Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS USM - AKA The Dust Pump

[Pete]

Thanks Tony. I was really pleased with these ones too...

[photobitz]

They're great Pete :) Heat blur FTW!

[KenjiS]

Heat blur is indeed awesome!

Heres more bloody birds though :)

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v170/scifiguy1012/Photography/IMG_1508-Edit.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v170/scifiguy1012/Photography/IMG_1467-Edit.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v170/scifiguy1012/Photography/IMG_1475-Edit.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v170/scifiguy1012/Photography/IMG_1469-Edit.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v170/scifiguy1012/Photography/IMG_1511-Edit.jpg

[jacobsen1]

I'm officially thrilled with this lens. I switched from a 300 f4 over the winter but didn't have any sailing or surfing to test it on when I made my decision... Well this weekend I got both and the lens worked PERFECTLY for both.
http://www.benjacobsen.com/wp-content/gallery/point-judith-ii/img_0032.jpg

http://www.benjacobsen.com/wp-content/gallery/point-judith-ii/img_9951.jpg

http://www.benjacobsen.com/wp-content/gallery/point-judith-ii/img_9996.jpg

http://www.benjacobsen.com/wp-content/gallery/point-judith-ii/img_0015.jpg

http://www.benjacobsen.com/wp-content/gallery/eaj-71-5-week-update/img_9698.jpg

http://www.benjacobsen.com/wp-content/gallery/eaj-71-5-week-update/img_9739.jpg

http://www.benjacobsen.com/wp-content/gallery/eaj-71-5-week-update/img_9760.jpg

[Pete]

With the 1D Mk II N

http://www.the-aperture.com/EE/photos/normal/20090718__PER9567.jpg

100% of above shot. Only post processing is normal capture sharpening.

http://the-aperture.com/cp/20090718-_PER9567-100.jpg

Pretty amazing, eh?

Oh. And it's at 400mm wide open at f/5.6. Allegedly the worst combination for this lens.

[KenjiS]

With the 1D Mk II N

http://www.the-aperture.com/EE/photos/normal/20090718__PER9567.jpg

100% of above shot. Only post processing is normal capture sharpening.

http://the-aperture.com/cp/20090718-_PER9567-100.jpg

Pretty amazing, eh?

Oh. And it's at 400mm wide open at f/5.6. Allegedly the worst combination for this lens.

I agree, the entire thing of "The 100-400 is soft at f/5.6 at 400mm" is complete bull, My copy is just as good at f/5.6 as it is at f/8 it seems, Maybe if i had a 50D i might notice a difference, but my 30D certainly sees little if any improvement

[Feudal1]

Fantastic lens!! I picked up a used copy of one of these, and have found it to be sharp, with excellent color rendition. It's a fun "people lens".

http://cwhite.smugmug.com/photos/601778336_KYRBC-L.jpg

http://cwhite.smugmug.com/photos/601778341_MfB6b-L.jpg

http://cwhite.smugmug.com/photos/601778304_VxNE3-L.jpg

[tonylong]

Hey all,

I took on a project today, processing some shots afresh from a bumpy, windy ferry ride across the Puget Sound to Seattle, WA a bit over two years ago. I used the 100-400 with the 30D to get some long distance shots of the Seattle skyline and waterfront, despite the haze of distance and moisture in the air as well as the bumping and wind. I was using a monopod.

If you want to see the dismal original shots pre-Lightroom, look here:

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showpost.php?p=8347002&postcount=772

These shots could certainly use some Photoshop love, but I'm stubborn about getting the most I can out of a Raw file and saving Photoshop for big prints/presentation and special needs, so these are Lightroom only.

At 100mm
http://www.pbase.com/tonylong/image/80566910/original.jpg

Same distance/time, at 400mm
http://www.pbase.com/tonylong/image/115396062/original.jpg

[malam]

I am looking at getting this lens too. The lens had been in the market for about a decade, I think. Has Canon been making any changes or refinements to the lens ? I can't see Canon still having the build with all the initial QC problems that I've been reading in this thread. Are the newly built ones that different ??

Thanks.

[Madweasel]

Canon gives its lenses a "MkII", etc., designation when they are redesigned. They don't say whether minor changes are made within long production runs, but the "word on the street" is that newer examples of this lens seem to perform more consistently well than older ones. The lens was introduced in November 1998, so yes, just over 10 years in production.

[malam]

Canon gives its lenses a "MkII", etc., designation when they are redesigned. They don't say whether minor changes are made within long production runs, but the "word on the street" is that newer examples of this lens seem to perform more consistently well than older ones. The lens was introduced in November 1998, so yes, just over 10 years in production.

