Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L Is USM III Lens

Performance surpassed expectations with no detectable deterioration or loss of detail across some 1500 images of birds including Kingfisher, Puffin, Razorbill, Guillemot and Gannet. Images were pin sharp with extremely good colour and definition over a range of distances. No detectable loss of quality was experienced when used in conjunction with a Canon EF Extender 1.4x III, all that was lost was a couple of f stops at the most which under the circumstances of us was more than acceptable.

Amazing lens!

I do a lot of HS football photos and worried that with the 400mm I may be a little to close to the action. It took me a little bit of getting use to but once I figured out my standing points on the field I have got nothing but amazing shots with this lens. I shoot with a 1DX MarkII. This is a great combination. Beautiful color, sharp and fast! If you can afford it I recommend it. I was debating between this and the 300mm 2.8 and believe I would have been happy with the 300mm but am very happy I bought the 400mm.

Handles like a dream

And I’m a 220 lb 69 year old weakling. I do all hand shooting. It is so light I don’t even realize it is there. Feels like my 14mm lens. Credit the movement and rebalancing of the weight towards the shooter for this.Takes great pictures. No complaints. Got everything I thought I was getting and more. It is the best you can buy. The f/2.8 and f/3.2 f stops really help especially in low light and on cloudy days.

Ideal for hand-held bird ptg on long hikes

For bird photography, I need an 800 mm telephoto that I can hand-hold and carry on difficult hikes. With 2x extender, this lens gives superb quality and still can be hand-held. I made it as light as possible by removing the shoe and using my 5D camera body. With hood, the weight is then 9.8 lb. Without hood, it is 9.0 lb. Not easy, but doable -- especially when Birds of paradise are at stake. Excellent combination; happily recommended.

Lighter, but worth it?

I have owned a lot of Canon super telephoto lens, including the 300 IS II, the 400 IS II, and the 600 IS II. My primary interest is creature photography. When I was given the chance to buy the 400 IS III at a substantial savings in used, like new condition from B&H, I jumped at it. I had read reviews reporting that the image quality is superior to that of the 400 IS II, but my experience has failed to support that claim.For fear that the new lens might not be as good as my copy of the 400 IS II, I kept the version II and have done extensive comparison testing. I can detect no improvement in image quality. The version III is significantly lighter and its center of gravity is farther back, but for the difference in cost, I consider the version II to be the better ... MoreI have owned a lot of Canon super telephoto lens, including the 300 IS II, the 400 IS II, and the 600 IS II. My primary interest is creature photography. When I was given the chance to buy the 400 IS III at a substantial savings in used, like new condition from B&H, I jumped at it. I had read reviews reporting that the image quality is superior to that of the 400 IS II, but my experience has failed to support that claim.For fear that the new lens might not be as good as my copy of the 400 IS II, I kept the version II and have done extensive comparison testing. I can detect no improvement in image quality. The version III is significantly lighter and its center of gravity is farther back, but for the difference in cost, I consider the version II to be the better buy. (I generally shoot from a sandbag out the driver's window, from a gimble-mounted monopod out the passenger window, from a tripod with a gimble for prolonged shooting setups, from a monopod with a gimble when hiking, and hand-held for shooting flying birds or running mammals. In all of these the series II performs as well as the series III, except that for wing shooting the Series II is superior, because its front-heavy balance and extra weight cause it to swing more smoothly. (Both lenses produce sharp images with 1.4 or 2x Series III teleconverters.) I greatly prefer either to my 600mm IS II, which is clumsy for handling in tighter spaces, and which does not produce high quality images with a 2X teleconverter. Never-the-less, at 75 years of age the lighter weight is appreciated. I question, however, whether the lesser weight of the series III is worth its extra price tag.

Loving this lens

I enjoy sports photography. I have Canon 1DX Mk II camera. This lens was on my wish list. So glad I eventually bought it. Sharpness of football images is amazing.Lens is heavy and bulky. I knew it would be. Needs a monopod.I have also used it for wildlife photography in a hide.Great in low light at f2.8 too.

Most wonderful lens in the universe

I sold all my video gear and still fell short of the full amount of this crazy expensive lens. But OMG, is it worth it. The auto focus and stabilization when handholding is quick. When I get it in focus, it's super tack sharp with lots of contrast: in EOS Utility, some of the deepest blacks are crushed compared to what my other Canon & Zeiss lenses would register.As far as weight, it's not heavy, especially for its size, but it's still hard for me to hold for very long (wimpy gal). I haven't tried it on a tripod but I can imagine it'll be even more amazing. I had read that using a 400mm is also great for landscapes so that will be worth exploring.Being a widow, I can say with conviction that life is very short -- and that this lens is an exciting purchase that ... MoreI sold all my video gear and still fell short of the full amount of this crazy expensive lens. But OMG, is it worth it. The auto focus and stabilization when handholding is quick. When I get it in focus, it's super tack sharp with lots of contrast: in EOS Utility, some of the deepest blacks are crushed compared to what my other Canon & Zeiss lenses would register.As far as weight, it's not heavy, especially for its size, but it's still hard for me to hold for very long (wimpy gal). I haven't tried it on a tripod but I can imagine it'll be even more amazing. I had read that using a 400mm is also great for landscapes so that will be worth exploring.Being a widow, I can say with conviction that life is very short -- and that this lens is an exciting purchase that will bring me some moments of joy for many years to come.

