Canon 200-400 F4 or 400mm F2.8 ?: Canon SLR Lens Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review

Canon 200-400 F4 or 400mm F2.8 ?

Started Oct 16, 2015 | Questions

nimtree • Regular Member • Posts: 180

Canon 200-400 F4 or 400mm F2.8 ?

Oct 16, 2015

One gives compositional benefits, other gives more light and superb sharpness.

Deciding which one, is a tough question.

Can someone please suggest ?

Usage is mostly mammals, early and late evening and in very dusty conditions.

Does the 200-400 zoom sucks dust? How is the in built teleconverter, useful ? Not sure if I want to use the in built one and make it a slow F5.6.

Thanks.

-- hide signature --

Tiger Photography

ANSWER:

This question has not been answered yet.

Canon EF 200-400mm f/4L IS USM Extender 1.4x Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II USM

Reply to thread Reply with quote Complain

Cheatdeath • New Member • Posts: 24

Re: Canon 200-400 F4 or 400mm F2.8 ?

In reply to nimtree • Oct 16, 2015

I would rent or go try out both if possible. Also I would look at the 500mm F4 IS II which is cheaper and probably a better overall lens for wildlife.

Cheatdeath's gear list:Cheatdeath's gear list

Panasonic LX100 Canon EOS 7D Mark II Canon EF 300mm f/4.0L IS USM Canon EF 70-200mm F2.8L IS II USM Sigma 18-35mm F1.8 DC HSM Art +4 more

Reply Reply with quote Reply to thread Complain

Steve Balcombe • Forum Pro • Posts: 15,582

Re: Canon 200-400 F4 or 400mm F2.8 ?

In reply to nimtree • Oct 16, 2015

nimtree wrote:
Does the 200-400 zoom sucks dust? How is the in built teleconverter, useful ? Not sure if I want to use the in built one and make it a slow F5.6.

Internal or external makes no difference - any 1.4x TC costs a stop of light.

-- hide signature --

https://www.flickr.com/photos/stevebalcombe/

Reply Reply with quote Reply to thread Complain

OP nimtree • Regular Member • Posts: 180

Re: Canon 200-400 F4 or 400mm F2.8 ?

In reply to Steve Balcombe • Oct 16, 2015

Steve Balcombe wrote:

nimtree wrote:

Does the 200-400 zoom sucks dust? How is the in built teleconverter, useful ? Not sure if I want to use the in built one and make it a slow F5.6.

Internal or external makes no difference - any 1.4x TC costs a stop of light.

I understand that but in the field there would not be enough time to remove the lens (in dusty surroundings), put a teleconverter and then attached the lens back, by that time, the tiger would be gone home for dinner.

-- hide signature --

Tiger Photography

Reply Reply with quote Reply to thread Complain

Steve Balcombe • Forum Pro • Posts: 15,582

Re: Canon 200-400 F4 or 400mm F2.8 ?

In reply to nimtree • Oct 16, 2015

nimtree wrote:

Steve Balcombe wrote:

nimtree wrote:

Does the 200-400 zoom sucks dust? How is the in built teleconverter, useful ? Not sure if I want to use the in built one and make it a slow F5.6.

Internal or external makes no difference - any 1.4x TC costs a stop of light.

I understand that but in the field there would not be enough time to remove the lens (in dusty surroundings), put a teleconverter and then attached the lens back, by that time, the tiger would be gone home for dinner.

I don't understand what you mean. You said you don't want to "use the built in one and make it a slow f/5.6". As opposed to what, if not an external one? Then you went on to describe the exact benefit of the thing you don't want to use, i.e. that it removes the need to swap in/out an external TC.

-- hide signature --

https://www.flickr.com/photos/stevebalcombe/

Reply Reply with quote Reply to thread Complain

Myrgjorf • Regular Member • Posts: 464

Re: Canon 200-400 F4 or 400mm F2.8 ?

In reply to Steve Balcombe • Oct 16, 2015

ISteve Balcombe wrote:

nimtree wrote:

Does the 200-400 zoom sucks dust? How is the in built teleconverter, useful ? Not sure if I want to use the in built one and make it a slow F5.6.

Internal or external makes no difference - any 1.4x TC costs a stop of light.

I don't agree. In my experience the built-in TC takes less IQ hit than the external (Canon x1.4 mk3). Both makes it a 280 - 560 F5.6 though.

I have often used the flexibility of the 200-560mm to get photos not possible with a fixed FL. But I am sure a fixed FL may be better in some scenarios. Though I haven't tried the 400mm F2.8 I think it is a very different beast useful for other workflows. I use my 200-400 with a 7D2 most of the time adding another x1.6 though I sometimes uses it with a 6D.

The 200-400 zooms internally so dust should not be a problem and I haven't had dust problems so far.