Thanks - I could see that you have the 100-400mm too !. Would you have bought this lens if you had to make the decision today ?

[Madweasel]

Thanks - I could see that you have the 100-400mm too !. Would you have bought this lens if you had to make the decision today ?
I certainly would! Here's one I took with it today, straight from the 40D with only default Lightroom presets:

http://i72.photobucket.com/albums/i192/garlicpickle/Canon/lr1small-8665.jpg

[malam]

Wow - that looks terrific ! Thanks.

[Andy Favors]

I love this lens, as does everyone else. I have it on my 40D 95% of the time, maybe even more than that. It's my baby, :)

[RolyRatman]

I just joined the 100-400mm L club as well, just arrived this morning and really looking forward to getting out and about and shooting with it.... :)

[photobitz]

Thanks - I could see that you have the 100-400mm too !. Would you have bought this lens if you had to make the decision today ?

That could be a hard question to answer. The 100-400 fits a bit of a niche in the available lens selection and there's not really much else to compare it with. If money was no object then I would probably go with a 400/2.8 IS over this since I use it at 400mm about 90% of the time. Considering the price of the prime however that isn't exactly realistic.

[Madweasel]

Aside from the price difference, I don't think you should ignore the weight difference too - there's lots of places I would happily take the 100-400L where the weight of a 400/2.8 would persuade me to leave it at home.

[andrewhuxman]

http://i157.photobucket.com/albums/t47/ahuxman58/IMG_7444.jpg

[photobitz]

Aside from the price difference, I don't think you should ignore the weight difference too - there's lots of places I would happily take the 100-400L where the weight of a 400/2.8 would persuade me to leave it at home.

That's a very good point. In my "money is no object" scenario however I would be hiring a sherpa to haul the 400/2.8IS around for me. :lol:

[tonylong]

That's a very good point. In my "money is no object" scenario however I would be hiring a sherpa to haul the 400/2.8IS around for me. :lol:

You're not married...:)?

[photobitz]

Hahahaha... Yes I am, with kids too. I reckon I'd have to pay them more than a sherpa for their cooperation though ;)

[Madweasel]

:lol: You haven't brought them up right, then have you? :lol:

[keith breazeal]

Aside from the price difference, I don't think you should ignore the weight difference too - there's lots of places I would happily take the 100-400L where the weight of a 400/2.8 would persuade me to leave it at home.

Oh, you are so right! I carry the 300mm f2.8L IS on many shoots. Last night the county fair. My ass is dragging this morning. I have to do the rodeo this afternoon.
Lately, this heat has not helped either. This is me at one of the local events- I think I was an inch shorter by the end of the day. :lol:

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3434/3777941887_52e4c8a61c_o.jpg

[malam]

With the big lens like the Canon 400 or 100-400, do you still use a UV filter ? Or any other filter for that matter. Looking at the photo above, I can see that the hood is huge .

[Andy Favors]

I don't use anything, just the bare lens, and the hood isn't really that big, at least I don't think. I bought a UV filter for it, but I don't use it, to me it seems that it has better IQ without.

[tonylong]

With the big lens like the Canon 400 or 100-400, do you still use a UV filter ? Or any other filter for that matter. Looking at the photo above, I can see that the hood is huge .

The big lenses like the 300 f/2.8 IS and bigger have a drop-in slot for filters -- the front element is just way too huge for filters and the hood screws on, as in there is a bolt that you screw down onto the rim of the lens for a very solid fit:).

The 100-400 takes conventional filters and hoods, as does the 70-200 f/2.8 IS (they are about the same size and weight, except when the 100-400 is pulled out).

[malam]

Thanks. I ordered my 100-400 this afternoon and was wondering if I should get a UV and Polirizing Filter for it too.

[Andy Favors]

I feel the hood is good enough for me. Not sure about a Polarizer, haven't seen many pics taken with it on a 100-400.

[malam]

I feel the hood is good enough for me. Not sure about a Polarizer, haven't seen many pics taken with it on a 100-400.

Do you have your lens hood permanently mounted ? For travelling, I thought I might have to pack the hood separately.

[tonylong]

Do you have your lens hood permanently mounted ? For travelling, I thought I might have to pack the hood separately.

The hood for the 100-400 is a conventional twist-on plastic hood, although of a solid design rather than the petal-shaped design.

When I pack the lens in a bag, I just mount it reverse -- it doesn't take up much more space, especially since there is a tripod-mounting leg on the lens.

[malam]

Thanks again - much appreciated.

