The Canon EF 400mm F/4.0 DO IS II USM Lens Review /// Is It Worth the Money?

[@RogerZoul]

Nice review. Reviews are not at all easy. A few issues: The r5 is good at much higher ISO than 1600. I find no reason to worry about high ISO on the r5. Second, it would have been more logical to compare the 400 f/4 against both the 500 and 600 f4 than the 400 2.8 from both a cost and weight point of view. They all let in the same about of light do it just comes down to focal length. There, the DO is much less bulky and a 1.4x gets you passed the 500, so it is competitive. Also, all if these big tele primes are expensive so I see no basis to grade them down for that reason. The buyers of these lenses have dealt with their cost, so there really is no need to even bring it up. I have used the DO since 2016 and it is just as sharp as the the 500/600 f4 lenses and works that way on all if the Canon bodies from the 6D to the r5 and beyond. One will have a very hard time discerning sharpness differences in real-world shooting, which is all that counts.

[@RogerZoul]

Is mode 3 really vertical panning? I think that is just the one where IS is enabled just when you fire the shutter. Mode 2 handles both horizontal and vertical panning.

[@anand-iyer]

I bought the 400 DO II three years ago and it’s been the best investment I’ve made. Amazing wildlife lens. Best combo of optics, aperture and size in the market.

[@PhotoFeaver]

100% agree. I think it’s am amazing and definitely worth a spot in your camera bag. IF you can afford it. it’s great, it’s just a shame about the overall price. but I guess that’s what you get for a lens of that calibre and performance

[@anand-iyer]

@@PhotoFeaver yeah the price of a new copy is high but I bought it used so I ended up getting a virtually brand new condition DO II for $4000 less than the new price. I used to have the 100-400 II before but I sold it to put towards this. It was also a great lens but the DO II is a class above when it comes to subject separation and low light capabilities. A bit sharper as well. I use it with my 5D4. How was your experience with it adapted to the R5? AF/animal eye detect work well?

[@serenitynownature708]

how does it compare to the 5.6 for birds?

[@gary_michael_flanagan_wildlife]

@@anand-iyer’m debating this lens too. I have my primary bird lens as my 600mm II lens. It’s phenomenal in quality and even a bit sharper than the new RF version. It’s just pretty heavy at almost 9lbs. I’m going to be shooting owls after Christmas and debated buying either the 400mm DO II lens or perhaps the 300mm f 2.8 plus the extender III and traveling with one of those. Any thoughts between the two? I bet the DO is the better option sounds like. Thanks

[@anand-iyer]

@@gary_michael_flanagan_wildlife hi. I think the DO II is probably better in your scenario. One less TC to worry about. Plus you could use your TC on the DO II for longer reach than the 300 2.8 if you so wanted.

[@WIDGI]

Thanks for this. The deer looked great, I would have liked to see more real world usage including with extenders. Also, f6.3 isn't two stops from f4, it's 1.3 stops, f8 is two stops. I'm considering this lens as the f2.8 is just a bit too heavy for me to hand hold but I really need to see the difference in bokeh.

[@barryspruce7397]

Good review but a few more samples backing your evaluation such as f/4 bokeh would have been helpful. Also Pro shooters have grown used to taking off the large hoods on big primes and packing it in a checked bag suitcase when traveling. In that case this lens is a very small carry on with your backpack full of gear. Lastly one reason to buy the 400mm prime is versatility. Although it is not as versatile as a 100-400mm, it is more versatile than a 500,600 or 800mm. This is done with the 1.4 and 2.0 extenders when more length is needed or when shooting smaller subjects such as birds. A score using extenders would have been very helpful especially with a few samples to back your evaluation. Lastly, availability is critical now in November 2021. Canon 400, 500, and 600 primes can not be found in the new or used market. This lens is also out of stock new but can be found used with a little research. Although I noticed these key things missing from the review, I really do appreciate the time and thought put into this review. You are very organized and to the point. The scoring system, although not original, is a nice part of the review. Thank you for the good review of this lens as I am considering a used lens purchase.

[@ignatprokhoropchyuck4652]

How to use this preset knob and rubber black ring while autofocus adjusting in practice when focusing?

[@maxgreen6838]

Mode 3 IS compensates at the instant of shutter release (rather than continuously).

