DS R, but the 2xTC on the 5DS R has the best resolution, in agreement with you.

The-digital-picture comparisons of the 400mm DO II and 300mm/2.8 II with 2xTCs on FF and 7DII show the relative degradation at f/8 on the crop, which has the same size pixels as the 5DS R. So, what I find is not unique.

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=962&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=2&API=2&LensComp=739&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=2&APIComp=0


http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=962&Camera=963&Sample=0&FLI=2&API=0&LensComp=739&CameraComp=963&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=2&APIComp=2


----------



## AlanF (Sep 14, 2016)

Jack
My local dealer has a 5DIV coming in tomorrow. Maybe I'll be able to tell you about it and the 400 DO II?


----------



## arthurbikemad (Sep 14, 2016)

Jack Douglas said:


> AlanF said:
> 
> 
> > Jack
> ...



The last month I have been shooting 1DX2 and 5D3 back to back, there are many advantages of the 1DX2 that stack up well against the 5D3 for example, but I have to be honest and say I think pixel peeping wise the 5D3 seems to have the slight advantage, I do feel I can see the slightly higher MP count of the 5D! Now saying that do take into account that ALL of the many other factors can result in a much lower hit rate with the 5D3, such as AF, ISO noise, FPS and so on, I know you have talked many times about cropping and of late I have been shooting small song birds, a new-ish subject for me but cropping even with my 500/[email protected] is a big factor even when only say 8-15m from the birds! Its here I have found that pixel count does matter, I find I can take a perfectly good photograph but end up peeping and comparing the two bodies, ridiculous I know. Sadly my 1DX2 has now gone back as has excessive dust again in the PP housing, you cant clean it from there so I am now in a position to get my money back and decide what the hell I am going to do, thing is the 1DX2 is SUCH a weapon of a camera its hard to not have it in the bag, the AF and FPS just blows any other camera away...BUT then there is the matter of 20MP.


----------



## Jack Douglas (Sep 14, 2016)

AlanF said:


> Jack
> My local dealer has a 5DIV coming in tomorrow. Maybe I'll be able to tell you about it and the 400 DO II?



Well, I almost replied previously that you should get one right away so that there was ample time for me to reap the reward! 

I presume you'll be just test driving??

Jack


----------



## Jack Douglas (Sep 14, 2016)

arthurbikemad said:


> Jack Douglas said:
> 
> 
> > AlanF said:
> ...



Thanks for this candid report. You did pick up on my concern repeated so many times!  I know we are not alone in feeling this concern - it would indeed be extravagant to have both cameras for precisely the same purpose. Who wants to hike with two heavy bodies and probably also carry two heavy lenses to make use of both cameras rather than swapping lenses?

For me, my 3 year history with 300 and converters tells me that I need to crop more than I need fps, as much as I'd like all the features/goodies of whatever camera. The 6D tells me I need more than 4.5 fps and that 7 could probably do the trick (previous Nikon was 6). In other words some of us end up between a rock and a hard place.  So, what to do??

We need a 400 DO II owner who has the 1DX II and the 5D4 to carefully delineate the upside and downside relating to this dilemma. 

I suggest Eldar should buy the 5D4 and help us out! Or, equally good, Alan should buy both.

Jack


----------



## arbitrage (Sep 15, 2016)

Arash is currently evaluating the 5D4 against his 1DX2. He mainly shoots the 600II and 400DOII. He has posted some initial comments on this thread on FM Forums. Read down for his replies to some of our questions on 5D4 vs 1DX2. He will be doing a full review once he has put more time in with the 5D4.

http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1449968


----------



## AlanF (Sep 15, 2016)

Collected the 5D IV this morning. It's a pain just having DP 4.5 as the only available software. What I can say at this stage is that the focus with the 400 DO II + 2xTC is very snappy and consistent. There is an increase in resolution on going from 400 -> 560 -> 800mm by about what is expected, whereas the 5DS R maxes out at 560mm. But, the 5DS R at 560mm looks sharper than the 5D IV at 800mm. For static photos, the 5DS R will beat out the 5D IV for "reach". As mooted by Arash in the fredmiranda thread, AF is significantly better with the 5D IV and it is faster, which will be better for birds in flight, and the 1DX II is better still. But, Arash is a BIF specialist and I am more of a sitting duck shooter.