[1putts]

Some recent ones...

http://1putts.smugmug.com/photos/600825294_PirRN-XL.jpg


http://1putts.smugmug.com/photos/600843914_nTxAW-XL.jpg


http://1putts.smugmug.com/photos/600065560_wtYa5-XL.jpg


http://1putts.smugmug.com/photos/592965076_7nvHc-XL.jpg

[tonylong]

Nice, 1putts! Were these cropped, or were you actually that close? They look pretty crisp for the very close crops that I often end up with!

[neil_r]

From a wet morning in India

http://www.ambrosiabbs.com/gallery/photo/large/India_August_2009_NHR1045.jpg

[Andy Favors]

The hood for the 100-400 is a conventional twist-on plastic hood, although of a solid design rather than the petal-shaped design.

When I pack the lens in a bag, I just mount it reverse -- it doesn't take up much more space, especially since there is a tripod-mounting leg on the lens.

I have it on all the time. It's rarely off the camera for more than a few shots, so I don't really use the bag. If I do though, like was said, I just reverse it.

And nice shots 1putts, especially the kingfisher, very cool.

[peterbj7]

When I pack the lens in a bag, I just mount it reverse
I'm pretty sure that's how my lens came new - with the hood mounted in reverse on the lens.

[.mark.]

Here's my first contribution to this thread...

[phoenix54]

http://i696.photobucket.com/albums/vv330/celestron8/AIRSHOW/knife_edge.jpg

[Burnaby]

Interesting yin-yang: "motion vs motionless"...

[tonylong]

Great shot with the jets, Jim!

[1putts]

Thanks tony and ozz.

Nice, 1putts! Were these cropped, or were you actually that close? They look pretty crisp for the very close crops that I often end up with!

The kingfisher is cropped quite a bit, but the rest are minimal.

[Andy Favors]

kingfishers are quite difficult to get, I've yet to get a good shot.

[KenjiS]

Thanks tony and ozz.



The kingfisher is cropped quite a bit, but the rest are minimal.


What body was that?

[Burnaby]

Where were these taken 1putts? Reifel comes to mind...

[KenjiS]

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v170/scifiguy1012/Photography/IMG_1567-Edit.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v170/scifiguy1012/Photography/IMG_1593-Edit.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v170/scifiguy1012/Photography/IMG_1597-Edit.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v170/scifiguy1012/Photography/IMG_1642-Edit.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v170/scifiguy1012/Photography/IMG_1657-Edit.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v170/scifiguy1012/Photography/IMG_1671-Edit.jpg

100-400 is good in the rain :)

[cfibanez]

100-400 is good in the rain :)

Nice shots, kenji. Have you considered boosting up the light a bit?

[tdodd]

50D + 1-4 at 400mm, 1/800, f/8, 200 ISO. Slight crop, for composition. Otherwise no edits at all....

EDIT : 100% crop added.

[1putts]

What body was that?

Kenji, it's a 50D.

Where were these taken 1putts? Reifel comes to mind...

Hey Burnaby. These are all from Harbourside Park, North Vancouver. I was shooting the Ospreys and the Kingfisher decided to stop by.

[KenjiS]

Nice shots, kenji. Have you considered boosting up the light a bit?

If I push them a bit im afraid noise will be an issue, and I'd also lose the deep contrasted vibrant look they have most likely...

[Pete]

An example of the characteristic "weird bokeh" effect.

http://www.the-aperture.com/EE/photos/normal/20090804__PER0145.jpg

This effect occurs when shooting wide open with small artifacts close to the subject.

[Goincarcrazy]

I've noticed every once in a while you see a graininess in the view finder as well and I don't really know what causes this... but I've had this symptom pop up in a few pics from this lens...and only this lens.

[KenjiS]

I've noticed every once in a while you see a graininess in the view finder as well and I don't really know what causes this... but I've had this symptom pop up in a few pics from this lens...and only this lens.


Same...i cant figure out what causes it....

I remember on my first outing a few of the flower shots i did had really weird looking bokeh that distracted from the picture...

But then after using it a bit more, I found it only happens occasionally, I think it MIGHT have to do with a very busy background...

[huhging]

With 50D ...

[Burnaby]

Hey Burnaby. These are all from Harbourside Park, North Vancouver. I was shooting the Ospreys and the Kingfisher decided to stop by.
Thanks & great captures mate. I'll head over there soon...

[Burnaby]

An example of the characteristic "weird bokeh" effect.

This effect occurs when shooting wide open with small artifacts close to the subject.
Looks eerily like a Moire effect...

[pixelbasher]

Haven't posted in here for a while.