Myrgjorf's gear list:Myrgjorf's gear list

Sony RX100 Olympus TG-5 Canon EOS-1D X Mark II Canon EOS M50 Canon EOS R5 +20 more

Reply Reply with quote Reply to thread Complain

Steve Balcombe • Forum Pro • Posts: 15,582

Re: Canon 200-400 F4 or 400mm F2.8 ?

In reply to Myrgjorf • Oct 16, 2015

Myrgjorf wrote:

ISteve Balcombe wrote:

nimtree wrote:

Does the 200-400 zoom sucks dust? How is the in built teleconverter, useful ? Not sure if I want to use the in built one and make it a slow F5.6.

Internal or external makes no difference - any 1.4x TC costs a stop of light.

I don't agree. In my experience the built-in TC takes less IQ hit than the external (Canon x1.4 mk3). Both makes it a 280 - 560 F5.6 though.

For goodness sake, I didn't say anything about IQ. The external TC makes it 27 mm longer and 225 g heavier as well, but I didn't say anything about that either.

-- hide signature --

https://www.flickr.com/photos/stevebalcombe/

Reply Reply with quote Reply to thread Complain

RogerZoul • Veteran Member • Posts: 3,243

Re: Canon 200-400 F4 or 400mm F2.8 ?

In reply to Steve Balcombe • Oct 17, 2015

Steve Balcombe wrote:

Myrgjorf wrote:

ISteve Balcombe wrote:

nimtree wrote:

Does the 200-400 zoom sucks dust? How is the in built teleconverter, useful ? Not sure if I want to use the in built one and make it a slow F5.6.

Internal or external makes no difference - any 1.4x TC costs a stop of light.

I don't agree. In my experience the built-in TC takes less IQ hit than the external (Canon x1.4 mk3). Both makes it a 280 - 560 F5.6 though.

For goodness sake, I didn't say anything about IQ. The external TC makes it 27 mm longer and 225 g heavier as well, but I didn't say anything about that either.

Little confused here. The OP asked how is the in built TC, useful or not. You said it makes no difference you just lose a stop of light. The other poster said the in-built TC has better image quality, which conflicts with what you said since you *implied* that there is no difference in IQ. Hence, you did say something about IQ. It also makes very little sense to buy a lens with an in-built TC if you don't plan to use it, or use an external one.

RogerZoul's gear list:RogerZoul's gear list

Canon EOS R5 Canon EF 500mm f/4.0L IS II USM Canon RF 35mm F1.8 IS STM Macro Canon RF 100-500mm F4.5-7.1L IS USM Canon RF 800mm F11 IS STM +31 more

Reply Reply with quote Reply to thread Complain

Sports Shooter • Senior Member • Posts: 1,648

Re: Canon 200-400 F4 or 400mm F2.8 ?

In reply to nimtree • Oct 17, 2015

nimtree wrote:

One gives compositional benefits, other gives more light and superb sharpness.

Deciding which one, is a tough question.

Can someone please suggest ?

Usage is mostly mammals, early and late evening and in very dusty conditions.

Does the 200-400 zoom sucks dust? How is the in built teleconverter, useful ? Not sure if I want to use the in built one and make it a slow F5.6.

Thanks.

200-400 . Super sharpness too and the build in TC is made of the same glass as the lens.

or go for the 500 / f4.

You didn't tell us what camera you use...

Sports Shooter's gear list:Sports Shooter's gear list

Canon EOS-1D Mark IV Canon EOS-1D X Mark II Canon EOS R6 Canon EF 85mm F1.8 USM Canon EF 70-200mm F2.8L IS II USM +14 more

Reply Reply with quote Reply to thread Complain

OP nimtree • Regular Member • Posts: 180

Re: Canon 200-400 F4 or 400mm F2.8 ?

In reply to Sports Shooter • Oct 17, 2015

5D Mark III is my main body.

-- hide signature --

Tiger Photography

Reply Reply with quote Reply to thread Complain

Sports Shooter • Senior Member • Posts: 1,648

Re: Canon 200-400 F4 or 400mm F2.8 ?

In reply to nimtree • Oct 17, 2015

nimtree wrote:

5D Mark III is my main body.

I would go for the 200-400. The 5D MKIII has excellent high ISO capability to handle low light at f4 or even f5.6.

Sports Shooter's gear list:Sports Shooter's gear list

Canon EOS-1D Mark IV Canon EOS-1D X Mark II Canon EOS R6 Canon EF 85mm F1.8 USM Canon EF 70-200mm F2.8L IS II USM +14 more

Reply Reply with quote Reply to thread Complain

Phil Shaw • Contributing Member • Posts: 620

Re: Canon 200-400 F4 or 400mm F2.8 ?

