The N has a larger LCD. It also is reputed to be better at capturing fine details in the highlights. I'm sure there are more differences...
Lens: the 400/5.6L has a good reputation as a flight lens. But it lacks IS--not a problem for flight shots, as you need to be at higher shutter speeds, but it reduces its applicability for other things. And there's always the 300/2.8...
-Paul
Posted by Steve Foss on February 8, 2007 at 5:28 PM
Any of the Canon image stabilization telephotos from 300mm on up are excellent for in-flight birds. There are two IS modes. Mode 2 is for panning shots, and I've had good luck shooting ducks and other birds in flight with my 100-400L IS in Mode 2. If you're talking the 400 f2.8, 500 f4 or 600 f4, you're looking at also springing for a very strong tripod/head setup, aside from the major money for those lenses, because they are too heavy to comfortably handhold for long.
What's your price range?
Posted by Ott Luuk on February 10, 2007 at 11:42 AM
Really, what are you willing to handhold? Some people handhold their 500/4L IS big guns, some complain about 2kg lens+camera setups being heavy. Personally, I really like my newly acquired 400/5.6L for balance, reach and focus speed.
Also, the 300/4L IS is very popular - similar weight and cost as the 400/5.6L, has IS, focuses very close - but has less reach w/o converters.
The mkII N improvements are more or less listed at: http://www.dpreview.com/news/0508/05082208canoneos1dmkiin.asp
Posted by Ian Beatty on February 14, 2007 at 9:05 AM
Can't say as I'm an expert with birds but I am wanting to do more wildlife photos.
Seems like the 300 f/4 IS is a good balance between speed, cost, and weight. Put a 1.4 converter on it and you have a 420mm f/5.6 and IS (a bit more than the 400 5.6 which doesn't have IS).
Put it on a 20D or 30D and you're up to a 672mm f/5.6 - not a bad setup for the cost, especially compared to the 300 f/2.8, or 400 f/4.
Discussion
4 repliesAlso, what is a good Canon "flight" lens (handheld)?
Lens: the 400/5.6L has a good reputation as a flight lens. But it lacks IS--not a problem for flight shots, as you need to be at higher shutter speeds, but it reduces its applicability for other things. And there's always the 300/2.8...
-Paul
What's your price range?
Also, the 300/4L IS is very popular - similar weight and cost as the 400/5.6L, has IS, focuses very close - but has less reach w/o converters.
The mkII N improvements are more or less listed at: http://www.dpreview.com/news/0508/05082208canoneos1dmkiin.asp
Seems like the 300 f/4 IS is a good balance between speed, cost, and weight. Put a 1.4 converter on it and you have a 420mm f/5.6 and IS (a bit more than the 400 5.6 which doesn't have IS).
Put it on a 20D or 30D and you're up to a 672mm f/5.6 - not a bad setup for the cost, especially compared to the 300 f/2.8, or 400 f/4.