Another overcast day at the airfield....I always seem to pick the bleak days to go out! And on the way home dropped into a local animal reserve
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3457/3794520854_4c3517e522_o.jpg

[pixelbasher]

An example of the characteristic "weird bokeh" effect.

This effect occurs when shooting wide open with small artifacts close to the subject.


Funny this is popping up now.

I got a similar background yesterday for the first time.....or at least the first time I noticed it. It's not so obvious in this resized shot, but the original is much more pronounced. Still not as "there" as your example http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3421/3793708685_8dcd212e41_o.jpg

[larshkj]

Hi guys!

I got this lens today. Ordered it from B&H on tuesday. 3.5 days from New York to my doorstep here just outside Oslo in Norway. That is nothing short of amazing!

I've taken some test photos today. Nothing fancy at all. I must say that I'm very pleased about the IQ on my copy. It's very sharp wide open at 400mm. And the files sharpen up really well in PS. I shot the test image in RAW, converted in ACR. Sharpening set to 0.
The second image is sharpened in PS. Amount: 120%, Radius: 0.5 pixels (Smartsharpen). Oh by the way, these are 100% crops
My 70-200 f4L IS is sharper, but not a lot.

http://www.pbase.com/larshkj/image/115822989/original.jpg
http://www.pbase.com/larshkj/image/115823001/original.jpg

What do you guys think?

[Sydor25]

http://sydor25.com/Pictures/Fort_Worth_Primates-056.jpg

[funhouse69]

Here's a few from yesterday...

http://funhouse69.smugmug.com/photos/614361741_rDS3Z-L.jpg http://funhouse69.smugmug.com/photos/614359903_U2Sqs-L.jpg

http://funhouse69.smugmug.com/photos/614366835_6qHYY-L.jpg

[Mtn Breeze]

Hi everyone,

Here's a couple from yesterday, out of the 'Doghouse' ground blind, 50D.

Matt.


http://nznatureupclose.smugmug.com/photos/607613134_Hs3MJ-L.jpg


http://nznatureupclose.smugmug.com/photos/613904077_G5n7r-L.jpg

[photobitz]

I took my 100-400 to the zoo yesterday and ended up using it almost all day. Here's one that really tested the limits... late afternoon in heavy shade and through a thick glass viewing window.

1DmkIII, 100-400L @ 180mm IS on, ISO3200, f/5.0, 1/320 handheld. Obviously I did some noise removal but it tidied up pretty well.

385651

[cfibanez]

I am subscribed to this thread and watch the new entries everyday. They are truly amazing. I will have to get this lens soon. I've been holding off only because of the possibility of an update...

[Andy Favors]

I thought about holding off, but chose to just buy now, and sell it if there is an update. There will always be someone willing to buy it, for most of it's original value. Just buy, and enjoy it. You won't regret.

[_aravena]

Well I'm renting this bad boy again. I'm totally skipping over the Sigma mainly because the 100-400L performed so well for concerts last time, I'd rather not risk missing shots. Can't wait! I might take out for more as well.

[.mark.]

A few from today
385713
385712

[.mark.]

and two more
385714
385715

[neil_r]

handy for picking out cute looking traffic cops in India without them knowing :-)

http://www.ambrosiabbs.com/gallery/photo/medium/Pune_August_2009_NHR1219.jpg

[peterbj7]

When I had an A1 (actually I still have it but don't use it any more) my favourite lens was a Tamron SP 70-210 zoom. Now I have the 5D my favourite by far is the 100-400. I'm so glad I bought it at the same time as the 5D.

[Madweasel]

handy for picking out cute looking traffic cops in India without them knowing :-)

Scary girl - looks like she knows how to use that stick!

[foto_cbs]

Here's a European kingfisher taken a few days ago.
This is wide open at 400mm.

40D, ISO800, 1/160, f/5.6

[peterbj7]

Scary girl - looks like she knows how to use that stick!
But not how to tie her shoe laces.

[pixelbasher]

Went out and did some bike racing yesterday.

Who likes green! :lol:

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3576/3807408890_2a77da947b_o.jpg

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3580/3807364050_13f329dbdc_o.jpg

[tdodd]

Handheld at 560mm (728mm equivalent), 1/80, f/11, 100 ISO. EXIF is included...

(100% crop included. I think the IS works OK to 3 stops for normal magnification levels)

[photobitz]

Wow. I'm surprised you got a picture that sharp considering 560mm, handheld at only 1/80!!

[Burnaby]

Love that two option IS...

[tdodd]

Wow. I'm surprised you got a picture that sharp considering 560mm, handheld at only 1/80!!
This was only a practice shot. I was experimenting to see what sort of shutter speed I needed in order to get decent rotor blur.

