Home > Consumer Reviews > Canon EF 400mm f/5.6L USM Super Telephoto Lens for Canon SLR Cameras

I've used this lens now exclusively for nature photography, primarily birds. Especially birds in flight. The shots I get with this lens (paired with an EOS 50D) elicit comments from other photographers with words like "incredible", "that sharp as hell lens you have..", "amazing detail!". I've taken probably 100,000 photos with this lens out in the field in the 15 months I've owned it. You cannot go wrong with the lens. The auto-focus is extraordinarily fast, and when you switch it from 3.5m-infinity to 8.5m to infinity, the speed is almost instantaneous for shots at a distance. It also seems to eliminate "hunting" for focus if you miss your target initially. Just remember to switch it back to 3.5m-infinity for closer shots! Bird photography is extremely demanding and difficult. This lens gives me the ability to walk and carry a long lens with great "reach" pretty much anywhere. Like others who have reviewed this lens mention, I never stop it down from wide open. It's sharp to the edges, and there's not a hint of chromatic bleeding or halos anywhere. In good light, I can use very high shutter speeds while keeping ISO values low, enabling high detail and great stop motion capture shots of birds in flight. This is THE lens for hand-held bird and nature photography. Buy it. Don't even think about it.

The lens is great and quick focus and IS ability of camera make pictures very sharp. Even distant subjects can be cropped and are still sharp. Excellent lens for animal photography, and setting lens at 5.6 makes for faster shutter speeds to stop action. Raising ISO also helps, but in bright light not needed as much. My only problem with this lens in my first two weeks of use was taking it to Florida to some boardwalks, and some birds and alligators were so close to the boardwalk that I couldn't get the whole subject in the frame, sometimes not taking the shot, although sometimes this made for great portraits. Normally the subjects are not going to be this close, and in most instances I was able to back up enough to take the photo. I'll sacrifice the pound of weight to be too close sometimes.

I use this lens on a 5D.
It is definitely not as sharp as a 50mm lens, but this is something I accept as it is well known in photographic circles that
it's harder to get the same sharpness on a telephoto lens as it is on a wider angle lens, unless you want to put all the sharpness into
the center of the image, in which case you can get higher resolution. That's why you get better resolution from astronomical telescopes
(which are optimized for the center of the image) than from camera lens.
Overall I can't complain about this lens, for the price. There is very little chromatic aberration. It's built tough, it's light and
doesn't hurt my back.
Jut be aware that if you want top-notch quality (at a price) you will have to fork out a lot more money for the 400mm f/2.8 lenses.
In any case this will blow the zooms of equivalent focal length out of the water.
So rating this lens is not so obvious:as far as value for money goes it's five stars, but in absolute terms it's four stars.

Great lens if you can get it right... I had to send mine back to Canon twice for calibration, second time with the camera.. Fist time lens was found with a broken USM.. Fortunately they replaced it but it came back so so.. Pics were not sharp as this lens is known to be... As of this writing, I haven't received my lens back yet, so will see... I purchased this lens in April of 09...

[...]

I purchased this lens primarily for hand-held bird photography for use on my Canon 40D DSLR. The lens is typical of Canon's L-series "white" family of professional level telephoto lenses, having very high standards of construction and superb optical performance, even with a 1.4X teleconverter, when conditions allow.

This lens is known as the "overlooked" Canon telephoto, since it does not garner the glamor of its cousins, the really long, heavy, faster, and vastly more costly professional telephoto lenses. It is also known as the "toy lens" by bird photographers who mostly use those really Big Berthas for long-distance close-ups with blurred-out backgrounds.

I selected it for the high image quality wide-open, relatively light weight, and shorter physical length, allowing both hand-held and tripod mounted use, as well as its modest cost (compared to all high quality alternatives). The image quality is extremely high, even wide open at f/5.6, although it does improve slightly stopped down a notch or two. The image contrast, flare resistance, and color saturation are also excellent for a telephoto lens of its "older" fixed focal length optical design.

It doesn't have image stabilization (IS), which maintains the reasonable price, but I don't consider that much of a handicap using Canon's DSLR's, which allow low-noise high ISO settings for higher shutter speeds under decent lighting conditions. Braced against a tree, fence post, etc., and especially in a sitting position with arms resting on knees, for example, the lack of IS is simply not an issue. The focus is extremely fast and accurate with the 40D's sensitive all X-type focus points, and the quickly removable tripod mount is of an excellent design that all tripod mounts should have.

As a bonus, on the 40D, the lens has the equivalent field of view of a 640mm f/5.6 telephoto lens! When a high quality teleconverter can be used, this becomes almost a 900mm f/8 telephoto (actually 896mm)! Not to exaggerate the point too much, but that's starting to get into the Big Bertha focal length range, under the right lighting conditions. Other pluses include the handy built-in sliding lens hood and the very high quality included lens case, which are extra cost items for Canon's non-L lenses.

The 400mm and 500mm zooms all seem to suffer from image softness at their maximum focal lengths, which I would be using 90% of the time anyway, so I elected to simply get the highest quality fixed 400mm I could find for a reasonable price. I also decided that I could live with 1 f-stop less than the much more expensive f/4's, since this lens can be shot wide-open at the same high quality as the f/4's stopped down - thus resulting in f/5.6 anyway.

This reasoning is even more appropriate when including the slightly less expensive, still high-quality, third party lenses, such as Tamron, Tokina, Sigma, etc. I reasoned that since I plan to use this lens for the rest of my life, why compromise in image quality for a few percent lower initial cost? I'm not slamming third party lenses in general by any means (I own a few), just in this case of comparing available alternatives (including other Canon's) to the selection of this particular Canon 400mm and its intended use.

I was blessed with several excellent bald eagle shots on what I had expected to be just an initial "practice with the new lens" outing. Because of this excellent lens, it turned out to be a very productive shoot. I would include a thumbnail photo of one of these shots, except I can't seem to be able to "paste" a small image into Amazon's review window.

For one that is willing to accept and operate within the parameters of this lens, that photographer will be handsomely rewarded by Canon's 400mm f/5.6L telephoto lens. In my case, it is exactly what I was looking for and it is exceeding all my expectations.