Canon EF 200-400mm f/4L IS USM w/Ext 1.4x DXO Review and Findings

ziggy53

DXO has finally finished their review of the Canon EF 200-400mm f/4L IS USM Extender 1.4x zoom lens.

Review:
http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/Publications/DxOMark-Reviews/Canon-EF-200-400mm-f-4-IS-USM-Extender-1.4X-review-does-the-performance-justify-the-price

Findings:
Teleconverter out/(off):
http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/Lenses/Camera-Lens-Database/Canon/Canon-EF-200-400mm-F4L-IS-USM-Extender-14x/(camera)/795

Teleconverter in/(on):
http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/Lenses/Camera-Lens-Database/Canon/Canon-EF-200-400mm-F4L-IS-USM-Extender-14x-ON/(camera)/795

mercphoto

I know the go-to lens for Football and Soccer is the 400/2.8, and the to-to lens for motorsports is the 500/4. What I'm wondering is if the shooting pros would rather have this one lens, and get some versatility in the ability to shoot at a range of focal lengths, or stick with the primes? Either of those primes is about as expensive as this zoom is.

ziggy53

DPReview has some image samples and additional insight:

http://www.dpreview.com/lensreviews/canon-ef-200-400mm-4-1p4x

ziggy53

mercphoto wrote: »

I know the go-to lens for Football and Soccer is the 400/2.8, and the to-to lens for motorsports is the 500/4. What I'm wondering is if the shooting pros would rather have this one lens, and get some versatility in the ability to shoot at a range of focal lengths, or stick with the primes? Either of those primes is about as expensive as this zoom is.

I must believe that lenses such as the Canon EF 200-400mm f/4L IS USM w/Ext 1.4x will mean "rental" more than "ownership" to most independent professionals who will use it. This simply isn't a lens that any individual needs on a very regular basis. (They may "want" it on a regular basis, but that's a separate issue.)

On the other hand, I can see certain organizations owning a copy or two, just to insure availability and quality control for their top-tier in-house and contract shooters.

mercphoto

Understood Ziggy. I'm just wondering, for the type of photographer that owns a 500/4 lens, would they rather have this instead, given the costs are relatively identical. I'm talking about the people who really do own lenses like this (Thawley, Wheeler, etc.), if given the chance buy again, would they still buy the prime, or opt for this zoom?

pathfinder

I just looked at the price of the 500 f4 IS L, I did not realize they were this close in price. In the last 5-10 years, several of Canon's long primes have almost doubled in price. Wow!!

I suspect if the image quality is comparable ( and I suspect that it is ) then some folks will definitely opt for the versatility of the 200-400 over the 500 prime, in spite of the price.