Here's one at 400mm (520mm equivalent) and 1/125. I think that's about as fast as you can go if you want to capture sufficient rotor blur. This is approx 33% crop. IQ is a little down as I think heat haze has caused wobbly air. This was shot just after midday on a scorching day.

Unfortunately, due to rather poorly considered field layout, I was shooting into the light. I do wish the people that lay on these displays would think about the direction of the sun before arranging the layout of things. Sheesh! Of course, being England, I guess they plan on there being no light, just rain and wind.

When you can work the light on your favor then results do improve (second attachment).

[Lazuka]

an older one with 100-400L on a 40d.

[talcool1]

Hi everyone,

Here's a couple from yesterday, out of the 'Doghouse' ground blind, 50D.

Matt.


http://nznatureupclose.smugmug.com/photos/607613134_Hs3MJ-L.jpg


http://nznatureupclose.smugmug.com/photos/613904077_G5n7r-L.jpg
Beautiful shots...well done!

[aladyforty]

I am about $500 australian away from having the 100-400. I sold my 400 F5.6L due to versatility. Just how difficult is it to get used the push pull and is it really as much of a dust pump as stated in so many forums.

[pixelbasher]

It took me about half an hour to "get used to it" It was really a no brainer to go from twist to pump for me. I love how fast it is to go from 100 to 400. Great for fast stuff coming at you or going away from you.

As far as dust goes, I still can not see any dust inside the thing, but I have only had it for about 4 months but have literally taken thousands of photos with it in that time.
Of course the air has to come from somewhere when you pump it outward so I guess it depends on how dusty the environment is, and how filtered the lens is where it draws the air in, but for me, it's still clean as.

To put it in perspective, my 17-85IS has a lot more dust inside it, yet taken half the photos of the 100-400

[aladyforty]

It took me about half an hour to "get used to it" It was really a no brainer to go from twist to pump for me. I love how fast it is to go from 100 to 400. Great for fast stuff coming at you or going away from you.

As far as dust goes, I still can not see any dust inside the thing, but I have only had it for about 4 months but have literally taken thousands of photos with it in that time.
Of course the air has to come from somewhere when you pump it outward so I guess it depends on how dusty the environment is, and how filtered the lens is where it draws the air in, but for me, it's still clean as.

To put it in perspective, my 17-85IS has a lot more dust inside it, yet taken half the photos of the 100-400

thanks, I put a large deposit on the only one in the shop (they have been waiting for back orders and this is the only one that came in ) it came in today. I hope to pick it up in the next few days

[Burnaby]

Dust (particles) come and go and over time you become de-sensitized to them as they are infrequent, and insignificant. I had one a month after acquisition; it disappeared shortly thereafter. However, because of their location inside the lens, they do not appear on the images, unlike say dust on the sensor.

[tonylong]

I've never considered the "dust pump" thing to be a bother with this lens. My one challenge is to consistently squeeze the best possible results out, since I'm typically shooting this with a 1.4x TC and either hand-held or, at most, with a monopod. It really is a very capable and trouble-free lens.

[S.Horton]

the 100-400 is a workhorse. I will never sell my copy, unless Canon comes up with a 200-400 f/4 (smile)

http://midnightblue.smugmug.com/photos/172634817_sC7Aq-L.jpg

[Andy Favors]

Great shot. I'd sell mine for better IS. I always feel limited.

[Sydor25]

http://sydor25.com/Pictures/EPV0019.jpg

[aladyforty]

just an update I got the 100-400 lens today, the only one in our local store, they have had problems getting them in. I got it for around the same price as Id pay online so I'm happy. We have really atrocious weather today, hail wind and rain and pretty cold. This was taken between the showers and out the back door. It was very dull so i cant wait for better conditions for testing it out.

this was at full zoom, 400m ISO 640 and F5.6

All seems OK with the lens but I cant really hear the IS noise that I can on my 70-200 F4 IS. Is that normal?

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3480/3822623884_112fa97a92_o.jpg

[funhouse69]

I find the IS on my 100-400 is a lot quieter than my 70-200 f/2.8L IS so it seems like you are ok. Can you see it working when you are looking through the view finder? If so you are good :-)

[aladyforty]

I find the IS on my 100-400 is a lot quieter than my 70-200 f/2.8L IS so it seems like you are ok. Can you see it working when you are looking through the view finder? If so you are good :-)


not really, although I set the camera at iso 100 and took three with and three without IS and those with seemed better than without, but Ive always been pretty steady handholding so I'm not sure???