Outstanding lens and amazing with extenders

This lens is just outstanding. I have been spending most of my time testing with the 1.4x III and 2x III extenders. The 2x is just outstanding on this lens (800mm). I only have the 1dx Mark II so results may vary on other bodies. It is the best performing lens with the 2x I have used so far. (400mm DO II, 600mm Mk II, 800mm, 200-400mm to name a few that I own or have owned). The weight reduction is outstanding and puts all the weight in the palm of your hand. The background rendering is amazing. The Canon 800mm was my main work horse for 8 1/2 years. In my opinion it has the best image quality/feel of the lens I have used (the 600 Mk II is a very close second). This lens with the 2x gives me that same feeling as the image quality of the 800mm did. This lens now vs ... MoreThis lens is just outstanding. I have been spending most of my time testing with the 1.4x III and 2x III extenders. The 2x is just outstanding on this lens (800mm). I only have the 1dx Mark II so results may vary on other bodies. It is the best performing lens with the 2x I have used so far. (400mm DO II, 600mm Mk II, 800mm, 200-400mm to name a few that I own or have owned). The weight reduction is outstanding and puts all the weight in the palm of your hand. The background rendering is amazing. The Canon 800mm was my main work horse for 8 1/2 years. In my opinion it has the best image quality/feel of the lens I have used (the 600 Mk II is a very close second). This lens with the 2x gives me that same feeling as the image quality of the 800mm did. This lens now vs the 800mm is around 3.5 lbs lighter. This just makes it so much easier to handhold, I handheld most of my shots with the 800mm. The AF is very snappy and is great for BIF work with both extenders also. This is another solid performer from Canon.I have a few shots I have taken in a Flickr album if interested.https://www.flickr.com/photos/robamyphotos/albums/72157675132675357Happy shooting allRob

Weight difference is HUGE!

I used the Ver II for 5 years with great success. I loved that lens with exception of the weight. I am 64 years old and hand hold frequently and the weight was starting to be a burden.I decided the 2.2 lb. reduction would be a huge help with the Ver III so I purchased one. But, the lens feels MUCH lighter due to the movement in the weight location. The new lens has so much weight removed from the front that it makes a huge difference in the way the lens feels. Lots of weight in the front also gives lots of inertia and difficulty tracking. The Ver III with its weight in the middle of the lens cures this issue and the lens feels much more maneuverable for trackingAlso when the weight is in the front (Ver II) and your arm is supporting the lens at the end, it ... MoreI used the Ver II for 5 years with great success. I loved that lens with exception of the weight. I am 64 years old and hand hold frequently and the weight was starting to be a burden.I decided the 2.2 lb. reduction would be a huge help with the Ver III so I purchased one. But, the lens feels MUCH lighter due to the movement in the weight location. The new lens has so much weight removed from the front that it makes a huge difference in the way the lens feels. Lots of weight in the front also gives lots of inertia and difficulty tracking. The Ver III with its weight in the middle of the lens cures this issue and the lens feels much more maneuverable for trackingAlso when the weight is in the front (Ver II) and your arm is supporting the lens at the end, it really makes your arm sore. The Ver III with its weight rearward is easier to support since the weight is closer to your body.So, from the weight standpoint, in many ways, the Ver III is a huge improvement.From the performance standpoint I feel the picture quality is the same but I need more time with it. The focusing is rocket fast and accurate.The price of this lens is staggering. If your pocketbook allows the purchase you will likely have little to complain about t once you have it. Be warned that at the time of this review, there is a firmware upgrade due to some issues with video.Final comment.....Incredible lens. No regrets.

Worlds of Difference from Version II

I am writing this review for both he 400mm f/2.8 IS III & 600mm f/4.0 IS III. I had the opportunity to test the 400mm, 600mm, 500mm f/4.0 II, 200-400mm f/4.0, and had my own 300mm f/2.8 IS II. These are the things that deserve highlighting:(1) Weight: The 400 and 600 are lighter than any of the lenses. The 200-400 is by far the heaviest.(2) Balance: Both the 400 and 600 have the best center balance.(3) Focus: The 400 and 600 provided the fastest auto focus.(4) Image Quality: This is hard to explain unless you place the images side by side with the 400 or 600. The 400 and 600 performed miraculously, even in low lighting for a sport venue.I had no intention, nor was I looking to purchase a new lens. Up to this point, my plan was to wait for Canon to release an ... MoreI am writing this review for both he 400mm f/2.8 IS III & 600mm f/4.0 IS III. I had the opportunity to test the 400mm, 600mm, 500mm f/4.0 II, 200-400mm f/4.0, and had my own 300mm f/2.8 IS II. These are the things that deserve highlighting:(1) Weight: The 400 and 600 are lighter than any of the lenses. The 200-400 is by far the heaviest.(2) Balance: Both the 400 and 600 have the best center balance.(3) Focus: The 400 and 600 provided the fastest auto focus.(4) Image Quality: This is hard to explain unless you place the images side by side with the 400 or 600. The 400 and 600 performed miraculously, even in low lighting for a sport venue.I had no intention, nor was I looking to purchase a new lens. Up to this point, my plan was to wait for Canon to release an updated 200-400mm zoom. I've used the 200-400mm lens in the past and absolutely loved it, but some of the sporting venues experienced low lighting once the sunset and the 200-400mm did not perform well. Now, I'm in a dilemma. I've been saving money for the new Mac Pro (and monitor) due later this year and I cannot stop thinking about the 400 and 600. As a side note, I installed the Canon 1.4x III extender on the 400mm and found the results came out just as clear. My recommendation, go see one for yourself and if you have a version II, bring it with you so you can see and feel the difference.