In reply to Sports Shooter • Oct 17, 2015

Given the limited room for changing position in many situations when photographing mammals, the 200-400 zoom would be my choice. In fact I made this choice a few years ago by buying a Nikon 200-400 plus a Nikon D3 to complement my Canon 500/f4, 600/f4 and 300/f2.8 lenses. For mammal photography the 200-400 was my go to lens. I very quickly sold the 500/f4 and the 300/f2.8 got very little use after I bought the 200-400. The price of the Canon 200-400/f4 is the only thing that puts me off from replacing the Nikon 200-400. I had just about convinced myself to up-grade (and it is an up-grade) to the Canon lens, when Nikon announced their new 200-500 zoom. I'm now waiting to try one of these on my D810 before I make a final decision about the Canon 200-400.

Reply Reply with quote Reply to thread Complain

bigfatron • Contributing Member • Posts: 777

Re: Canon 200-400 F4 or 400mm F2.8 ?

In reply to RogerZoul • Oct 17, 2015

RogerZoul wrote:

Steve Balcombe wrote:

Myrgjorf wrote:

ISteve Balcombe wrote:

nimtree wrote:

Does the 200-400 zoom sucks dust? How is the in built teleconverter, useful ? Not sure if I want to use the in built one and make it a slow F5.6.

Internal or external makes no difference - any 1.4x TC costs a stop of light.

I don't agree. In my experience the built-in TC takes less IQ hit than the external (Canon x1.4 mk3). Both makes it a 280 - 560 F5.6 though.

For goodness sake, I didn't say anything about IQ. The external TC makes it 27 mm longer and 225 g heavier as well, but I didn't say anything about that either.

Little confused here. The OP asked how is the in built TC, useful or not. You said it makes no difference you just lose a stop of light. The other poster said the in-built TC has better image quality, which conflicts with what you said since you *implied* that there is no difference in IQ. Hence, you did say something about IQ. It also makes very little sense to buy a lens with an in-built TC if you don't plan to use it, or use an external one.

He never said it made no difference, nor did he imply anything about IQ. He merely pointed out that a 1.4x TC will hit you for a stop of light, whether its internal or external. The confusing part is the original post.

bigfatron's gear list:bigfatron's gear list

Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro USM Canon EF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM Canon Extender EF 1.4x III Canon EF 35mm F2 IS USM +3 more

Reply Reply with quote Reply to thread Complain

Steve Balcombe • Forum Pro • Posts: 15,582

Re: Canon 200-400 F4 or 400mm F2.8 ?

In reply to bigfatron • Oct 17, 2015

bigfatron wrote:

RogerZoul wrote:

Steve Balcombe wrote:

Myrgjorf wrote:

ISteve Balcombe wrote:

nimtree wrote:

Does the 200-400 zoom sucks dust? How is the in built teleconverter, useful ? Not sure if I want to use the in built one and make it a slow F5.6.

Internal or external makes no difference - any 1.4x TC costs a stop of light.

I don't agree. In my experience the built-in TC takes less IQ hit than the external (Canon x1.4 mk3). Both makes it a 280 - 560 F5.6 though.

For goodness sake, I didn't say anything about IQ. The external TC makes it 27 mm longer and 225 g heavier as well, but I didn't say anything about that either.

Little confused here. The OP asked how is the in built TC, useful or not. You said it makes no difference you just lose a stop of light. The other poster said the in-built TC has better image quality, which conflicts with what you said since you *implied* that there is no difference in IQ. Hence, you did say something about IQ. It also makes very little sense to buy a lens with an in-built TC if you don't plan to use it, or use an external one.

He never said it made no difference, nor did he imply anything about IQ. He merely pointed out that a 1.4x TC will hit you for a stop of light, whether its internal or external. The confusing part is the original post.

Exactly right - thanks bigfatron.

-- hide signature --

https://www.flickr.com/photos/stevebalcombe/

Reply Reply with quote Reply to thread Complain

OP nimtree • Regular Member • Posts: 180

Re: Canon 200-400 F4 or 400mm F2.8 ?

In reply to Phil Shaw • Oct 17, 2015

Phil Shaw wrote:

Given the limited room for changing position in many situations when photographing mammals, the 200-400 zoom would be my choice. In fact I made this choice a few years ago by buying a Nikon 200-400 plus a Nikon D3 to complement my Canon 500/f4, 600/f4 and 300/f2.8 lenses. For mammal photography the 200-400 was my go to lens. I very quickly sold the 500/f4 and the 300/f2.8 got very little use after I bought the 200-400. The price of the Canon 200-400/f4 is the only thing that puts me off from replacing the Nikon 200-400. I had just about convinced myself to up-grade (and it is an up-grade) to the Canon lens, when Nikon announced their new 200-500 zoom. I'm now waiting to try one of these on my D810 before I make a final decision about the Canon 200-400.