[aladyforty]

actually I think it must be working, I just tested it inside at ISO 100 on and off and I can get clear shots with it on but get shake without so it has to be working. Just that its so smooth and quiet compared to my new 70-200 F4 IS

overall the lens looks pretty good and is reasonably sharp wide open at full zoom

[photobitz]

I'm sure you'll enjoy it ;)
On mine the IS just makes a slight tick noise when it turns on and off and that's about it. The image lag in the viewfinder is usually quite noticable although maybe not so at the shorter end.

[pixelbasher]

I can't really hear it, but I can sure see it "grab" Just half press on something at 400, you'll see it lock on for sure.

[xMClass]

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2590/3824113033_d66bb33728.jpg

[Madweasel]

Lovely shot, MClassImages. Very beautiful.

[aladyforty]

some of my first shots

F8 ISO 640 at 310mm
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2570/3825450919_9f0c4bd3f0_o.jpg

F8 ISO 400 at 220mm
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2541/3827981467_f62e228bf2_o.jpg

F 5.6 ISO 640 at 400mm on a very dull rainy day
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3480/3822623884_112fa97a92_o.jpg

F6.3 ISO 400, this is a 100% crop at 400m so I think the lens is quite sharp

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3427/3822273885_839b0d985e_o.jpg

[KenjiS]

Now for some contributions from me! :)

been a while i know, compy issues and such...also havnt used my 100-400 much..

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v170/scifiguy1012/Photography/IMG_1956-Edit.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v170/scifiguy1012/Photography/IMG_2043-Edit.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v170/scifiguy1012/Photography/IMG_2016-Edit.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v170/scifiguy1012/Photography/IMG_2008-Edit.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v170/scifiguy1012/Photography/IMG_2004-Edit.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v170/scifiguy1012/Photography/IMG_1993-Edit.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v170/scifiguy1012/Photography/IMG_1968-Edit.jpg

[Andy Favors]

Took these two yesterday, they are full frame, just cropped the edges a bit, taken on a 40D..........

http://i27.tinypic.com/212j15i.jpg

http://i25.tinypic.com/2ij19i1.jpg

[Neilyb]

Couple from a recent trip to UK, 50d and 100-400, plus patience.

http://neilburton.smugmug.com/photos/624355248_cnvsR-XL.jpg

http://neilburton.smugmug.com/photos/624355226_kCcTM-O.jpg

[S.Horton]

This lens you can really play with, too, BECAUSE it has a push/pull zoom

http://midnightblue.smugmug.com/photos/186531979_sj6Cc-L.jpg

[Andy Favors]

That is interesting. I'll have to try that one next time I'm out.

[KenjiS]

This lens you can really play with, too, BECAUSE it has a push/pull zoom

http://midnightblue.smugmug.com/photos/186531979_sj6Cc-L.jpg

NICE! did you bolt it on a tripod to do that?

[cfibanez]

[QUOTE=S.Horton;8492532]This lens you can really play with, too, BECAUSE it has a push/pull zoom[QUOTE]

Nice!

We have a thread on slow shutter speeds with lots of zooming HERE (http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?p=8488277#post8488277).
Check it out!

[cfibanez]

This lens you can really play with, too, BECAUSE it has a push/pull zoom

Nice!

We have a thread dedicated to slow shutter speeds with lots of zooming HERE (http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?p=8488277#post8488277).
Check it out!

[Sydor25]

2 shot pano:

http://sydor25.com/Pictures/Seattle_Alki_Beach-971+981_6x18.jpg

[larshkj]

Shot an airshow yesterday with my new 100-400.
I'm very impressed with this lens. It's far better than I expected.
I got quite a few VERY sharp photos, and of course a lot of unsharp ones :) That's how it is with fast moving airplanes.

Shots can be seen here:
http://www.pbase.com/larshkj/rygge_airshow_2009

[rdcamero]

Very nice airplane photos.

[Burnaby]

Nice selection of aircrafts, but the subjects are sadly underexposed, resulting in too much backlighting. It appears the sun was on the wrong side of you, and this could have been corrected by increasing the exposure. The last pic clearly illustrates that. I realize though that your perspective may have been limited by the show's geographical orientation.

[larshkj]

Nice selection of aircrafts, but the subjects are sadly underexposed, resulting in too much backlighting. It appears the sun was on the wrong side of you, and this could have been corrected by increasing the exposure. The last pic clearly illustrates that. I realize though that your perspective may have been limited by the show's geographical orientation.

Hi.

Yes, the sun was straight in front of me "the whole day". In addition there was a very thin cloud layer in front of the sun most of the day, making the light very harsh. This made it very difficult to get the right exposure. All the images are shot in RAW, but still it was hard to get the right exposure without blowing out the background. Then again my PP skills are not that good.

