Choices choices..

[rupertpeaches@netscape.ne]

Hi, I hope you'll bear with me as this is my first post on the forum.
I moved to the beautiful Highlands of Scotland last year and it has inspired me to renew my interest in photography.
I bought the 10D last year and 15mm lens to capture the northern lights.
I then bought 24-70L - big mistake!! I loved it so much that I then bought 70-200F4L. :D
I also bought 2x converter, but would like to take wildlife photos too, I've already seen a wildcat and signs of otters. I did think about the 100-400L but I get the impression from this forum that its not a good idea to use it with the TC :?: I'm not worried about manual focusing.
Would the 400 F5.6 be a better option, unfortunately, budget does not allow for anything more expensive!
Any advice would be greatly appreciated thanks

[Scottes]

Both the 100-400 and 400 prime are f5.6 at 400mm, so you'll be manual focusing with the TC on either. The prime should be a touch sharper. The 100-400 is more expensive but adds IS, which is great for low-light wildlife.

There were several threads recenetly on both lenses. Do a search for "100-400" and you'll find many messages, including some great comparisons on a thread titled some thing "Four ways to shoot 400"

[rupertpeaches@netscape.ne]

Thanks for your quick response :)
I wonder if I might be better off with a 1.4 TC. :?:
I've read some of the threads re these lenses and it doesn't seem that the 2x tc and 400mm are a good combination.
The quality of the images I've seen are great :D and I'm very tempted by the 100-400 for the IS and its versatility, I can always sell the 2x tc!
I see that many of you display your photos on here, are newbies able to do so? It would help me perhaps improve my skills if more experienced and able people were prepared to view them and comment!

[scottbergerphoto]

I have the 100-400 IS L. It certainly is a great lens. It is limited in range though for wildlife. The viewfinder gets very dark with the 2x extender. I recently got the Sigma 500mm f/4.5 EX APO HSM for wildlife. It's 1/2 the price of the Canon f/4, and is highly regarded. It's made very well, auto -focuses fast, and has a bright viewfinder image. It comes with a 4 year warranty. I bought it from B&H.
Scott

[MediaMagic]

I also have the 100-400L. It's a great lens and I really love mine, but it's not going to give you what you are looking for for wildlife shots. It's a bit soft at 400mm (even at f11) compared to the 400mm prime. I would definately suggest *not* using the 100-400L lens as a primary wildlife shooting tool. You could make do with it, and get some good to excellent results, but if you are serious about the shots, I'd recommend getting a better tool for the job so you could achieve superior results. The examples I have seen from the Sigma 500 f4.5 APO HSM have been absolutely stellar. That would be my choice if I were to take up wildlife photography.

David

[rupertpeaches@netscape.ne]

Thanks for your advice, but the Sigma is out of my price range. :cry:

Another possibility is the 300mm IS F4 with the 2x TC, would the extra stop make the viewfinder bright enough for me to see what I'm taking?
That would give me 600mm and I've already got the 2x TC.

Thanks again

[CyberDyneSystems]

Rupert,.

If you wnat a birding/wildlife lens,. I would definately go for the primes..

It is debatable as to which, the 300mm f/4 IS Vs. 400mm f/5.6 would be a better solution,. both of these are the most widely used "starter lenses" for birders.. the 400mm being the most recomended..

The advantage of the 300mm is twofold,. IS and the flexibilty of full af at both 300mm and at 420mm f/5.6 with the 1.4X t-con

But,. as a birder,. your lens is never too long,. and thus you will want to be shooting at 400mm or 420mm all the time. T-cons are great in a pinch,. but they aren't quite the same as a longer lens.

Personally I would recomend the 400mm f/5.6

[Sketcher]

Rupert,

I'm stalking the 400mm f/5.6L myself. According to many owners and reviews (a good one being found at: Luminous Landscape - Forgotten 400 (http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/lenses/forgotten-400.shtml)), the 300 IS w/tc and the 100-400L just don't do 400mm as well as the prime. Or so I've read :).

*Edit - Belmondo's done some homework of his own which might be worth your time to read. http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=24218&highlight= and there are a few other references if you do a forum search on "400".

[rupertpeaches@netscape.ne]

Taking the plunge...

Thanks to all for your opinions, I've just ordered the 100-400mm from Adorama- can't wait to get hold of it! :D

Difficult decision to make but al in all I think this will best suit my needs.