300mm f/2.8L IS II vs 400mm f/4 DO II on 1Dx for birds?

BirdShooter7 · Feb 23, 2016

Does anyone have any experience with these two lenses for bird photography. I am interested in using one or the other on a 1Dx along with 1.4x III and 2x III TC’s. I have experience with the 300 and know it is great for the job but definitely see potential benefits from having the extra focal length of the 400 if it is at least optically equivalent to the 300.

I have read a lot of reviews of the new 400mm DO and so far I haven’t found a negative one. In fact they pretty much seem to be over the top positive. I have seen claims that the new 400 is even sharper than the 300 which would be really amazing if true.

I did see at least one post where someone compared the bokeh of the 400 to their 500mm f/4 and the new DO lens didn’t look as good. Other than that things look great for the 400. In fact they looked so great that I was preparing to order one from B&H when a friend contacted me saying he had purchased one and has been unable to get results with the new lens that are as good as what he is getting with his 300mm f/2.8 II and TC’s. He has spent a great deal of effort making sure that he has the MFA set to optimal for each combination of lens and lens + TC… and has even been to the Canon service center to have them check everything out. The service center says that his lens has no defects and is working perfectly.

This is definitely not the news I want to hear (or maybe it is since I won’t feel so compelled to spend nearly $7000). Has anyone done a comparison between these two lenses on any camera?

Another thing I noticed in all of the on line reviews that I read was that pretty much all of the sample images were in ideal or close to ideal lighting conditions. Can anyone offer any first-hand experience with this lens in lower light/less than optimal lighting? How does it do in low light?

While I do my share of photographing birds in open areas with ideal light, I also do a lot of photography in rain forests and cloud forests and definitely will be dealing with less than ideal lighting a significant amount of the time. Many of those areas are remote and require lots of exertion to get to which is the main reason I am interested in using a body like the 1Dx (for better lot light performance) and a lighter weight lens.
Thanks,

Greg

BigBen08 · Feb 23, 2016

I can't answer all of your questions since I don't do BIF and all my shooting is in bright light.

I own the 300 f2.8 IS II and rented the 400 DO II for an air show last year. Here are my observations:

The 400 DO II is a fantastic lens with sharpness on par with my 300 f2.8.

With the 1.4xIII on the 400 DO II, sharpness decreases a tiny bit, but still provides excellent sharpness and contrast. Even with the extender, AF performance is great, and it makes a good alternative to the 500 f4 if f5.6 and 560mm is acceptable to the photographer.

The 400 DO II does produce odd bokeh, especially with extenders. Some people call it onion ring bokeh. I like the bokeh from my 300 better.

I'm considering replacing my 300 f2.8 with the 400 DO II. The 400mm will be more useful for me during air shows, and 560mm good for those high in the sky aerobatic planes.

Here some images taken with the 400 DO II, and some with the 300...

(press 'L' for larger view)

https://www.flickr.com/photos/31267310@N05/albums/72157652876389715

https://www.flickr.com/photos/31267310@N05/albums/72157662448667552

--
http://flightlinephotos.smugmug.com
My Sets: http://www.flickr.com/photos/31267310@N05/sets

BirdShooter7 · Feb 24, 2016

Thanks very much for your feedback. The main areas I am interested in using the 400 are with the 1.4x III and 2x III TC’s. My friend sent me a bunch of photos with the 2x III on the lens and all of them just look slightly soft while the 300mm f/2.8 IS II with the same 2x TC produces nice and crisp shots under the same shooting conditions. I wonder if he might have gotten a dud because none of the shots he has sent me with the bare lens look quite as crisp as his shots with the 300mm f/2.8 IS II. They don’t look bad at 400mm but just not quite as good as the 300.

I am very interested in any feedback about the 400, especially in lower light use.

