Believe me as an ex-Reuters photo editor this lens was the prime lens at the 2002 World Cup, 2004 Olympics & throughout the 2,000’s. It is an absolute beast in terms of output & size. I think the newer versions of this lens are lighter in size. I would suggest to look at photos from sporting events in this particular timeline for examples. This is a killer lens. This was industry standard.
Completely agree with you. This really is a beast of a lens, certainly in regard to weight, but is lighter than the original EF 400 2.8 which I think was about 6.5kg. The first IS version was a game changer and as you said, it absolutely dominated sports and press work. Built like a tank, you could use it hard for 10 years until it looked like a dog, then easily sell it on to other sports and press photographers who knew the pedigree and durability of the lens and weren't worried about how it looked. The very latest RF version is undoubtedly better when tested in a lab and much lighter which is the biggest advantage. However, when it comes to the rough and tumble world of sports and press work, I honestly don't think you'd see much difference when you factor in the realities thrown at you during a working assignment - working in the heat and the rain strips away any resolution advantage a newer lens has.
I had this lens until a few years ago. It was amazing for sports and aviation. I used it with my 1d4 and a 2x extender at a Scottish air show once and got a cracking image of a Merlin helicopter doing a display about half a mile out in the sea. 1040mm at f5.6 was a great shot. Sadly didn’t use it for a while and sold it. But overall it was an amazing lens. Great video one of the best I have seen. 🙂
@@davidsantiago2451 It was the perfect review as I have had the 300mm 2.8 IS before, and I am looking to het into sports photography and this lens would be the obvious choice for me. It's everything I needed to know.
I remember my old 400 2.8 IS very well I bought in 2007. I babied it. It was in perfect condition. I sold it for 6k.. as much as I purchased it for because Canon had a major price hike on superteles( but I threw in a wimberly foot, side kick and the circular polarizer. I seen him put it on craigslist for $3200. It has been there since covid started and sadly I think he is going to take a pretty good hit on it if he really wants to sell it. I hear that you should use the latest 2x or 1.4 converter on it for better image quality FYI but don't quote me on that. I ended up getting the version II of the 400 2.8 and 600 f4. They work better with the Canon R5 eye and helmet focus tracking. The old versions cannot attain 12fps and can only go to 80percent of the field AF instead of 100. I will not be paying 16k for version III. I picked up a 100-400 II for cheap over covid. That is a super sharp lens and has some good DOF blur (not as much as the 400 of course.) You got some great images from that lens. If people practice their technique the can get some great images out of the old gear including ths lens without 12fps or eye tracking. Good review good to see photographers like you still getting great images out of it. There is an English guy here on youtube who was shooting football/soccer.. He has a great video on how to do maintenance on that beast, it shows the 70-200 II maintenance which saved me from sending mine into Canon for service . Search Mark Kerton or RwzEmbU19Go
Part of the reason I wanted to do this review (and more in the future) is to show the benefits of using "old gear" and that you don't have to buy the latest gear to get great shots. Its more important to have the gear that works for you given your particular situation. Thanks for the comment and info!
Hi, are you saying that if using the older version on this lens (the exact lens in the video) that even if your camera can shoot 20 fps, the lens will only allow for less than 12 fps? Are you saying that the auto focus just kinda stops working after a number of shots? As opposed to maintaining focus during the duration of time the shutter is depressed? Asking bc I just got the older version (the one in the video) and I planned on using it for sports on a R6 and an EOS 7D 🤦🏽♂️
@@ShotgunJoeTV Well it is not an exact science, even for the newer cameras. If you look at the R6 do a search on Lenses Supporting Maximum High-Speed Continuous Shooting Speed and you will see the new cameras are the same. If you specify the r5 or r6 in your search it is in the manual and is stated the same. Factors that may limit maximum 20 fps, or 12 fps mechanical are. Less fps are likely with non supported lenses, battery under 60 percent, Using camera dual battery grip BG-R10 with only 1 battery, Wi-Fi on, using old LP-E6 batteries, using old USB Power Adaptor PD-E1, anti flicker turned on. Even temps below 23C or low scene brightness and other scene issue. But the manual states you may reach full burst/continuous modes in these conditions but it is LESS LIKELY. I think Canon is just covering their rear end. But I have experienced slower fps when the battery was very low. When the battery red warning light is blinking, the fps slows down. In answer to your question. AF works fine. The FPS slow down is similar to what would happen in the buffer fills up in your cameras internal memory. It slows down but everything works like normal. If you want it to more likely reach maximum FPS the best thing you can do is buy a battery grip with 2 new model batteries. Or a 1dx III or R3 that use the bigger high current battery (that is why they are considered professional sports photography cameras). Even my old 7d says UP TO 8 FPS. That is because under some circumstances, it does not make it to that speed.
