Wide open, which one should be better? Assuming both are good copies.The 500/4.5 is not serviced anymore by Canon. Have you heard that these or similar lenses of the same age are already in high risk for AF breakdown?

i dont think you'd see much of a differencei own the 500 4.5. My friend has a 400 5.6 and would like to buy my 500 and sell his 400As far as repairing i wouldnt worry about it there are third party repair places that will work on them and have the parts just like the 200 1.8As far as high risk i dont think so either. As long as you take care of these lenses they can last for a long time

Well, I am in the same situation as your friend, wanting to move up from the 400/5.6L. Thanks for your reply, I wanted to know what I should expect if I get to test shoot a 500/4.5 that is for sale against my 400.PalmsWestPhotowrote:i dont think you'd see much of a differencei own the 500 4.5. My friend has a 400 5.6 and would like to buy my 500 and sell his 400As far as repairing i wouldnt worry about it there are third party repair places that will work on them and have the parts just like the 200 1.8As far as high risk i dont think so either. As long as you take care of these lenses they can last for a long time

I just bought a used 500 f/4.5 (on its way). I figure the glass should be as good as any L series lens. Hopefully I won't regret not having IS, but I figure it will be tripod mounted all the time anyway. I thought about the 400 and may still get one too, but I want to wait as long as I can to see if Canon gets IS into that lens.

Congrats on the new lens! I read elsewhere that this lens is very sharp actually. But I also read that this lens needs AF motor even for manual focusing! I am getting cold feet... Is the AF unit really still repairable at somehow reasonable price?Hedshotwrote:I just bought a used 500 f/4.5 (on its way). I figure the glass should be as good as any L series lens. Hopefully I won't regret not having IS, but I figure it will be tripod mounted all the time anyway. I thought about the 400 and may still get one too, but I want to wait as long as I can to see if Canon gets IS into that lens.

At present, KEH quotes about US$90.00 to deal with a sticky aperture (as an example). I guess I figure that there will always be some access to at least minor repairs. I have a 90-day warrany from the vendor (B&H) so if anything seems out of sorts I'll return it and bit the bullet for the IS version (that scream you hear is my wallet).

Got it in, 1998 copy. Focusing is very fast. Everything seems OK. Will get some outside pics when I can. I'll let you know my impression versus my 300mm IS f/4 L. It is lighter than I thought but it's heavy. Definitely hand-holdable but only for very short periods and at high shutter speeds.

I didn't find it to be so. It can be difficult to distinguish between the sharpness of good telephoto lenses when used alone, but differences reveal themselves when using teleconvertersWhen I had the 500/4.5 I found that, while it was sharp wide open, when a 1.4x extender was attached it wouldn't reach max sharpness until stopped down to around f/9 - f/10. In contrast, the 400/5.6 I once had - also sharp wide open - would be pretty sharp wide open at f/8 when a 1.4x extender was attached and only sharpen up slightly by going up to f/9 - f/10. This tells me that, for my copies at least, the IQ on the 400/5.6 was equal to or better than that of the 500/4.5. Still the 500isfaster and longer than the 400 and a good birding lens for the money.