BTW, the images don't look that underexposed on my screen...

Thanks for comments.

Lars

[Burnaby]

Hi.

Yes, the sun was straight in front of me "the whole day". In addition there was a very thin cloud layer in front of the sun most of the day, making the light very harsh. This made it very difficult to get the right exposure. All the images are shot in RAW, but still it was hard to get the right exposure without blowing out the background. Then again my PP skills are not that good.

BTW, the images don't look that underexposed on my screen...

Thanks for comments.

LarsOops Lars, I've just looked at your shots on a different computer (my laptop), and you're right, they aren't under-exposed. Goes to show you... :oops:

[tdodd]

100-400 AF speed (shot with my 50D at 400mm, 1/1000, f/7.1, 1600 ISO)....
http://lh5.ggpht.com/_4_R8TkwT74w/So1VQvz5dSI/AAAAAAABJnM/huL_wlv0tmc/s800/20090813_161737_1709_LR.jpg

100-400 IS performance (shot hand held with my 1D3 at 560mm with a Kenko 1.4X at 1/80, f/11, 100 ISO)....
http://lh5.ggpht.com/_4_R8TkwT74w/SoE4HUDiRII/AAAAAAABI7s/25SD1kVj1-0/s800/20090808_105220_0149_LR.jpg

100% crop (Ignore the blurring of the lettering, as I think that is just exhaust haze and different letters are blurred in different directions. If you look at the people and the majority of the chopper it is pretty crisp.)
http://lh5.ggpht.com/_4_R8TkwT74w/SoE4QV9iTbI/AAAAAAABI70/Nc79vhh4It8/s800/20090808_105220_0149_LR.jpg

100-400 sharpness (100% crop, shot with my 50D on a tripod, wide open at 560mm with a Kenko 1.4X, 1/400, f/8, 100 ISO)....
http://lh4.ggpht.com/_4_R8TkwT74w/SpFmtMfuHhI/AAAAAAABJsc/rPkg8nTG86I/s800/20090823_110911_2480_LR-3.jpg

I hear the 400/5.6L prime has faster AF and is sharper, but the 100-400 is quite a versatile lens :)

[stonyzmom]

http://img199.imageshack.us/img199/396/3of4.jpg

http://img10.imageshack.us/img10/171/osprey1of42.jpg

http://img13.imageshack.us/img13/8792/osprey4of42.jpg

http://img199.imageshack.us/img199/3537/hummers1of33.jpg

[digger58]

I have been saving like crazy to pick this one up, so it is now within my reach. A quick question though, I also own the 300mm f4 IS and I am debating hanging on to it or selling it when I buy the 100-400. Any thoughts?

[photobitz]

Sell it then buy a 300/2.8 IS? :lol:

On a serious note you'll probably never be taking both lenses out with you so you'll probably end up preferring one over the other. If the 300 ends up sitting in your bag unused you're probably better selling it. The only possible advantage the 300/4 IS would have is slightly better sharpness and I think half a stop at the 300mm mark.

[KenjiS]

Sell it then buy a 300/2.8 IS? :lol:

On a serious note you'll probably never be taking both lenses out with you so you'll probably end up preferring one over the other. If the 300 ends up sitting in your bag unused you're probably better selling it. The only possible advantage the 300/4 IS would have is slightly better sharpness and I think half a stop at the 300mm mark.

Also it focuses closer and its lighter/smaller..

[Andy Favors]

Handheld, 1/80s. No cropping. Turned out quite well I must say.

http://i31.tinypic.com/dws45c.jpg

[S.Horton]

NICE! did you bolt it on a tripod to do that?

No. Hand-held.


Nice!

We have a thread dedicated to slow shutter speeds with lots of zooming HERE (http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?p=8488277#post8488277).
Check it out!

I missed that! I have a collection of shots to post there! Thx!
:cool:

[Goincarcrazy]

African Weaver Bird (with a weird background, but I kinda like it...):

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2628/3872699491_51d04dda22_b.jpg

[JeffreyVB]

From this past Saturday, East Coast Surfing Championships in Va Beach, VA. Shot with my 1D Mk II. 1/1250 sec, f/8, ISO 200, AWB.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v175/onenictoy/ECSC_09/_V0I0119.jpg

[DragonSpeed]

Yup - nice sharp lens:

http://www.fotothing.com/photos/7ee/7ee26b8f083f71afb4c06906907cec1b_b35.jpg

[funhouse69]

Here's a few from tonight...

