400mm 2.8L IS

[toosnvetts]

Hi, folks. I am a novice photographer and have been shooting just a year with a Canon 400D. I shoot mostly birds and some other wildlife. I have a 700-200 4L IS that I love. I also have a prime 50mm 1.8 that I like in addition to the kit lens.

I have just about decided to bite the bullet and buy what I really want, a 400mm 2.8L IS. Am I rushing it? Also, I need input on how to, most effectively, mount it on a tripod. I have heard of gimbel mounts and would like to know more about tripod shooting with these long and heavy lenses. I also have a monopod.

Thank you for any help or ideas.

[djwixx]

At $6,000+ I would suggest it's a rush

Do you plan to spend hours in the field waiting for that shot? Would a 1.7TC on your 70-200 (maybe upgrade to a 70-200 F2.8 ) give you some scope to consider whether you want to put down so much cash? If you're desperate to spend some money you could try a 300 F4 with a 1.4TC and at least have two focal lengths.

[toosnvetts]

I have a 1.4TC for my 70-200 L4 and it works fine but the 5.6 maximum aperture means shooting in good light. I must say that I am almost retired at 60 years old, exercise daily and live in south Louisiana right in the middle of numerous bird sanctuaries and state parks. I believe I could take some exceptional pictures handheld but I do like to sit a blind as well.

I have worked my whole life and don't think that that money is a waste at my point in life. I can afford it and I am healthy enough to use it. The worst that can happen is I have to sell it and the resale is high; I have checked! The local store here is also advising me that there are some serious photographers that would rent such a lens so it's in my future, the question is just when. I really am in no hurry. I will probably want a body upgrade soon as well.

Charlie

[leejungil]

Howdie fellow Lens enthusiast..! I look at it this way, if you want it, go for it, as everyone will have a opinion or suggestion on better or different options. When I bought my 400 f/2.8 I wasnt sure if i wanted it or the 400 f/4 DO.. So I just ended up buying both of them and now I am quite happy I did..Life is to short to be concerned with such minor options.. Good luck as if you buy the 400 2.8 L IS, you are buying one of the best pieces of glass that money can buy...

Cheers, Jerry in NW Ohio

[djwixx]

I have a 1.4TC for my 70-200 L4 and it works fine but the 5.6 maximum aperture means shooting in good light. I must say that I am almost retired at 60 years old, exercise daily and live in south Louisiana right in the middle of numerous bird sanctuaries and state parks. I believe I could take some exceptional pictures handheld but I do like to sit a blind as well.

I have worked my whole life and don't think that that money is a waste at my point in life. I can afford it and I am healthy enough to use it. The worst that can happen is I have to sell it and the resale is high; I have checked! The local store here is also advising me that there are some serious photographers that would rent such a lens so it's in my future, the question is just when. I really am in no hurry. I will probably want a body upgrade soon as well.

Charlie

As time, money and surroundings are on your side go for it . Here I am working and trying to justify a 70-200 F2.8 . At least you already have the TC to extend it's scope should you feel the need. Can you spare a dime ?

[jestev]

Howdie fellow Lens enthusiast..!

Sorry, we prefer being called photographers. Of course, you'd have to drop the "fellow" to say that. A photographer uses the equipment for its intended purpose; a "lens enthusiast" doesn't.

[djwixx]

Howdie fellow Lens enthusiast..!

Sorry, we prefer being called photographers. Of course, you'd have to drop the "fellow" to say that. A photographer uses the equipment for its intended purpose; a "lens enthusiast" doesn't.

I had to bite my tongue when I saw the respondent!!

[heffa]

I have a 1.4TC for my 70-200 L4 and it works fine but the 5.6 maximum aperture means shooting in good light. I must say that I am almost retired at 60 years old, exercise daily and live in south Louisiana right in the middle of numerous bird sanctuaries and state parks. I believe I could take some exceptional pictures handheld but I do like to sit a blind as well.

I have worked my whole life and don't think that that money is a waste at my point in life. I can afford it and I am healthy enough to use it. The worst that can happen is I have to sell it and the resale is high; I have checked! The local store here is also advising me that there are some serious photographers that would rent such a lens so it's in my future, the question is just when. I really am in no hurry. I will probably want a body upgrade soon as well.

Charlie

Charlie:

It sounds like we're in similar boats. I bought the 400 f/2.8 last summer and have loved using it. I didn't find the need to spend hours and hours in the blinds to justify it -- it's enough to know that it's in my arsenal when I need it. This last fall my high school daughters roped me into taking action shots of their marching band as a fund raiser, and I used the 400 on the sidelines throughout the season. It was a blast. This summer I'm hoping to get out more for some wildlife and nature adventures. I'm also going to take it to the golf course once in a while.

I will highly recommend a Wimberley tripod head for use with this lens. It's incredible! The lens becomes weightless and is effortless to pan and respond to the action. It's really a treat not to have to worry about balancing and mandhandling the lens... for me it's too heavy to steady for a shot.

Oh, and I got the camera body upgrade not long after getting the lens, too. I'm sure it won't end there. I've already got my tax rebate spent!

Enjoy!

[toosnvetts]

I'm sure it won't end there!

Safe bet, Jeff! I just got off the Wimberley site and I think that will also be a good investment. Thanks for your endorsement.

On nomenclature, I think these lenses are works of art so I suppose I am a "lens enthusiast". I doubt many would call me a 'photographer" LOL. These lenses make people like me look so much better. What I surely am is a bird lover!

[ewhalen]

Howdie fellow Lens enthusiast..!

Sorry, we prefer being called photographers. Of course, you'd have to drop the "fellow" to say that. A photographer uses the equipment for its intended purpose; a "lens enthusiast" doesn't.

Hahahah so true.

[adz929]

I always laugh when I hear someone use "arsenal" as an adjective to describe their assortment of camera equipment. Last time I checked, an "arsenal" was a stockpile of weapons. The dictionary makes no mention of camera equipment.

[heffa]

I always laugh when I hear someone use "arsenal" as an adjective to describe their assortment of camera equipment. Last time I checked, an "arsenal" was a stockpile of weapons. The dictionary makes no mention of camera equipment.

Well, I do intend to shoot people with it...

[philway]

Some links about birding:
http://photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00KCHe
http://www.geocities.com/tgrey41/PagesIndex/Links.html
http://www.birdsasart.com/faq_4f56or3is.html
http://www.thejunglelook.com/Info/bp/Bi ... raphy.html

[canonian]

The 400mm is a fine piece of glass however before you do this I'd look at the Sigma 50-500 and Canon 100-400. Neither are of the quality of the 400 f2.8 by any means but I bet your prints unless they are very large you would be hard pressed to tell the difference.

If you are going for the best why not check out the Canon 500mm f4 IS? Is your distance to subject always the same? If not a prime could be annoying.

[toosnvetts]

Wow, thanks for the great links, philway! I really appreciate it. I am in no hurry here, going to do some more studying!