I bought this one off craigslist a few years ago. I have never regretted having it, and you won't either. I just couldn't spend the money for the newer versions, and if you don't mind the weight (get a hefty monopod) this lens is amazing. You won't regret having it for field sports, especially if you shoot high school football in the poor lighting.
I keep my big ef300mm 2.8 Prime in the vehicle and I carry in a smaller combo, the R7 and rf100-400mm. If I see something really special that's in a good position for the big lens I'll bring it and the tripod back in or occasionally handhold. I would do the same with the 400mm.
I currently have the EF 300mm 2.8 and it is great for all of those same reasons! The EF 400mm 2.8 will be my next lens for sure! I can adapt both lenses to my Canon R7 and my Sony A7iv.
Obvious answer why someone would get is in not IQ. Although it is excellent with it still being extremely sharp even by today's standards. It is sports, this and the 300mm f/2.8 are household words in the sports photography world. They are exceedingly useful because of a good combination of reach and still maintaining a relatively fast aperture to help with keeping those shutter speeds high. You can use these anywhere where a 400mm is applicable. But sports is where it's at for this lens. It's on the slightly short side for wildlife, although you can abesolute find good use cases for it. Especially if you pair it with an extender. Been shooting 15 years and remember when these things where all the rage and were the best of the best.
Physically no, optically yes. I try not to put too much force on the mounting point, but otherwise its not really any different to hold. It is more difficult to stay on target though due to the narrower field of view, which amplifies your own movement even when you are trying to stay as steady as possible.
Hi David, huge thanks for this video about the big good old white elephant! You nailed it, especially for the usability. So much valuable hints to make a decision much more easier. Ok, it's still not that much easy for me to go for a purchase of the ball on chain (like you named it), but I have now the best direction to think about. Of course I visit your Instagram and your Website - many great photographs. I wish you every success with expanding your great TH-cam channel and your business. Regards, Nico
I managed to find a very gently used one about 6 months ago for a fantastic bargain. I shoot sports, and this lens is amazing, but I have to be at least 30 yards away from the action. Super sharp with amazing bokeh. But..... It's a monster of a lens. I have a nice carbon monopod, but it's still hard to maneuver and takes a lot of effort when switching to my secondary camera. I think it's a little slower to focus than my 70-200 2.8-II, but I've gotten some great shots with it.
@@davidsantiago2451 I have not used the preset button yet. I understand the concept, but I'm hesitant. Often when shooting baseball, I'll stand behind 3rd base. I could preset at 1st base to catch a possible throw-out and focus on either the pitcher or batter, then switch to the preset after the batter hits.....but does that really save time as opposed to just keeping my back button focus button pushed and panning to first base? And will it be a little out of focus if I shift my position slightly when I shift to 1st base? It may be useful for track & field also, but I don't think it's commonly used by sports photographers, which tells me something. I also just picked up a nice 300mm 2.8L IS, which also has the preset button. Honestly, I don't think it'll be very useful, but I'll try it out at some point.
