Canon EF 100-400 4.5-5.6 L IS

[Pvapour]

having used a 2x TC with my Tamron 18-270 for the last month I really feel its time to move onto a better lens, results were quite good with the Tamron to be fair but AF is quite compromised with a 2x TC and I'm going to be putting myself into some quite deep field situations over the next couple of months to get some good shots (want to enter Nat geo comp this year) so do not want to waste any shot that might present itself.

so after a fair bit of review reading and looking at equipment used in last years competition it seems this lens was quite widely used and is quite widely respected amongst keen amateur and semi pros, (I think 14-7 uses it looking at the lens example shots on here) but was hoping for some input from you guys and maybe some alternatives (if any)

Have the 450 at the mo but would have a 5D come the trip so would need to be a full frame lens.

Cheers

Nick

Edited by Pvapour on Sunday 31st January 10:04

[Simpo Two]

Pvapour said:

quite widely respected amongst keen ammeters

A keen ammeter:



A useful tool.

[Pvapour]

Simpo Two said:

Pvapour said:

quite widely respected amongst keen ammeters

A keen ammeter:



A useful tool.

is slang for amateur meter, jeez

[4hero]

Not really used mine for wildlife much Nick, but it's an excellent lens. Use mine for motorsport mainly, and really can't fault it. Use it on both the 40D and 350D, with excellent results (well, I think they are good anyway). Focusing is spot on, very speedy and the push pull zoom is fantastic!

A couple of example shots.

Shot at 400mm, it's a tiny bit soft at 400 but nothing a bit of sharpening won't fix.





Shot at 275mm



woohoo, a "wildlife" shot Shot at 400mm



Buy it!

Neil.

Edited by 4hero on Thursday 4th February 19:36

[Pvapour]

4hero said:

Not really used mine for wildlife much Nick, but it's an excellent lens. It was my first L, and one I will never part with. Use mine for motorsport mainly, and really can't fault it. Use it on both the 40D and 350D, with excellent results (well, I think they are good anyway).

A couple of example shots.

Shot at 400mm, it's a tiny bit soft at 400 but nothing a bit of sharpening won't fix.





275mm



woohoo, a "wildlife" shot Shot at 400mm

[img]http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3243/2707164663_e515ae5a27_o.jpg[img]

Buy it!

Neil.

any chance of some high res versions to scrutinise 4Hero, wildlife tends to be more still so a little more sharpness should be possible.

[4hero]

Just got the one handy on flickr (of the porsche), it was taken a while ago with the 350D, my skill has improved a little since then.

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3187/2876297629_10b...

edited to add, I'll dig out some better example shots this morning and post 'em up.

Edited by 4hero on Sunday 31st January 10:52

[Dogsey]

Not quite as long, but then not quite the price, I'm finding that the Sigma 100-300 f4 is a cracking lens. I've seen it rated in a couple of reviews as Sigmas best zoom lens and seems to be pin sharp right across the range. The bonus over the Canon 100-400 is that it's a constant f4 (oh and the fact that it's half the price according to Camera Price Buster - in fact it's now £100 cheaper than I bought it for at the start of Jan!).

[MonkeyHanger]

It's a Marmite lens. Plenty of people swear by it and an equal number just swear at it.


I had one for a couple of years and ran it with my 120-300/1.4x TC for almost a year. The Canon got sold,i still have the Sigma.

If it's a case of needing 400mm then i'd look at the 400 f5.6L and add a 70-200 of some sort later.

[jon-]

Impressive with a 2x too. This was slightly out of focus and handheld @ 800mm



shot from here

[Hedgeman]

It's a great lens - one I'd never part with. Sharp, great colours and extremely versatile.

The push-pull zoom isn't as nice to use as a regular lens, but you soon get used to it.

[flat-planedCrank]

4hero said:

Shot at 400mm, it's a tiny bit soft at 400 but nothing a bit of sharpening won't fix.

Wide open at 400mm think for a lens with that much range its not bad

Can vouch for 4hero's 100-400 as well



Cheers.

