johnbegood17 Loc: Redhill,Surrey,England

Afraid done most of the lens got to be a 400mm f/4 weighs 2.8 lbs

oldtool2 Loc: South Jersey

The weight on the 400mm f5.6 is 2.76 pounds. Here are a couple of reviews of this lens.

http://www.dpreview.com/products/canon/lenses/canon_400_5p6/overview
http://www.dpreview.com/products/canon/lenses/canon_400_5p6/amazon-customer-reviews

Jim D

Coolcameragirl Loc: Bradenton, FL

These are from the canon ef 400.

Coolcameragirl Loc: Bradenton, FL

Here is another. I love this lens.

johnbegood17 Loc: Redhill,Surrey,England

Yes I like the photos thank you as good as my 400 2.8 any day, better than that whit pumper

oldtool2 Loc: South Jersey

Great shots! I also noticed the hawk were taken at f6.3 and ISO-800.

Jim D

Dolphin001

I have the 100-400mm zoom. I've attached some pictures. If you are referring to the prime 400mm F5.6 lens it should be sharper if anything.

ISO 400, 1/1000, F7.1 at 330mm - hand held


ISO 400, 1/1000, F8.0 at 400mm - hand held


ISO 400, 1/1000, F6.3 at 285mm - Hand held

jeep_daddy Loc: Prescott AZ

First of all no, I don't think this is what the OP wanted. He wanted examples of the EF 400mm, not the EF 100-400mm. Second, you need some practice using your lens. Sorry but your images make the 100-400 look bad. I've got a 100-400 so I know.

imagemeister Loc: mid east Florida

As I have stated before, after analyzing the Photozone resolution numbers, I have come to the conclusion that the absolute practical resolution of the 400 5.6, the 300 F4 W1.4X and a good 100-400 at 400 - all wide open is equal. The main differences being in focus speed and accuracy and ergonomics.

Frank 2012 Loc: Olathe, Kansas

I used my Canon EF 400mm f/5.6 L to get these photos.
Also using tripod.

Frank 2012 Loc: Olathe, Kansas

I used the Canon EF 400 mm f/5.6 L with a tripod to get these photos.

North American Robin

gessman Loc: Colorado

I have the 400 5.6 and will vouch for it's sharpness although my archives are a mess and I'd have a hard time finding any full size images I have not reduced for posting on uhh which means that I don't readily have shots to upload the original so you can magnify and view in full size. The exif data is missing in most or all of these files but I'm confident all these shots were made with the 400 5.6 and either an EOS 20D in the case of the balloons and the deer while from there on down were shot with a 5D2 and most of the shots were at f/6.3 or f/8 with some wide open at f/5.6. A couple of the balloon shots had a 1.4X II added.

Here's a short and sweet review and comparison with the 100-400 by a highly respected independent reviewer. This site has the 5th highest traffic rate of all photography sites on the 'net, whatever that means.

http://luminous-landscape.com/reviews/lenses/forgotten-400.shtml

minustide Loc: San Francisco

Canon 400 5.6 Prime-YES!

Frank 2012 Loc: Olathe, Kansas

Two more photos with the Canon EF 400 f5.6 L.
Grandson playing little league (American football). The pictures are hand held approximately 50 meters away. Bright sunshine really helps this lens perform.

Photo not edited


Photo not edited

Birdguide Loc: Ormond Beach, FL

No she was nimble and landed on her feet, they continued the round with no other problems.