----------



## Jack Douglas (Sep 15, 2016)

arbitrage said:


> Arash is currently evaluating the 5D4 against his 1DX2. He mainly shoots the 600II and 400DOII. He has posted some initial comments on this thread on FM Forums. Read down for his replies to some of our questions on 5D4 vs 1DX2. He will be doing a full review once he has put more time in with the 5D4.
> 
> http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1449968



Thanks for this!

Jack


----------



## Jack Douglas (Sep 15, 2016)

AlanF said:


> Collected the 5D IV this morning. It's a pain just having DP 4.5 as the only available software. What I can say at this stage is that the focus with the 400 DO II + 2xTC is very snappy and consistent. There is an increase in resolution on going from 400 -> 560 -> 800mm by about what is expected, whereas the 5DS R maxes out at 560mm. But, the 5DS R at 560mm looks sharper than the 5D IV at 800mm. For static photos, the 5DS R will beat out the 5D IV for "reach". As mooted by Arash in the fredmiranda thread, AF is significantly better with the 5D IV and it is faster, which will be better for birds in flight, and the 1DX II is better still. But, Arash is a BIF specialist and I am more of a sitting duck shooter.



Alan, thanks for this. Is the camera on loan or are you serious about buying it? 

From what Ari is saying the trade off is essentially this. The snappiest AF that to him is acceptable with 2X is with the 1DX II and the 1D4 doesn't cut it. For you and I we are not as dedicated to BIF and so that assessment may not be valid. 

Since you have the 5D4 in your hands I guess with a little time you can assess that. Is the 30 MPs with poorer AF a good trade off or are we going to also lose relative to the 1DX II larger pixels and better IQ, albeit at 20 MPs?

I know first hand that my 6D competed quite well with my friends 1DX for IQ when cropping, so that's always in the back of my mind when I think of the 1DX II with only 20 MPs.

Jack


----------



## AlanF (Sep 16, 2016)

Jack
The trade off for me is that the 5D IV is 640g/22.6oz lighter. I couldn't comfortably hike with the 400 DO on the 1DX II or use it arms extended for a length of time, and I'm getting older each year. Still, I suppose I could use my heavy duty Manfrotto monopod as as a walking stick and to help hold the gear for extended periods when stationary. Also, if I need a snappier response, I can use the 5D IV with the 1.4x TC, which has only slightly less reach than the 2xTC on the 1DX II, and also have an extra stop for higher shutter speed or lower ISO.


----------



## Jack Douglas (Sep 16, 2016)

AlanF said:


> Jack
> The trade off for me is that the 5D IV is 640g/22.6oz lighter. I couldn't comfortably hike with the 400 DO on the 1DX II or use it arms extended for a length of time, and I'm getting older each year. Still, I suppose I could use my heavy duty Manfrotto monopod as as a walking stick and to help hold the gear for extended periods when stationary. Also, if I need a snappier response, I can use the 5D IV with the 1.4x TC, which has only slightly less reach than the 2xTC on the 1DX II, and also have an extra stop for higher shutter speed or lower ISO.



Alan, that's a very valid point. I hiked a lot with 300 X2 with the 1D4 and found it OK but the 1DX II is somewhat heavier, although now the 400 DO II is a bit lighter. 

The 400 is lighter but with my first serious 5 minute walk with it, X2 on the 6D, I could tell I hadn't shot much in the last few months. It's easy to say it's hand holdable but as a person ages the inevitable loss of strength is a given.