[Pvapour]

@ 4Hero, those 400 shots are pretty good, you can see the drivers wearing glasses in one of the shots (when zoomed in) and this all at a high shutter speeds, the eagles clarity is very good is that cropped?

@ Jon, great comparison, thanks even with x2 its clarity & aberration is far superior to the tamron

the only other option (as Monkey said) is a fixed 400, which I could then use the Tamron 18-270 to fill in (with x2) wonder how it would compare with the 100-400??

@ dogsey, tried the sigma 100-300 a while back but it had little advantage over the tamron TBO

its looking like a done deal, even if the fixed 400 is better it'd have to be allot to make up for having to carry two lenses, I shall be carrying allot of gear for a fair trek and dont want to leave any food behind

thanks for input guys, expensive help as ever 4hero

[paul911]

I’ve heard nothing but praise for the Canon 100-400mm, and its been on my wish list for a very long time. I’ve just taken the plunge and purchased a used one. Cant wait for it to arrive.

[flat-planedCrank]

Pvapour said:

@ dogsey, tried the sigma 100-300 a while back but it had little advantage over the tamron TBO

Would have thought the sigma 100-300 would be an option?
It'll give you 300mm at f4, but 420mm f5.6 with a 1.4x converter, plus HSM focusing.

Surprised you didn't find it much better than your Tamron 18-270, how was the image quality?


Cheers.

[Pvapour]

flat-planedCrank said:

Pvapour said:

@ dogsey, tried the sigma 100-300 a while back but it had little advantage over the tamron TBO

Would have thought the sigma 100-300 would be an option?
It'll give you 300mm at f4, but 420mm f5.6 with a 1.4x converter, plus HSM focusing.

Surprised you didn't find it much better than your Tamron 18-270, how was the image quality?


Cheers.

dont get me wrong, it was definitely better but I was just starting out and the IS (VR on Tam) feature was very important to me, not so much now, but still an advantage when looking at the 100-400 against the sigma 100-300, plus the extra reach of the Canon is going to be quite important in what i'm looking at shooting, looking at the National geo exhibition in the nat. hist. museum for a 2nd time yesterday! a large amount of the shots were using the canon 100-400 at full 400mm reach.

[RobDickinson]

I've borrowed a 100-400 (2003 vintage) and honestly I wasnt inpressed. Could have been a bad copy, or bad technique, but at near pixel level it was soft (7D) and the IS seemed to 'kick' in and spoil snapshots unless you left it to settle.

Also the focus seemed a bit wayward but again, 400/5.6, even f8 and your dealing with very shallow DOF sometimes so may not be the lens.

I'm going for a 400/5.6L prime instead I think especialy as I have a 70-200.

100-400
Upsides
versatility, IS (2 stop) ok center sharpness on good copies

Downsides
heavyish
slowish af (but ok)
poorish bokeh
corner sharpness and poor copies.

400mm isnt hugely long for wildlife either, but to get longer gets insanly expensive.

[flat-planedCrank]

RobDickinson said:

400mm isnt hugely long for wildlife either, but to get longer gets insanly expensive.

400mm does seem to be a common length for wildlife, only longer lenses that i can think of at semi-reasonable prices are the Sigma 150-500mm and 50-500mm..but then I guess there are other trade-offs such as max aperture.

After that I guess the only options are re-mortgaging the house or renting


Cheers.

[RobDickinson]

Yeah , cheaper to improve stalking techniques or take a blind etc.

Wish canon would redo the 400/5.6 add IS and weathersealing. Also do a 400/4 thats affordable...

[flat-planedCrank]

RobDickinson said:

Yeah , cheaper to improve stalking techniques or take a blind etc.

Wish canon would redo the 400/5.6 add IS and weathersealing. Also do a 400/4 thats affordable...

OT, but how is the 7D going ?
[/off topic]

[SamHH]

RobDickinson said:

Also do a 400/4 thats affordable...

Even if they made a non-DO one, I doubt it'd be affordable when you consider that the Nikon one costs £4500.