Hallo, ich habe von ein halben Jahr die 400mm is Mark1 gekauft. Jetzt laufe ich nur noch mit der herum. An die 6 kg habe ich mich gewöhnt. Ich benutze fast immer ein 2x mark1 und ein macro converter (canon). Ein Tragegurt ist Pflicht bei den Gewicht und wenn man den ganzen Tag läuft. Ich habe es auch für die Astrofotografie gekauft und die M101 (Galaxy) ist gestochen Scharf geworden. Wenn du das Geld hast dann kauf die 400mm is Mark1, es lohnt sich. Lg Alex
Nice video. My auto focus on mine works great, however I noticed this morning the manual focus ring will not move even a little. Any suggestions? It is the same (original IS) version as yours.
@@davidsantiago2451 Thanks for your answer ! My 500mm IS is pretty loud (in calm indoors or when i'm reye on the camera) and i was wondering if it was normal or if my lens had a problem !
Believe me as an ex-Reuters photo editor this lens was the prime lens at the 2002 World Cup, 2004 Olympics & throughout the 2,000’s. It is an absolute beast in terms of output & size. I think the newer versions of this lens are lighter in size. I would suggest to look at photos from sporting events in this particular timeline for examples. This is a killer lens. This was industry standard.
Completely agree with you. This really is a beast of a lens, certainly in regard to weight, but is lighter than the original EF 400 2.8 which I think was about 6.5kg. The first IS version was a game changer and as you said, it absolutely dominated sports and press work. Built like a tank, you could use it hard for 10 years until it looked like a dog, then easily sell it on to other sports and press photographers who knew the pedigree and durability of the lens and weren't worried about how it looked. The very latest RF version is undoubtedly better when tested in a lab and much lighter which is the biggest advantage. However, when it comes to the rough and tumble world of sports and press work, I honestly don't think you'd see much difference when you factor in the realities thrown at you during a working assignment - working in the heat and the rain strips away any resolution advantage a newer lens has.
I had this lens until a few years ago. It was amazing for sports and aviation. I used it with my 1d4 and a 2x extender at a Scottish air show once and got a cracking image of a Merlin helicopter doing a display about half a mile out in the sea. 1040mm at f5.6 was a great shot. Sadly didn’t use it for a while and sold it. But overall it was an amazing lens. Great video one of the best I have seen. 🙂
The most complete review of this lens on TH-cam!!! Thank you.
Thanks, I really appreciate that. Glad it was helpful!
@@davidsantiago2451 It was the perfect review as I have had the 300mm 2.8 IS before, and I am looking to het into sports photography and this lens would be the obvious choice for me. It's everything I needed to know.
When you’re hand holding? You are much bolder than I will ever be. Your the.Man!!
Well done…
I bought one two years ago for 3800. It is in perfect condition not a scratch on it. The person that owned it, must have never even used it.
Any plans of selling the lens
THANK YOU FOR ALL THE GOOD INFO
I remember my old 400 2.8 IS very well I bought in 2007. I babied it. It was in perfect condition. I sold it for 6k.. as much as I purchased it for because Canon had a major price hike on superteles( but I threw in a wimberly foot, side kick and the circular polarizer. I seen him put it on craigslist for $3200. It has been there since covid started and sadly I think he is going to take a pretty good hit on it if he really wants to sell it. I hear that you should use the latest 2x or 1.4 converter on it for better image quality FYI but don't quote me on that. I ended up getting the version II of the 400 2.8 and 600 f4. They work better with the Canon R5 eye and helmet focus tracking. The old versions cannot attain 12fps and can only go to 80percent of the field AF instead of 100. I will not be paying 16k for version III. I picked up a 100-400 II for cheap over covid. That is a super sharp lens and has some good DOF blur (not as much as the 400 of course.) You got some great images from that lens. If people practice their technique the can get some great images out of the old gear including ths lens without 12fps or eye tracking. Good review good to see photographers like you still getting great images out of it. There is an English guy here on youtube who was shooting football/soccer.. He has a great video on how to do maintenance on that beast, it shows the 70-200 II maintenance which saved me from sending mine into Canon for service . Search Mark Kerton or RwzEmbU19Go
Part of the reason I wanted to do this review (and more in the future) is to show the benefits of using "old gear" and that you don't have to buy the latest gear to get great shots. Its more important to have the gear that works for you given your particular situation. Thanks for the comment and info!