Greg

jeminijoseph · Feb 24, 2016

BirdShooter7 said:
Thanks very much for your feedback. The main areas I am interested in using the 400 are with the 1.4x III and 2x III TC’s. My friend sent me a bunch of photos with the 2x III on the lens and all of them just look slightly soft while the 300mm f/2.8 IS II with the same 2x TC produces nice and crisp shots under the same shooting conditions. I wonder if he might have gotten a dud because none of the shots he has sent me with the bare lens look quite as crisp as his shots with the 300mm f/2.8 IS II. They don’t look bad at 400mm but just not quite as good as the 300.

I am very interested in any feedback about the 400, especially in lower light use.

Greg

Some comparison to 300/2.8. I was looking for same info

Canon 400mm f/4 IS DO IS II Review: Battle of the light lenses – Ari Hazeghi Photography

BirdShooter7 · Feb 24, 2016

Yes that review was one of the main reasons my friend ordered his and I was about to order mine. Unfortunately so far the one that my friend got doesn’t seem to behave the same way the one in the review did. His is going back to B&H tomorrow and my order is on hold. He will get another one when they get more in stock, hopefully the next one will be better. We both really want all that we have read to be true.

From the sample pictures I have gotten from my friend I can say that the images look good at web size but when I look at them at 1:1 magnification they definitely lag behind what his 300mm f/2.8 II does both bare and with the TC’s.

Thanks for your input.

Greg

jeminijoseph · Feb 25, 2016

BirdShooter7 said:
Yes that review was one of the main reasons my friend ordered his and I was about to order mine. Unfortunately so far the one that my friend got doesn’t seem to behave the same way the one in the review did. His is going back to B&H tomorrow and my order is on hold. He will get another one when they get more in stock, hopefully the next one will be better. We both really want all that we have read to be true.

From the sample pictures I have gotten from my friend I can say that the images look good at web size but when I look at them at 1:1 magnification they definitely lag behind what his 300mm f/2.8 II does both bare and with the TC’s.

Thanks for your input.

Greg

With all the reviews we've seen in the net, I thought the DO lens now caught up in sharpness. Hopefully it's a piece issue and ur friend will get a better one next time. I'll keep watching this thread. Please put any of ur findings here..

dgumshu · Feb 26, 2016

BirdShooter7 said:
Does anyone have any experience with these two lenses for bird photography. I am interested in using one or the other on a 1Dx along with 1.4x III and 2x III TC’s. I have experience with the 300 and know it is great for the job but definitely see potential benefits from having the extra focal length of the 400 if it is at least optically equivalent to the 300.

I have read a lot of reviews of the new 400mm DO and so far I haven’t found a negative one. In fact they pretty much seem to be over the top positive. I have seen claims that the new 400 is even sharper than the 300 which would be really amazing if true.

I did see at least one post where someone compared the bokeh of the 400 to their 500mm f/4 and the new DO lens didn’t look as good. Other than that things look great for the 400. In fact they looked so great that I was preparing to order one from B&H when a friend contacted me saying he had purchased one and has been unable to get results with the new lens that are as good as what he is getting with his 300mm f/2.8 II and TC’s. He has spent a great deal of effort making sure that he has the MFA set to optimal for each combination of lens and lens + TC… and has even been to the Canon service center to have them check everything out. The service center says that his lens has no defects and is working perfectly.

This is definitely not the news I want to hear (or maybe it is since I won’t feel so compelled to spend nearly $7000). Has anyone done a comparison between these two lenses on any camera?

Another thing I noticed in all of the on line reviews that I read was that pretty much all of the sample images were in ideal or close to ideal lighting conditions. Can anyone offer any first-hand experience with this lens in lower light/less than optimal lighting? How does it do in low light?

While I do my share of photographing birds in open areas with ideal light, I also do a lot of photography in rain forests and cloud forests and definitely will be dealing with less than ideal lighting a significant amount of the time. Many of those areas are remote and require lots of exertion to get to which is the main reason I am interested in using a body like the 1Dx (for better lot light performance) and a lighter weight lens.
Thanks,

Greg

I can tell you that my 400 DO ii is spectacular. The 7D2 lives on the lens and I have not had a chance to get out with my 1DX... but I will soon. The 400 DO ii and my 500 F4 ii are my two favorite lenses. The Bokeh is better on the 500 F4 ii, but the 400 DO ii does not disappoint.