So for me, the question that I ask that might still shift me to the 1DX II is again how the 30 MPs fairs, all things considered compared to 20 MPs (IQ and reach). If 1 level MPs seriously make up a lot of the difference I'd probably go 1DX II. We both need cropping latitude.

Jack


----------



## Jack Douglas (Sep 16, 2016)

Alan, so that's a 5D4 purchase? That shop must like you!

Jack


----------



## AlanF (Sep 19, 2016)

Jack, remember there are two of us who go out regularly bird photographing. Yesterday, my wife used the 5DS R with the 100-400mm II and I used the 5DIV with the 400mm DO II plus extenders. She got some excellent shots as the 5DS/100-400 is a superb combo for static shots. She did much better than she used to with the 7DII. 

The 5DIV had what was lacking in the 5DS, really good AF for birds in flight (I use 560mm for the wider field of view). It also handles the 400 at 800mm really well, unlike the 5DS R, which maxes out at 560 with that lens.


----------



## Jack Douglas (Sep 19, 2016)

AlanF said:


> Jack, remember there are two of us who go out regularly bird photographing. Yesterday, my wife used the 5DS R with the 100-400mm II and I used the 5DIV with the 400mm DO II plus extenders. She got some excellent shots as the 5DS/100-400 is a superb combo for static shots. She did much better than she used to with the 7DII.
> 
> The 5DIV had what was lacking in the 5DS, really good AF for birds in flight (I use 560mm for the wider field of view). It also handles the 400 at 800mm really well, unlike the 5DS R, which maxes out at 560 with that lens.



Well then Alan, you are set (I still somehow think you managed to acquire two toys with some pretty good rationalization!).  

I agree that for those of us that may not be up to the level of Ari, 560 is enough for BIF, although distant birds in the sky should be OK with 800 on the 5D4 from what I gather. I'd sure appreciate your feedback on the 400 X2 before I purchase my camera. 

I've pretty much made up my mind that my 300 has to be sold now because it simply won't get any use. There is one exception, that is, from a blind with very near proximity it has a better MFD. I'll have to adjust my prop distance since I need infinity as well and don't want to be caught with a tube and place and lose that flexibility.

So, I'm generally very pleased with the lens and the price ($1874 CAD less than my local shop sells it for, and $794 less than a new 300). Without that reality I probably wouldn't have it!

My Jobu foot swapped over to the 400 and is even better now as a handle. All it needs is a little plastic thingambob that would slide on the arca swiss dovetail and it would be superb - guess that'll be my next project.

Jack


----------



## AlanF (Sep 19, 2016)

Jack
For birds at rest, the 400x2 is excellent, and gives better resolution than 400x1.4 on the 5DIV. There are so few birds flying around at present I haven't been able to test the 400x2. As for mfd, I have the 100-400mm II, which gets down to less than 1 m and is very sharp at 300mm and light compared with the 300/2.8. My wife with the 100-400mm on the 5DS R and I with the 400 + TCs on the 5DIV are pretty well covered for most situations.

Of course, you could sell everything and buy the new Sigma 500/4 - it weighs only 2.2 kg more than the 400 DO - and have money left over for a 1DX II


----------



## tron (Sep 19, 2016)

AlanF said:


> Jack
> For birds at rest, the 400x2 is excellent, and gives better resolution than 400x1.4 on the 5DIV. There are so few birds flying around at present I haven't been able to test the 400x2. As for mfd, I have the 100-400mm II, which gets down to less than 1 m and is very sharp at 300mm and light compared with the 300/2.8. My wife with the 100-400mm on the 5DS R and I with the 400 + TCs on the 5DIV are pretty well covered for most situations.
> 
> Of course, you could sell everything and buy the new Sigma 500/4 -* it weighs only 2.2 kg more than the 400 DO - and have money left over* for a 1DX II


 ;D ;D ;D In fact he will possible have to get a new Sigma 500 at the future just like the previous 500 4.5 EX does not work with many cameras. So he will have again money left for the future Canon bodies ;D ;D ;D


----------



## AlanF (Sep 19, 2016)

oops, I meant 1.2 kg or 2.64lb heavier. To be fair, with the new Sigma dock, the lens should be reprogrammable.