Hi, are you saying that if using the older version on this lens (the exact lens in the video) that even if your camera can shoot 20 fps, the lens will only allow for less than 12 fps?
Are you saying that the auto focus just kinda stops working after a number of shots? As opposed to maintaining focus during the duration of time the shutter is depressed?
Asking bc I just got the older version (the one in the video) and I planned on using it for sports on a R6 and an EOS 7D 🤦🏽♂️
@@ShotgunJoeTV Well it is not an exact science, even for the newer cameras. If you look at the R6 do a search on Lenses Supporting Maximum High-Speed Continuous Shooting Speed and you will see the new cameras are the same. If you specify the r5 or r6 in your search it is in the manual and is stated the same. Factors that may limit maximum 20 fps, or 12 fps mechanical are. Less fps are likely with non supported lenses, battery under 60 percent, Using camera dual battery grip BG-R10 with only 1 battery, Wi-Fi on, using old LP-E6 batteries, using old USB Power Adaptor PD-E1, anti flicker turned on. Even temps below 23C or low scene brightness and other scene issue. But the manual states you may reach full burst/continuous modes in these conditions but it is LESS LIKELY. I think Canon is just covering their rear end. But I have experienced slower fps when the battery was very low. When the battery red warning light is blinking, the fps slows down. In answer to your question. AF works fine. The FPS slow down is similar to what would happen in the buffer fills up in your cameras internal memory. It slows down but everything works like normal. If you want it to more likely reach maximum FPS the best thing you can do is buy a battery grip with 2 new model batteries. Or a 1dx III or R3 that use the bigger high current battery (that is why they are considered professional sports photography cameras). Even my old 7d says UP TO 8 FPS. That is because under some circumstances, it does not make it to that speed.
I bought this one off craigslist a few years ago. I have never regretted having it, and you won't either. I just couldn't spend the money for the newer versions, and if you don't mind the weight (get a hefty monopod) this lens is amazing. You won't regret having it for field sports, especially if you shoot high school football in the poor lighting.
That's a tank of a lens. If I hit the lotto I'd love to grab a 600mm f4 L some day.
I keep my big ef300mm 2.8 Prime in the vehicle and I carry in a smaller combo, the R7 and rf100-400mm. If I see something really special that's in a good position for the big lens I'll bring it and the tripod back in or occasionally handhold. I would do the same with the 400mm.
I currently have the EF 300mm 2.8 and it is great for all of those same reasons! The EF 400mm 2.8 will be my next lens for sure! I can adapt both lenses to my Canon R7 and my Sony A7iv.
You can out this lens on a sony? How?
Great overview for a person on the fence regarding buying this lens or a lower aperture lend
Thanks!
Thank you .
This is actually a very good video.
The biggest point is, that these doesn't get serviced anymore.
Obvious answer why someone would get is in not IQ. Although it is excellent with it still being extremely sharp even by today's standards.
It is sports, this and the 300mm f/2.8 are household words in the sports photography world. They are exceedingly useful because of a good combination of reach and still maintaining a relatively fast aperture to help with keeping those shutter speeds high.
You can use these anywhere where a 400mm is applicable. But sports is where it's at for this lens.
It's on the slightly short side for wildlife, although you can abesolute find good use cases for it. Especially if you pair it with an extender.
Been shooting 15 years and remember when these things where all the rage and were the best of the best.
Great video ! and yes the gap was filled ! haha I M Planing on getting it , I think we've met shooting at an AirShow last year .
Nice cat!
When you use the 2x converter, do you find it more difficult to balance the camera and lens when handholding?
Physically no, optically yes. I try not to put too much force on the mounting point, but otherwise its not really any different to hold. It is more difficult to stay on target though due to the narrower field of view, which amplifies your own movement even when you are trying to stay as steady as possible.