The 400 DO ii is the right size and weight and is a pleasure to use. A 1.4 iii also resides on the lens and the images are very nice and sharp. I've had it for about a month now and I can say that it is a keeper. As spring and summer arrive, I will be out with it as much as I can.

I was on a waiting list for this lens and was tempted to buy the 300 F2.8, ii but I'm glad I waited.

I've heard rumors of a Canon 600mm DO in the works and I'm waiting to hear more on that along with a new 200-600mm.

BirdShooter7 · Feb 26, 2016

Thanks very much for your feedback, it is very encouraging. Have you used it much/at all with the 2x III?

Do you notice that your post processing is any different with the 400 DO II than with your 500? Is the contrast as good with the 400 as it is with the 500? Do you think the 400 DO II is good for use in low-light situations?

I know this is asking a lot but is there any way you would be willing to share a crop or two that hasn’t had any sharpening or other post processing. For example a crop from a jpeg that is from your 7D2 in faithful picture style with no editing other than the crop? I would really like to find out if what I am seeing from my friend’s lens is typical for the model. If it is too much work for you I completely understand.

Thanks again,

Greg

TheBlackGrouse · Feb 27, 2016

You have probably seen it already, but this is a thread where the bokeh of the 400 DO II is discussed, especially with converters.

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/56915355

Know what you mean, nearly bought it but then strange results appeared, still in doubt ;-)

--
TheBlackGrouse
Active outdoor photographer, trying to become better, studying user experience.

maiaibing · Feb 27, 2016

BirdShooter7 said:
I have read a lot of reviews of the new 400mm DO and so far I haven’t found a negative one. In fact they pretty much seem to be over the top positive. I have seen claims that the new 400 is even sharper than the 300 which would be really amazing if true.

Its not. But its 400mm and the 300mm is not. And its still a big step up from the old DO.

BirdShooter7 said:
I did see at least one post where someone compared the bokeh of the 400 to their 500mm f/4 and the new DO lens didn’t look as good.

My biggest grip with the DO is exactly the bokeh. Its the reason I'm not getting one myself.

BirdShooter7 said:
While I do my share of photographing birds in open areas with ideal light, I also do a lot of photography in rain forests and cloud forests and definitely will be dealing with less than ideal lighting a significant amount of the time.

Sounds like the kind of bokeh that could be a challenge for the DO. However, I had the same challenge shooting the old 100-400mm IS L and pretty much learned how to avoid bringing out its worst bokeh characteristics.

No lens is perfect and many lenses have obvious quirks and some people are happy to go along with this. Like the 50L. I'm not that kind of a person myself. If I can avoid quirks I will.

Still, even I ended up with the 100-400mm IS L because it could do so much for me.

Good luck with your choice!

dgumshu · Feb 27, 2016

BirdShooter7 said:
Thanks very much for your feedback, it is very encouraging. Have you used it much/at all with the 2x III?

Do you notice that your post processing is any different with the 400 DO II than with your 500? Is the contrast as good with the 400 as it is with the 500? Do you think the 400 DO II is good for use in low-light situations?

I know this is asking a lot but is there any way you would be willing to share a crop or two that hasn’t had any sharpening or other post processing. For example a crop from a jpeg that is from your 7D2 in faithful picture style with no editing other than the crop? I would really like to find out if what I am seeing from my friend’s lens is typical for the model. If it is too much work for you I completely understand.

Thanks again,

Greg

Hi,

I seem to recall trying the 2X on it, I'll see what I can find, but so far so good. The post processing on this lens hasn't been any differnt than the 500. The contrast is just as good and I haven't seen any problems working in low light (golden hours).

Sure, I can share a crop with no post. I typically shoot in Standard, not faithful. If you'd like, I can change the style in DPP and save to jpg. I've got things to do this morning, so it will probably be this evening.