[@jirojiro1029]

What would be really useful is how well it does with extender 1.4 and 2x in terms of AF and IQ. Everybody knows how much it cost and how much it weights.

[@Dagonator]

Good review! And btw: The lens hood is carbon fiber.

[@falxonPSN]

Just came across this video. Some good content, but you may want to correct your statements around the image stabilizer. Your understanding of the three modes is not correct. Mode 2 is for panning in either direction, and mode 3 is the same except the stabilization isn't turned on until you take the shot. Frankly, mode 3 is almost required for a lot of fast moving sports.

[@postabsorptiv]

Hey James. Thank you for your thorough review. I was wondering 🤔 what is best set up to test my own lenses for various parameters such as sharpness, vignetting, chromatic aberration and barrel and pincushion distortion etc I have thought of printing out some charts designed to highlight the lens performance in these various areas. Nevertheless, I am uncertain how much of the frame I will need to fill and thus from what distance to shoot from? Does it need to be from a similar distance as you would normally use the lens to shoot a real life subject, and does it even matter for the test outcome ? I imagine telephoto lenses won’t be a problem but I’ve would need to print to billboard size testing a 12 mm wide angle lens from a distance of say 5m. Hopefully 🤞 you can give me some pointers and personal experience on this subject. Best regards from Lars Bye Møller 🙏

[@royaltykidstv]

Would you be able to get a full end to end soccer game?

[@JoelRiveraMD]

What do you use as your test charts ? Where can I get something like that so I can test my lenses ? Do you have any links ?

[@OhhhhhhhBugger]

LOL, did you say the R5 has bad ISO performance!? That's one of the best performing cameras as far as ISO is concerned...

[@coachkenda7229]

Great review thank you :) I'd like to know the comparison between the 500mm and 600mm with the f4 vs this 400mm f4. Also, does anyone use this for low light (I know, 2.8 is ideal) sports? I'd only buy used but wondering if I could "get by" with the 400mm f4 for a few years before upgrading to a 2.8 or should i use my 300 2.8 with extender - losing light but maybe a better option? I just need that additional reach for soccer/football. Thanks again for this informed review. Best, K in Arizona

[@PhotoFeaver]

The difference between F/4 and F/2.8 is only one stop, so both lenses are exceptional for a low light environment, if I were to pick a lens, I would probably choose 400mm f4, it's by far the smallest and lightest lens, (cheaper as well) It still offers an amazing aperture F/4. But if your budget does stretch, the F/2.8 is also a really good lens. It's just a lot of money just for one stop of light more

[@serenitynownature708]

How does this lens compare to the 5.6? Is it that much better?

[@garymeredith2441]

I like watching your review you did some animal right the kind of photography I do is Birds . With this 400 D O lens did you do any bird photos , doing bird photos is some of the most critical kind of photography you can do so can you go out and test this lens on doing some bird photos .

[@pranavmahendru9652]

hi, does this combo work : a canon r6 + ef to rf adapter + 1.4x III converter + 400mm f/4 DO

[@RockyMaiviaMiami]

Yea but it would not be an f4 , it would be 560 f5.6

[@KevinNordstrom]

@@RockyMaiviaMiami while that is true, the 500 f4 mk2 which is what i would compare in this situation to get similar results, is near $9,000

[@robertlawrence7958]

Yes. I use this lens with my R6 bodies as a straight 400 for shooting rugby and when I shoot wildlife I will often use it with a 1.4x extender. It's an excellent lens / camera combination.

[@michaelwalsh7846]

Another reason I may not be able to buy it is I can never get to the phone quick enough to cancel the order confirmation before the wife sees it.

[@wellwhatthen10101]

I never rated the DO lens at all not worth it. Better having the heavier but better quality 100-400L lens anytime sorry canon but that's what is required the optics on the DO are rubbish the corner sharpness i would class as soft as Diarrhoea. Need to go to Spec savers i think. Check Frost Good Lens review .

[@RogerZoul]

Nonsense. I owned both and the DO mark 2 is better than the 100-400.

[@dillank3240]

I don't think you are right about the sharpness. Every review I've seen shows that it is a very sharp lens.

[@KevinNordstrom]

have you even owned the 400 f4?