Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II USM Image Stabilizer Super Telephoto Lens, USA Warranty

2018-11-24T22:29:57

I’ve owned this lens for nearly two years now and despite the cost and the weight I would buy it again in a second. It’s a tremendous piece of equipment that delivers outstanding image quality.

Brandon B.

2017-11-09T08:21:21

It took me three years to convince myself that I "needed" this lens. The day after I unpacked it, my concerns disappeared. I was taking short track speedskating photos in a poorly lit hockey rink from the far corner of the venue. The images were magical. Lower ISO's with f/2.8. Limited cropping with a 400mm. Light enough that I could hand hold the lens in a cramped penalty box. I couldn't stop smiling!

JOHN K.

2017-09-10T20:00:00

I purchased this lens used for distance landscape photography. However, it quickly became my “go to” lens for youth action sports photography, specifically field sports, baseball & soccer. The autofocus is spot-on when calibrated to the camera body. Parents love the color and crisp detail of the photos of their kids. Examples can be viewed on my Facebook page – Jerry Liebrand Photography.

Gliebrand

Originally posted at

2016-12-29T11:29:15

This lens has excellent sharpness all the way out to the edges. Surprisingly light for its size. I shot a night football game under metal halide lights and the response of the lens was outstanding. I was able to shoot wide open to give me some very high shutter speeds. This lens is the "mack daddy" of telephoto sports lenses.

CAMERON F.

2016-10-20T13:05:12

Love this lens. Fast, sharp, and fast focusing. Hard to go back other lenses after using this. Using for sports photography.

SCOTT T.

2015-12-28T02:54:29

Remarkable piece of glass. Results hand held are superb.....expensive, but unquestionably one of the finest lenses that I have acquired.

DAVE M.

2015-09-14T21:00:00

Short Answer: It is definitely better in every way to the original Mark I. Longer Answer: What do I shoot? Fast moving action. Things that are "better" about it compared to the Mark I? Lighter, better IS (mode 3 is more useful than I expected), sharper. Things that aren't so great about it (compared to the Mark I)? None so far. Guess my only nit picking gripes would be the case doesn't stack with previous/older cases. The lens cover doesn't fit well with a lens coat on.

JASON T.

2015-01-01T19:00:00

I rented this lens for 1 week this summer when I had some cash in my pocket and I was looking for a hand-holdable lens to mount on my 7d that offered more reach than my 70-200 for nature/birding. After quite a bit of internet research I was torn between the 300 2.8 II and the 400 2.8 II. I'll start by saying that this lens is nothing short of spectacular. If you can afford it and carry it for your intended/expected durations then I wouldn't hold back on it! It is really a joy to shoot with this lens. I'm not a great photographer (more money than skill, but the images that I captured with this lens after spending a few days of quality time with it were flattering to my abilities. I used the lens freehand for some outings and with a monopod for others. I sometimes used my 1.4x extender and noticed no appreciable tradeoff with AF or IQ performance. At the end of one week, however, my shoulders, back, and arms were paying the price for carrying this lens around. For once-a-week outings I'd probably be fine with this lens, but I was really hoping for something that I could haul around on my annual Adirondacks vacations. Those trips are 10 days long with ~5-8 mile hikes on a few days - sometimes climbing ~4000 ft. hills - and I knew from my short experience with this lens that I wouldn't be able to take it with me through those conditions. I almost wish that I could ignore my annual hiking trips when considering this lens, since I know that it would be more than manageable for one or two days at a time, but I ended up getting the 300 2.8 II and I'm really happy with my decision. Maybe someday I'll once again have enough cash in my pocket to get the 400 2.8. I'll buy it in an instant knowing that the 300 2.8 II is in my bag.

Shawn

Originally posted at

2014-06-03T21:00:00

Canon's updated version of the venerable 400-2.8 telephoto lens is wonderful to use since it weighs four pounds less than its predecessor. The focus is lightning quick for covering a sport such as professional baseball with a shorter throw to infinity for the updated model from version II, which was still a great lens. But the best aspect of the new version is the weight--at seven pounds, it is a lot easier to slog around with the lens while covering sporting events than its predecessor. The bad thing is simple--the price. At nearly $11,000, the lens is pretty tough to pay for these days as the editorial market for photographs marches to a low ebb.

DAVID Z.

2014-02-04T19:00:00

Excellent service and great professional!

RAY P.

2014-01-27T19:00:00

I got this lens to replace my 400 2.8L VI. I really like this lens but I have to say I cannot see a real big improvement over the IQ, between VI and VII. If I had to do it all over again, I may have kept my VI. I am not unhappy at all with the upgrade, I just may have been expecting to much. Still a great lens and would recommend it to anyone.