@@davidsantiago2451 Thanks!
Hi David,
huge thanks for this video about the big good old white elephant! You nailed it, especially for the usability. So much valuable hints to make a decision much more easier. Ok, it's still not that much easy for me to go for a purchase of the ball on chain (like you named it), but I have now the best direction to think about. Of course I visit your Instagram and your Website - many great photographs. I wish you every success with expanding your great TH-cam channel and your business.
Regards, Nico
Thanks, I appreciate that!
Fantastic video
i don't need it but i want it right now :)
Great review 😊
I managed to find a very gently used one about 6 months ago for a fantastic bargain. I shoot sports, and this lens is amazing, but I have to be at least 30 yards away from the action. Super sharp with amazing bokeh. But..... It's a monster of a lens. I have a nice carbon monopod, but it's still hard to maneuver and takes a lot of effort when switching to my secondary camera.
I think it's a little slower to focus than my 70-200 2.8-II, but I've gotten some great shots with it.
That's awesome, it really is a beast of a lens! I'm curious with you shooting sports if you've found the focus preset buttons of any use?
@@davidsantiago2451 I have not used the preset button yet. I understand the concept, but I'm hesitant. Often when shooting baseball, I'll stand behind 3rd base. I could preset at 1st base to catch a possible throw-out and focus on either the pitcher or batter, then switch to the preset after the batter hits.....but does that really save time as opposed to just keeping my back button focus button pushed and panning to first base? And will it be a little out of focus if I shift my position slightly when I shift to 1st base? It may be useful for track & field also, but I don't think it's commonly used by sports photographers, which tells me something. I also just picked up a nice 300mm 2.8L IS, which also has the preset button. Honestly, I don't think it'll be very useful, but I'll try it out at some point.
What's a good price to get these 400 2.8 for?
@@BenDunlop good question. Seeems they sell for about $4k, give or take, on ebay. I lucked out and found one on Craigslist for half that. Just lucky.
@@erik5024 which version? I see they've been produced since 1991? (Sorry for the questions, I'm in the market to buy one currently)
Hello! Does it have Focus by wire or is the MF really manual? Thank you for the nice video
Hello David. Can it cover Fujifilm GFX 33mm*44mm sensor? Or will it vignett a lot?
What about the 300 2.8?
Would love to get my hands on one. I think it would be a sweet spot for motorsports work.
Моя мечта
Hallo, ich habe von ein halben Jahr die 400mm is Mark1 gekauft. Jetzt laufe ich nur noch mit der herum. An die 6 kg habe ich mich gewöhnt. Ich benutze fast immer ein 2x mark1 und ein macro converter (canon). Ein Tragegurt ist Pflicht bei den Gewicht und wenn man den ganzen Tag läuft. Ich habe es auch für die Astrofotografie gekauft und die M101 (Galaxy) ist gestochen Scharf geworden. Wenn du das Geld hast dann kauf die 400mm is Mark1, es lohnt sich. Lg Alex
What about softness on the corners? I asked about getting this lens and a guy mentioned the softness. For me, it’s the center…can you speak to this?
Will my R5 be able to move the heavy glass ? (With adapter attached ofc)
Ant plans on selling 400mm
The cat is more handhold-able than the lens :)
Nice video. My auto focus on mine works great, however I noticed this morning the manual focus ring will not move even a little. Any suggestions? It is the same (original IS) version as yours.
Thanks! I have not had that issue, I believe CPS will still service the 400 IS though so I would look into that if the issue persists.
how noisy is the IS compared to modern lenses ?
Pretty loud. It's not annoying though, I really don't even notice it anymore.
@@davidsantiago2451 Thanks for your answer ! My 500mm IS is pretty loud (in calm indoors or when i'm reye on the camera) and i was wondering if it was normal or if my lens had a problem !
@@davidsantiago2451 hi David, so the constant noise of the stabilizer is normal?
It's still expensive
Any plans of selling the lens
Nope.
Wats the price u got for n also from where u purchased it