Im also a member of the fredmiranda forum where excellent pictures are shared... See below:

http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1401779

--
https://www.flickr.com/photos/128728392@N05/albums/72157648429825829/with/24127758582/

maiaibing · Feb 27, 2016

dgumshu said:
Im also a member of the fredmiranda forum where excellent pictures are shared... See below:
http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1401779

Very nice thread even if only bird pictures.

Also gives a good reference of the difference when the bokeh works and does not.

garyknrd · Feb 27, 2016

I've been using the 300 II for a few years and just got the DO II. Been using it for a couple months now. For birding it is a great lens. Everything said above I mostly agree with. Mostly use it with the 1D mark IV.

I get color frenging that is hard to get rid of on back light targets. Even shooting threw trees where the sky is visible, I can get bad color fringing. (strange). Also the OOF background can get a bit ugly at times. It takes a 1.4 without any problem what so ever.

I use it way more than I should. But it is so damn light....

Gary Kinard

Explore Gary Kinard’s 4,078 photos on Flickr!

www.flickr.com

BirdShooter7 · Feb 27, 2016

I really appreciate everyone’s feedback. Do you think it offers a significant advantage for someone who already owns the 300mm f/2.8 IS II? Do you plan on keeping both lenses or do you think you will replace your 300 with the 400?

Thanks,

Greg

BirdShooter7 · Feb 27, 2016

That sounds encouraging; hopefully my friend just got one that had an issue. It sounds like he will get a replacement the first week in March.

From his sample images the DO II was obviously less contrasty and crisp looking than the 300, especially when the 2x TC was in use. He doesn’t have a 1.4x TC so I didn’t get to see comparison shots with that.

I would definitely sign up at Fred Miranda but they have some goofy policy that prevents me from doing it because I don’t have the right kind of email address. For that reason I pretty much never look at the sight but I will be sure to follow your link.

Thanks,

Greg

BirdShooter7 · Feb 27, 2016

Thanks for the feedback. What I really am interested in figuring out is whether or not it is worth switching a 300mm f/2.8L IS II + 1.4x and 2x TC’s for the 400 DO II and TC’s. I know the 300 setup is fantastic though I do think the DO physically feels better to work with and hope that the benefit of the extra focal length would make it worth the change in systems. It seems to me that the main place where I would see the focal length benefit would be when using the 2x TC. So one of my critical questions is does the 400 + 2x buy me anything over the 300 + 2x.

I had the old 400 DO (two different units) and when I tested that lens vs my 300mm f/2.8 IS w/1.4x II the 300 rig was crisper looking and more detailed, the same was the case when I compared the 400mm w/1.4x and the 300 + 2x. I keep reading that Canon has brought the 400 up to the same level of performance as the other big telephoto lenses so that is what has me so excited about the new lens. As I said I was all ready to buy when my friend showed me his results now I have doubts again. Certainly looking at Romy’s photos makes me get all excited again but I don’t know if his results should carry so much weight for me. He is way better at post processing than I am and he definitely got way better results with the old 100-400 than I ever got out of any of the units of that lens that I owned. Maybe I should just invest the money for the new lens in post processing lessons.

Greg

Jay Brookstone · Feb 27, 2016

The 300mm f2.8 IS L is pretty much unmatched optically in the Canon line and has always worked well with the 1.4x and 2x TCs. This yields not only superb images but great flexibility, as with the TCs, it provides focal lengths of 300mm, 420mm and 600mm. Focus tracking DOES slow down significantly with the 2x TC attached.

I don't know too much about birding, but I've used the 300mm lens (and the 400mm f2.8 IS L) for sports for years with great success and many published images. It is much smaller/lighter than the 400mm f2.8 ISL and more versatile and easier to travel with

I've heard the new 400mm f4 DO lens is quite good - much better than the old DO - but its hard to imagine that its better than the 300mm f2.8 IS L. It WILL be smaller and lighter than the 300mm though - always a benefit.

BTW - don't birding fans usually go for 500mm+ lenses. Will 400mm do the trick, or are you counting on the 1.6x factor of a crop body?