5d3-shooter

Originally posted at

2013-09-01T21:00:00

A great versitile lens. Not only do I use it for the reach of the 400mm but find that I'm using it for portrait and macro shots as well. The image quality I get at the closest focusing distance is so good that I can crop the image down to see individual hairs on the legs of dragonflies and use the image for print. I have it mounted on the 1DX at present and the frame rate for sports and wildlife is amazing. I have never had the first edition of this lens so I can't compare the weight difference many users claim is quite significant but I find it can be hand-held for short periods of time under the right conditions. I shoot alot of 5 & 10k foot races and the color contrast and fleshtones are amazing without any post processing. I know this lens is expensive, but if photography is your passion then this lens will satisfy.

Key I.

2013-06-16T21:00:00

Due to the expense, I waited a long time to acquire a lens like this, but I am extremely happy with the results. I am using it for wildlife photography and have no complaints. It is everything I had hoped for and I look forward to many more outdoor adventures with this piece of precision equipment.

JAY R.

2013-03-18T21:00:00

I'm a professional motorsports photographer and this new version of an already industry-standard lens is amazing. faster, tougher, and lighter than the previous 400 2.8! Sure it's expensive, but worth every penny!

Andrew B.

2012-11-23T19:00:00

It is an excellent lens! I use it with my Canon EOS-1D X camera. Actually I have some Canon L series lenses such as Canon EF 200mm f/2L IS USM, Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8l IS II USM, Canon EF 85mm f/1.2l II USM, Canon EF 14mm f/2.8l II USM, Canon EF 100mm f/2.8l IS USM, Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8l II IS USM and of course my new Canon EF 400mm f/2.8l II USM. I use my another lovely camera Canon EOS-5D Mark III. I like this new lens very much! The picture quality is excellent!

Sentinel

Originally posted at

2012-09-07T20:00:00

The Canon 400 mm f 2.8 MK II is outstanding in all aspects. The f 2.8 opening provides superb images wide open, the weight has been significantly reduced allowing for its handheld use for photographing birds in flight for up 3-4 hour (personal limits). It weight reduction also is a great advantage when carrying in the field with a tripod. I use this lens with the 5DIII and the autofocus performance is incredible delivering a 95-98% of in-focus images. When used with a 1.4X Canon MKIII image quality degradation is not noticed. I replaced the foot with one that provides a lower height profile, lighter weight and a built-in groove for mounting to ballheads without the need to use a mounting plate.

Eduardo

Originally posted at

2012-08-07T20:00:00

I have many lenses in my line up but this lens paired with a 5d3 or a 1dx is absolutely remarkable. Would recommend it to ANYONE. Don't let the price scare you away. Use it once and you will be hooked!

fplphotos.com

Originally posted at

2012-06-17T21:00:00

I am a 77 year old male ,6 ft, 210 lbs in good shape and have no trouble getting really nice hand held shots of birds and wildlife. This lens is marginally less weight than my 500mm (the largest lens I use hand held) and the fast 2.8 lens on the 400mm allows allows me to use faster shutter speeds than the 500mm.For me the 400mm has it all,reasonable weight( for large super telephoto ,works really well with with 1.4 iii extender ( fast auto focus and great images no noticeable difference ) and good with 2.0 iii extender(slower AF and minor loss of image quality) I have 5 Canon Super telephotos ,300mm 2.8 up to 600mm 4.0.All with is.For me 400mm is best of best

Jaycro

2012-06-17T21:00:00

I am 77 year old male in good physical shape and have taken a number of very good Hand held photos . Slightly lighter than my 500mm f4 is which is the largest lens I can hand hold. Takes the 1.4 iii extender and produces excellent photos with fast focus and little if any loss of quality. With 2.0 extender (Mk iii) auto focus is decent but slower with a very slight loss of quality. I own 5 Canon super telephotos 300mm 2.8 up to 600mm and the 400mm 2.8 is the best over all for my purpose Reccomend Gitzo 5 series tripod and Wibery gimbal head

Jaycro

2012-02-16T19:00:00

After years of lugging heavy lenses back and forth on the NFL sidelines, this lens is a real treat due to it's reduced weight. This lens can actually be held held. While I don't see a tremendous difference in sharpness over my previous 400 2.8, the aesthetic quality of the bokeh seems to be more pleasing than the earlier version. The colors seems to be richer with added saturation. I've also added the 1.4 III which doesn't really seem to slow the lens down that much in terms of focusing speed. I'd rate this lens a 9.9, I'd give it a perfect ten but everything has room for improvement.

runerider

Originally posted at

2011-09-24T21:00:00

I normally use this as an 800mm f5.6. The conventional wisdom would be to have chosen the native 800 instead, better IQ and faster AF. But Canon has published MTF curves with extenders this time, and the IQ difference is so small it probably doesn't matter in practice. With the 2.0x extender III my lens is a little lighter than the native 800, physically 3 inches shorter, and focuses 10 feet closer. And on cloudy days it's a fine 560mm f4. I really don't expect to use this lovely thing as a native 400 f2.8 very often, but that's different from saying never. It's nice to know the flexibility is there.

JOHN B.