Edit after price announcement: the Sigma 500/4 is hardly cheaper than the 400mm DO II.


----------



## Jack Douglas (Sep 20, 2016)

I have no plans to buy more lenses other than possibly the 100 macro. Since I've now walked a bit with the 400 it really doesn't feel any lighter than the 300 but I sure prefer the barrel diameter - less stress on my hand holding it.

Jack


----------



## tron (Sep 20, 2016)

AlanF said:


> oops, I meant 1.2 kg or 2.64lb heavier. To be fair, with the new Sigma dock, the lens should be reprogrammable.
> 
> Edit after price announcement: the Sigma 500/4 is hardly cheaper than the 400mm DO II.


It is about 0.1 Kg heavier than the Canon 500/4 II. I would get Canon over Sigma any day (oh wait I do have it ;D ) Still 400 DO II is fantastic with 7D2


----------



## arthurbikemad (Sep 20, 2016)

tron said:


> AlanF said:
> 
> 
> > oops, I meant 1.2 kg or 2.64lb heavier. To be fair, with the new Sigma dock, the lens should be reprogrammable.
> ...



I've just ordered a 7D2 for my walk about bird sessions to go with my 500/4ii. I have a good feeling about the crop body after getting some great results with my girls 1200D. (and cheap compared to a 1DX2/5D4 etc)


----------



## Jack Douglas (Sep 20, 2016)

arthurbikemad said:


> tron said:
> 
> 
> > AlanF said:
> ...



Used ones also seem to be showing up now at pretty decent prices. Might be worth considering as a back-up for sure. Were the issues that many complained about largely from early adopters?

Jack


----------



## arthurbikemad (Sep 20, 2016)

Jack Douglas said:


> arthurbikemad said:
> 
> 
> > tron said:
> ...



I got a brand new 7D2 (3 Yr 3rd party guarantee), Canon grip, second LP-E6N, 64GB SD and a 64GB CF all for £1300.00 UK Pounds, I am looking forward to getting out with it and the 500/4ii as well as my 70-200ii and 100-400ii, I think it will boost my images IQ as I will be able to loose the x1.4iii and x2.0iii more so given the 7D2's native x1.6 crop factor, plus I don't loose stops of light, the 7D2 has built up quite a show of fantastic images all over the net some of are shown right here, (great images by the way people!). When I think about my kit bag having a crop body on the side has a great deal to offer, its like a whole new line up of glass!

I don't know of any current issues now in regard to focus and other niggles reported in the early days of the 7D2, I think more than enough time has passed that now is a great time to buy imo (price, probs, firmware and so on).


----------



## Jack Douglas (Sep 20, 2016)

arthurbikemad said:


> Jack Douglas said:
> 
> 
> > arthurbikemad said:
> ...



Here in Canada Canon has it on sale for $1800 CAD (1368 USD) so it is tempting.

However, there is never unanimity on the 1.6 reach advantage vs 1.4X extender.

Jack


----------



## arthurbikemad (Sep 20, 2016)

Jack Douglas said:


> arthurbikemad said:
> 
> 
> > Jack Douglas said:
> ...



No I know, it's always a trade off one way or another, I hope to get some good results at 1120mm as well as 800mm, will have some shots end of week, will post a few up in the bird sections.


----------



## tron (Sep 21, 2016)

arthurbikemad said:


> Jack Douglas said:
> 
> 
> > arthurbikemad said:
> ...


Just make sure you use AFMA. I had to do that with my 7D2 + 500 II and 7D2 + 500 II + 1.4III
I had success with 7D2 + 500 II handheld and less success with 7D2 + 500 II + 1.4III. For the later combination I used tripod and my keepers increased a lot.


----------