Jay

dgumshu · Feb 27, 2016

Birdshooter, here are some shots you requested... unedited.

The background on this first image is pretty much what most people complain about. When the subject is surrounded with a close and busy background (branches, brush), at fairly wide open apertures it can appear somewhat odd with doubling and some color fringing on the background.

Here is a similar shot with the aperture closed down to F8 where the background and foreground have more DOF and appear more pleasing. There is more than ample contrast.

You requested a crop, so here is a crop of the one above:

Here is another example of a busy background shot at F7.1, but the background is a little further from the blue Scrub Jay and I believe it would have looked better if shot at F5.6... or F4 without the TC. As the subject gets further away from the background, the background looks better as seen in the deer photo (below) shot at 7.1. The deer photo background would have looked better at F5.6 or wider.

I was too close and clipped the ear.

You wanted to see some shots taken with the 1DX, so I went out to shoot a few quick ones... nothing to write home about. Here is one at 7.1 with a close busy background. I wanted to get different f stops, but the birds were not cooperating and moving too fast. This was taken in the same area as the above Scurb Jay.

Some from this morning, unedited, with the 1DX at F5.6 (below). The time on the 1DX is wrong and has to be reset.

CROPPED

I don't shoot too many small birds and prefer to shoot larger shore birds, so I doubt if I'll run into much of the branch background issue. My 500 F4 is my favorite lens. However, if the F stop and background don't mix, I can get some bad shots with that too... especially with a 2X attached where I cant go wider than F8.

My favorite Egrets/Herons (and other shore birds) should be out in mass within the next few months and I plan to get lots of shots.

--
https://www.flickr.com/photos/128728392@N05/albums/72157648429825829/with/24127758582/

Zorro2016 · Mar 4, 2016

I do quite a bit of bird photography and I own both the latest 300mm f2.8 and 400mm DO MkII lenses.

Personally, I much prefer using the 400mm DO lens for birding because of its longer reach. I use this lens exclusively with the 7D MkII camera and usually attach the 1.4X TC on the lens. This lightweight combo is a blessing especially when travelling overseas for birding. The 400mm DO can also be hand held quite easily. Very useful when photographing fast moving birds and BIF. In addition to the weight, the compactness of this setup allows me to move in and out of the vehicle effortlessly. It would take greater effort on my part if I were to use my 600mm f4 lens. And I struggle to hand hold my 600mm.

In terms of optical quality, I cannot see any difference between the 300mm and 400mm lenses. AF speed and stabiliser feels about the same to me. For me, the only con of the 400mm DO Mk II is when shooting against the sun or bright light. The lens flare more easily and this will make your images less contrasty. This is not a big issue for me as the advantages of this lens far outweigh this issue. I can always increase contrast during editing. Some folks complain about the "ugly background" created by the 400mm DO lens. I have no issues with this.

garyknrd · Mar 7, 2016

One more quick negative on this very good lens. The minimum focus distance! I was in a hide and lost many very nice shots due to this. By the time I mounted the 300 II on the camera the bird was gone.

Also on my mark IV the AF in low light with the F/4 DO II vs. 300 F/2.8 is VERY noticable. I missed many shots due to AF hunting and not finding the target with the DO II. Where the 300 II hit fast and accurate. I think this is a F/4 issue. But, it will miss never the less.

I am having a hard time getting used to the focus limiter. I constantly miss shots due to this. But, that is more a learning process thing. If you are using the 300 II, I suggest you get familiar with this as soon as you get the lens. This is a bigger issue than I would of ever expected.

When out in the open, and in fair light I have no problems with this lens. And as stated above the extra 100mm really helps when birding.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/avianphotos

--
Presently living in Asia

300mm f/2.8L IS II vs 400mm f/4 DO II on 1Dx for birds?

Forum Pro

Veteran Member

Forum Pro

Veteran Member

Forum Pro

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Forum Pro

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Leading Member

Forum Pro

Forum Pro

Forum Pro

Forum Enthusiast

Veteran Member

New member

Leading Member

Similar threads

Keyboard shortcuts