Thanks.

So I made a good choice by buying a Nikon 200-500 for my D7100.

Now shopping for Canon 5D Mark III...hopefully canon launches something simillar soon.

I have a Tamron 150-600 but I am not impressed with the results (as compared to the primes)..usually its a great lens for the price.

-- hide signature --

Tiger Photography

Reply Reply with quote Reply to thread Complain

kelvin500au • New Member • Posts: 10

Re: Canon 200-400 F4 or 400mm F2.8 ?

In reply to nimtree • Oct 18, 2015

I have both the Canon 500F4 and the 200-400. You should not under estimate the versatility of the built in extender on the 200-400. I have used the prime for many years as a 700mm and there have been many times a mammal started off framed at 700 but then I found myself reaching for my second camera and the 100-400.

Now with the 200-400, I have an advantage of engaging the internal extender so I start at 560 and can keep using the same lens down to 200 without the need to grab the second camera and with the 70-200.

The quality of the 200-400 is every bit as good as the original 500 and I am happy to shoot at 5.6 all day long. There is no IQ loss engaging the internal extender

kelvin500au's gear list:kelvin500au's gear list

Canon EOS-1D Mark IV Canon EOS-1D X Canon EF 85mm F1.2L II USM Canon EF 200mm f/2L IS USM Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS USM +16 more

Reply Reply with quote Reply to thread Complain

Keyboard shortcuts:

FForum MMy threads

Latest sample galleries

Nikkor 58mm F0.95 Noct Sample Gallery

Sony ZV-E1 pre-production sample gallery (DPReview TV)

The Canon EOS R3 goes to the rodeo

Fujifilm X-H2 review samples

See more galleries »

Latest in-depth reviews

DPReview TV: Nikon 58mm F0.95 Noct Review!

We're Noct messing around with this review.

DxO PureRAW 3 review: Give Adobe's apps a much-needed boost with modern AI algorithms

Adobe Photoshop and Lightroom impress in a lot of ways, but their noise reduction lags the competition and their lens corrections lack a real-world basis. DxO PureRAW 3 aims to come to their rescue without totally reinventing your workflow!

The Sony ZV-E1 is the company's latest vlogging-focused camera: a full-frame mirrorless camera based the FX3/a7S III sensor, aimed at YouTubers and 'creators' looking to go pro.

The Sony ZV-E1 is a full frame camera targeting YouTubers. Chris and Jordan are Youtubers, what do they think?

Fujifilm's X-H2 is a high-resolution stills and video camera, that sits alongside the high-speed X-H2S at the pinnacle of the company's range of X-mount APS-C mirrorless cameras. We dug into what it does and what it means.

Latest buying guides

Above $2500 cameras tend to become increasingly specialized, making it difficult to select a 'best' option. We case our eye over the options costing more than $2500 but less than $4000, to find the best all-rounder.

There are a lot of photo/video cameras that have found a role as B-cameras on professional film productions or even A-cameras for amateur and independent productions. We've combed through the options and selected our two favorite cameras in this class.

What’s the best camera for around $2000? These capable cameras should be solid and well-built, have both the speed and focus to capture fast action and offer professional-level image quality. In this buying guide we’ve rounded up all the current interchangeable lens cameras costing around $2000 and recommended the best.

The best cameras for family and friends photos in 2022

Family moments are precious and sometimes you want to capture that time spent with loved ones or friends in better quality than your phone can manage. We've selected a group of cameras that are easy to keep with you, and that can adapt to take photos wherever and whenever something memorable happens.

Best affordable cameras for sports and action in 2022

What's the best camera for shooting sports and action? Fast continuous shooting, reliable autofocus and great battery life are just three of the most important factors. In this buying guide we've rounded-up several great cameras for shooting sports and action, and recommended the best.

Check out more buying guides »


Spending a Penny by Lensmate from Faeces	The end of another day by io_bg from Good Night	The food transfer by dv312 from A Big Year 2023	Mike and the FWS1000 by GeoffN from Scooters/Motorbikes in motion	Brazilian Gripen by Johnson Barros from Fast Jet With Wheels On The Ground	CURIOSITY by TX Photo Doc from Fleeting Moments

4	Tudor Ciobanu
3	Le Kilt
2	akustykmagmanetpl
2	Rock and Rollei
2	rodriguezPhoto
2	Kameratrollet
2	Photobygms
1	Mark B.
1	Kjeld Olesen
1	Loren Charif
1	José B
1	AnthonyL
1	Lemming51
1	ed rader
1	1DSmII
1	Stakeouttoo
1	gcrimmins
1	J A C S
1	Andy01
1	Tom59