Review of Canon EF 400 DO II

I have published my review of Canon 400 DO II, you can read it here if interested in this lens

http://arihazeghiphotography.com/blog/c ... ht-lenses/

Hi Ari,

Great review and impressive images given that you are using the 2x. My experiences with the original 400 DO was a little different.  In bright sunlight it was L quality and I had no complaints when mated with the 1.4x (using 1DIII). However, its Achilles' heel for me was the performance in overcast conditions. Contrast took a dive and no amount of post processing would get it back.  I remember photographing a young Glaucous Gull during a heavy snow storm and I could not retain any detail in the feathers. Have you tried the new DO in overcast conditions?

Cheers,

Jim

Nice summary, it seems they have addressed a lot of the weaknesses of the original which I owned for a number of years!  Surely there must be more negatives than just cost though.  I tend to get a little suspicious of the reviewer's motives if that's the only thing they come up with that could be better...

E.J. Peiker wrote: I tend to get a little suspicious of the reviewer's motives if that's the only thing they come up with that could be better...

so what exactly do you think my motives are?

hullyjr wrote:Hi Ari,

Great review and impressive images given that you are using the 2x. My experiences with the original 400 DO was a little different.  In bright sunlight it was L quality and I had no complaints when mated with the 1.4x (using 1DIII). However, its Achilles' heel for me was the performance in overcast conditions. Contrast took a dive and no amount of post processing would get it back.  I remember photographing a young Glaucous Gull during a heavy snow storm and I could not retain any detail in the feathers. Have you tried the new DO in overcast conditions?

Cheers,

Jim

Hi Jim, thanks for your comments. Yes I have shot with in overcast conditions too, it works great. If I get a chance I'll look through my files to see if I have a good example. 

ahazeghi wrote:

E.J. Peiker wrote: I tend to get a little suspicious of the reviewer's motives if that's the only thing they come up with that could be better...

so what exactly do you think my motives are?

I wasn't saying you had any. To me it does read a little like a Canon Explorer of Light review (or the Nikon and Sony equivalent) which is often disguised advertising for a brand.   It was just an impression I got reading it, nothing more, nothing less.  I just haven't ever come across a product that is even remotely perfect so I have trouble believing that there is nothing that could be better or different.  For this lens in particular, a test of the OOF specular highlights and how it compares to traditional optics would be very beneficial since that was a huge weakness of the original lens.  Elimination of the air gap might make that better but there is still the fact that it uses a phase fresnel element which has etched or ground concentric rings in it which can blow up on OOF point light sources.

I think a review is an opinion at the end of the day, for my application and subject, I couldn't really find anything to complain except for the price, I wouldn't equate this to advertising. It's just an excellent lens.  
 
For the record I have no financial relationship with Canon to advertise their products, they do not pay for my reviews, nor do they provide any gear or sponsor my photography. I purchase and review my gear independently and I pay the same as everyone else. There are times that I I don't recommend a Canon product (e.g. 7D2)

Best,

Great review Ari.

I am one of those who found the 600 too much to carry and almost impossible to hand hold effectively. I sold mine a year ago.

I just got my copy of the 400 DO MkII, after a long wait. Have not tested it much but my preliminary impression is quite positive. I don't do birds much, especially BIF, my main need is for larger animals in action in Africa. From that POV, it probably is going to be an even better lens for my needs.

For now, I am also quite interested in how it performs on the A7RII and it seems to be doing well on that front as well.

Good times, these.

Pradeep

Nice work, Ari, and great clean images, too. There are few full reviews of this interesting lens.

Aside from specular highlight comparison test (as EJ I would be curious to see that test), did you notice anything special about background blur smoothness ? Is the 400 as great as the 300 on this specific issue ? With the TCs also ?

As a side question, when using AF at f/8 with the 1DX, do you always use 4-point expansion, or sometimes only the central point ?

Thank you.

Manu.

Hi Manu,

I did not notice any issues in the BG, it is like any other Canon super-telephoto lens.

I usually use 4 pt expansion, but it depends on the subject.

best

Very impressive review. I must admit that since this lens came out I hadn't been interested at all in it since I already have a 300 f2.8II that I've been happy with. To see this lens perform so well with the 2x on the 1DX really changes things. I didn't think that the AF tracking could be that useful with an f8 combination judging by the 100-400II and the 800 with the 1.4x. The price is pretty close to what the 300 2.8II was when it first came out, but since then its price has dropped and they're widely available used. I definitely would want the 400 DOII now, but I definitely don't like the idea of taking such a hit on the 300 either.

Very nice review Ari, the one I've been waiting for as well.

Off topic but what don't you like about the 7D2?

So, Ari, did you replace the 300 with the 400DO, or do you keep the 300 for some specific uses where it is still better than the 400 ?
(e.g. MFD, 2.8 aperture of bare lens ?)

Martin Hale wrote:Very nice review Ari, the one I've been waiting for as well.

Off topic but what don't you like about the 7D2?

I sent you a PM

Vertigo wrote:So, Ari, did you replace the 300 with the 400DO, or do you keep the 300 for some specific uses where it is still better than the 400 ?
(e.g. MFD, 2.8 aperture of bare lens ?)

It has replaced my 300 II which I sold after this acquisition. 

Excellent review Ari. I'm wondering after a couple more months of use if you are still as thrilled with this lens or have discovered any weakness over time. I own the 300 f2.8 and love using it with or without converters but it's not enough length for me to leave my 600 at home. This would be a wonderful travel lens when it's just not practical or possible to have the 600 to work with.

Any other users out there? Thanks.

Hi Jim,

I used this lens shooting raptors in SoCal last month in tough conditions, lots of heat shimmer, dust, some low light etc. It excelled in every category, especially AF with the 2XIII despite being at f/8 (on 1D-X). This is the best lens not just for travel but also for situations where you are shooting from a tight space (shooting from a truck, small boat etc.) as it is easy to maneuver and swing. 

It's a no brainier over the 300 for bird photography IMO. 

best

Thanks Aresh, Looking very positive to me.