Canon Big White Conundrum - 200-400 vs 400 f2.8 IS II vs 500 f4 IS II

AbChromatic wrote:

Thank you so much for the valuable suggestions everyone. Based on the posts above, it appears:

a) 400mm will generally be a little short for wildlife. So 400 2.8 may not be the best option unless you’re into sports photography as well.

For small birds or very skittish wildlife that you just can't get close too, then I'd agree that 400mm will probably be too short, and so will a 500mm and maybe even a 600mm for that matter. For everything else this is a rule of thumb that has been around for ages - long enough that it probably needs some reconsideration in light of the higher pixels now available. Consider how large an image you *really* need for your output medium of choice, , then think about how much extra "reach" you can gain from cropping an image from a modern DSLR. Sure, being able to zoom right in and still see lots detail is nice, but how often do you do that in practice, other than to pixel peep?

b) 200-400 will be too short and engaging the extender to increase reach will cause a significant drop in the IQ. So this may not be the best option given the limited reach and high cost of this lens.

I can only imagine that the person that suggested this has/had a bad copy as it's not all that significant on mine, even at the limits of the zoom range, although there is some drop off as you would expect with any zoom. I have no qualms about using the in-built TC, and will quite happily combine this with an external 1.4x if I have to, for a very light and compact 400-800mm.

c) Two body is best approach for wildlife to gain a good mix of reach and versatility.

Pretty much true for any style of photography, but especially when using primes. While I don't generally shoot birds, especially smaller ones, my preferred combo for wildlife is the 200-400mm on one body and a 70-200mm with optional 1.4x TC on the other. If you want versatility (and I do) then you can't beat a zoom, so while the 200-400+TC might not be quite as sharp as my 500mm, it's more than good enough for my needs and the extra flexibilty of the zoom more than makes up.

As another poster suggested, you should definitely try before you buy with any of the lenses under consideration though.

Andy