Canon EF 400mm f4 DO IS USM review

I hesitated for weeks before buying this lens. It's expensive (only $1,000 or so cheaper than the wonderful 400mm 2.8 Canon lens), it's 4.0 instead of 2.8, it's not an L lens (since it uses the less common diffractive optics), and the user reviews of the early production lenses were mixed (the latter reviews are much better). However, I finally decided to buy because I needed a 400mm lens for a mix of sports and outdoors photos, and I knew that I would rarely use the much heavier and longer 400mm 2.8 lens. It is true that the 400mm 2.8 has photographic advantages over the 400mm 4.0 DO, but those don't mean anything if you don't have the lens with you when you need it!

In the month or so I've had the 400mm DO, I've taken it with me on trips--in planes, inside the cabin, with enough space for two camera bodies, and 24-70mm and 70-200mm zoom lenses--and I've shot sports handheld _exclusively_. The autofocus is very fast, the image quality is _astounding_, and I can only say good things about this lens. Perfect 10 for me!

I hesitated for weeks before buying this lens. It's expensive (only $1,000 or so cheaper than the wonderful 400mm 2.8 Canon lens), it's 4.0 instead of 2.8, it's not an L lens (since it uses the less common diffractive optics), and the user reviews of the early production lenses were mixed (the latter reviews are much better). However, I finally decided to buy because I needed a 400mm lens for a mix of sports and outdoors photos, and I knew that I would rarely use the much heavier and longer 400mm 2.8 lens. It is true that the 400mm 2.8 has photographic advantages over the 400mm 4.0 DO, but those don't mean anything if you don't have the lens with you when you need it!

In the month or so I've had the 400mm DO, I've taken it with me on trips--in planes, inside the cabin, with enough space for two camera bodies, and 24-70mm and 70-200mm zoom lenses--and I've shot sports handheld _exclusively_. The autofocus is very fast, the image quality is _astounding_, and I can only say good things about this lens. Perfect 10 for me!

I hesitated for weeks before buying this lens. It's expensive (only $1,000 or so cheaper than the wonderful 400mm 2.8 Canon lens), it's 4.0 instead of 2.8, it's not an L lens (since it uses the less common diffractive optics), and the user reviews of the early production lenses were mixed (the latter reviews are much better). However, I finally decided to buy because I needed a 400mm lens for a mix of sports and outdoors photos, and I knew that I would rarely use the much heavier and longer 400mm 2.8 lens. It is true that the 400mm 2.8 has photographic advantages over the 400mm 4.0 DO, but those don't mean anything if you don't have the lens with you when you need it! In the month or so I've had the 400mm DO, I've taken it with me on trips--in planes, inside the cabin, with enough space for two camera bodies, and 24-70mm and 70-200mm zoom lenses--and I've shot sports handheld _exclusively_. The autofocus is very fast, the image quality is _astounding_, and I can only say good things about this lens. Perfect 10 for me!

This is an often maligned lens, due to its high cost and the lower contrast compared to regular lenses. Both are true and the latter is easily fixable in the digital workflow. The upside that no other lens can compete with is, that one can carry it for miles without undue strain, handhold for substantial periods of time, like waiting a few minutes for some wildlife to move into position, or for some sports action to happen. Obviously, there are even lighter 400mm lenses, but those have typically no image stabilization and a very small maximum aperture.
At this point for me, this is my one size fits all super telephoto lens. There are sharper lenses, longer lenses, faster lenses, etc. but this one can do almost everything, and do it good enough.

This is my lens for handheld images of birds in flight. It's sharp and exhibits no color fringing or other chromatic aberration. By comparison, my Leitz 400mm f/6.8 Telyt shows a fair amount of color fringing outside the center region. To be fair, the Telyt is a much simpler design.

The Telyt does have higher contrast than the EF 400mm f/4 DO IS, but a levels layer in Photoshop can fix that.

The 400mm f/4 DO IS is much lighter than any 400mm f/4 lens with conventional optics. DO lenses have a diffraction element that compensates for the color dispersion of spherical lens elements. It also reduces optical complexity and size.

The f/4 speed makes autofocus faster, and allows even better isolation of subjects using narrow depth of field. While bigger and heavier than Canon's 400mm f/5.6L, the f/4 lens is light enough at 4.3 pounds that it's still easy to carry. I've used mine on hikes above 10,000 feet to photograph bighorn sheep.

IS definitely makes a difference handheld, and on a tripod below 1/125 second. Canon's 400mm f/5.6L is a non-stabilized lens.

I've taken some of my sharpest wildlife images with this lens - you can see every feather in some bird shots. Highly recommended if you can afford one.