Should I or Shouldn't I - Purchase of a Canon 400mm f/5.6 L

Sorry ladies and gentlemen, but yes it's another should I or shouldn't I purchase post. My wife and I will be heading to the Seychelles in October. Now, this will be our second trip in two years and this time around I plan on having the corrrect gear to take photos. However; now I'm in a dilema as we willvisit a couple of the surrounding islands with one particular island called Bird Island. Bird Island is exactly what it is, an island populated by thousands of birds.


My gear consists of the following:


Canon Xsi


Sigma 10-20 EX 4-5.6


Canon 24-105 4L


Canon 50mm 'nifty-fifty'


Canon 70-200 2.8 IS USM (no longer being sold) and various other gear consisting of tripod and monopod...blah blah blah.


Here is my dilema, should I purchase the Canon 400 5.6L USM or do you think the 70-200 will be plenty enough? Yes there is no IS on the 400 which makes it less expensive that the 300 4L IS USM but the IQ is much greater due to it's simple design (LOL, the thing is at least20 years old in design).


I've thought of the 300 4L, but it seems that the extra 100mm may not cut it. Sorry no TC or extenders to be used here, hence the the Canon 400mm. I don't like the push-pull of the 100-400 either - besides spending over 1600 on the 100-400 to actually use it from 200-400 is a waste of money!


Oh yeah IQ is high on my list as well as taking photos of the birds in flight.


Opinions/recommendations will be greatly appreciated - my apologies for the verbal diareha.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by elmo_2006

Now, this will be our second trip in two years and this time around I plan on having the corrrect gear to take photos

---

Since you've been there, you should be able to answer these questions:

1. How far away are the birds?
2. How tame are they? Can you easily approach them?
3. What kind of birds and how large are they?

If the birds are small and far away you need the longest lens that you can afford, if they're tame and large your 70-200 might just be all you need!

The type of lens used to shoot birds really depends on size and distance. Note that the 400L has a long minimum focus distance. You would not be abble to shoot hummingbirds because you will be so far away that they won't fill enough of the frame. This is where the 300mm F/4 and the 100-400mm zoom excel, high magnification and short MFD.


If its birds at a distance, you need more like 800mm, so get a lens that accepts TC's.


I took some images of finches in out honeysuckle vine from 10 ft or less away last weekend, and found that with my 70-200mm F4L IS, a 2X extender wasn't enough. All were handheld with wide open aperture. I wouldn't try this with a 70-200 F2.8, they are too soft at 200mm.





Finch at 200mm with 1.4 X Canon TC Heavily cropped


http://mt-spokane-photography.smugmu...2_37iMo-XL.jpg





finch at 200mm with Canon TC also lots of cropping


http://mt-spokane-photography.smugmu...6_wQ4M4-XL.jpg





finch at 200mm with stacked 1.4X and 2X TC's Autofocus works fine in good light with pre-focus (noticibly less sharpness, but prints very well). even this one had to have some cropping.


http://mt-spokane-photography.smugmu...5_fP3vV-XL.jpg

The 300 is a great lens. I really like the short minimum focus as it makes it a massively more useful lens (to me at least). It works great for flowers, butterflies, mushrooms,hummingbirdsand other wee things. That was the deciding factor between the two for me (and the IS of course).

Nice pics!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by scalesusa

I wouldn't try this with a 70-200 F2.8, they are too soft at 200mm.

---

Have a look at the new EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS II USM lens -it's as sharp if not sharper thanthe 70-200 f/4L ISat 200mm f/4, and with the 2x extender at 400mm, the f/2.8 IS MkII is sharper at f/5.6 than the f/4L IS at f/8, and significantly sharper when both are at 400mm f/8.


In fact, I think the 70-200 MkII with 1.4x (280mm f/4) compares quite favorably(a little sharper in the center and a little softer in the corners) with even the 300mm f/4L prime! A zoom lens that evenwith a teleconverter rivals the IQ of a prime? Unexpected, for sure - but one of the reasons that theEF 70-200 f/2.8L IS MkII is next up on my shopping list.

@ Sinh Nhut Nguyen...


LOL, ok, I think I may have over exaggerated the number of birds on the island, however please follow the link for further information:


<span style="color: #800080;"]http://www.birdislandseychelles.com/An_Island_Year.html


The birds are both far and close, as for the birds being tame and approachableI would have to say no, as for the bird types please follow this link


http://www.birdislandseychelles.com/list_of_birds.html


Sorry I could not be any more helpful

@scalesusa...


Awesome pictures and thanks for the opinions/recommendations. The birds in general will be much larger than hummingbirds (hopefully) and the minimum shooting distance is not really a concern. I've read where the minimumfocus distance is 11.5ft again, the island itself is 170 acre coral cay and is home to other species of tortoises as well - not sure if this helps.


As for the TC's, I would like to avoid them where possible as the IQ on the 70-200 2.8 would be reduced quite a bit. As this may be our last trip to the island for a very loing while, I would like to ensure that I have the proper gear. Yeah baby, the 800mm would be awesome, but I just don't have the $$$ available unless I decide to sell the house...LOL.


The 300 4L Is USM would be awesome but I'm concerned that the extra 100mm reach is not worth the CAD1900 (after taxes). Even slapping on a TC to achieve 420 5.6 for an extra CAD400, I think I would be better off with the 400 5.6L for CAD1500 (after taxes)


I guess what I'm trying to get at is 'is the Canon 400 5.6L worth the purchase and if it is the correct lens to use for these nature shots, all within a limited budget'? The IS would be nice but if I can get away with shooting at 1/500 from a mono/tripod i should be fine, no?


Thanks

@neuroanatomis...


LOL, I already have the Mark I version, besides here in Canada the Mark II version is 2599 add 499 for the 2xTC, which means for an extra2000 I might as well purchase the 300 2.8L...LOL.


However, reading through your post I do understand the options available to me.


Overall, is this Canon EF 400mm 5.6L worth the purchase and would it be the correct lens to use all in the name of affordability?


And, and, are there others out there that do have this lens and if you would recommend this lens for its purpose. It seems that the sites that I visit seem to be limited in output example, flikr and pixel-peeper.com


LOL, I sound needy here don't I!


I appreciateall your professional opinions.

Have you thought about renting?

@Jarhead5811


LOL, you actually bring up a good point, however I did check and the only location that I'm aware of only rents out the 100-400 and the 400 2.8 - sweet, not the actual lens that I'm 'gunning' for.