This one was taken with my 5DMK2

http://www.rockingpictures.com/photos/637979303_Ffkon-XL.jpg

This one was taken with my 40D

http://www.rockingpictures.com/photos/637917425_8C7Lx-XL.jpg

[cscheat]

funhouse, based on your experience, using the pump on 5DMKII will give you less REACH than the 40D right? but however i see not much difference between the 2 pic above

[funhouse69]

funhouse, based on your experience, using the pump on 5DMKII will give you less REACH than the 40D right? but however i see not much difference between the 2 pic above

I just updated the 5DMK2 pic in my original post to reflect the same exact crop so we are really comparing apples to apples.

So both of them are cropped the exact same in the two photos. There really isn't that much of a difference. I tried using my Kenko 1.4 on both of them and didn't get any keepers :-(

[Eagle]

I just updated the 5DMK2 pic in my original post to reflect the same exact crop so we are really comparing apples to apples.

So both of them are cropped the exact same in the two photos. There really isn't that much of a difference. I tried using my Kenko 1.4 on both of them and didn't get any keepers :-(
You should have left it 5DII uncropped like it was earlier. That way everyone could see the difference between the FF and the 1.6 crop FOV.

[funhouse69]

You should have left it 5DII uncropped like it was earlier. That way everyone could see the difference between the FF and the 1.6 crop FOV.

Good point - Instead of going back and changing it again here's a link to the pics in my gallery you can see the difference here pretty well.

http://www.rockingpictures.com/2009/Moon/09-02-2/9498570_brV39/1/637917413_3ScCJ

[m3pj]

This lens is fantastic on a 5D, 370mm/f5.6, cropped

http://www.smugmug.com/photos/638157717_BW5pS-XL.jpg

[aladyforty]

after being doubtful over the years about purchasing this lens as people said it was soft, I now love it. Mine is tack sharp

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3505/3883482153_a61900326e_o.jpg

[huhging]

I think mine is pretty sharp....

[nate1280]

From a local airshow on the 2nd, using a 1D3 + 100-400 combo.

The Canadian Harvard Association.
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2585/3884568323_18a1aaeedb_o.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/nate1280/3884568323/)

Centennial Flights: CF-18
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2643/3884578543_069a9f1385_o.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/nate1280/3884578543/)

[mleone]

My 100-400 and 5D Mark II had a zoo day.

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2661/3891019298_a10448c965_b.jpg

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2590/3890231797_a4dc9d1235_b.jpg

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2647/3891020854_b2fe8bbe38_b.jpg

[_aravena]

I just rented this bad boy again for a week. Can't wait to have some fun!

[The_Caper]

The dreaded and most deadly chipmunk. :)

http://i180.photobucket.com/albums/x72/The_Caper_67/LemoinePointe016.jpg

[cainey]

Just bought this lens last week.
Here's a quick sample from me.
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2427/3889785549_991ba9bcde_b.jpg

[bob_r]

This was taken with a 30D, the 100-400, a Sigma 1.4X TC, a 580EX and a Better Beamer flash extender. 1/250s f/8.0 at 560.0mm iso400
http://www.pbase.com/bob_r/image/115395462.jpg

[MaDProFF]

I just love this lens, it is just so universal, especially on a FF

[egordon99]

I love my 100-400L almost as much as I love prairie dogs :lol:

Wide open @ 400mm. Full frame resized, followed by a 100% crop. "Soft wide open my a*s" :lol:

(excuse the severe JPG compression on the crop :( )

391936

391937

[egordon99]

Backyard butterfly. 580EXII (in HSS) for fill.

391939

[Naturally Aspirated]

Yup - nice sharp lens:

http://www.fotothing.com/photos/7ee/7ee26b8f083f71afb4c06906907cec1b_b35.jpg

i see your prairie dog, and raise you 2 prairie dogs! :lol:

http://i29.photobucket.com/albums/c267/dontshootmek/IMG_7064copy.jpg



ps, i regretfully have to sell my copy. so if anyone wants it, its in the classifieds... :)

[egordon99]

^ LOL

Sorry you have to sell your 100-400 :(

I could probably spend an hour shooting prairie dogs, they're pretty much the only critters at our local zoo that do anything.

[Naturally Aspirated]

^ LOL

Sorry you have to sell your 100-400 :(

I could probably spend an hour shooting prairie dogs, they're pretty much the only critters at our local zoo that do anything.

if there's one thing oklahoma has plenty of, its prairie dogs... :lol:

oh and thats also one of the most "robust" prairie dogs ive ever seen!:lol:

[DragonSpeed]

i see your prairie dog, and raise you 2 prairie dogs! :lol:

ps, i regretfully have to sell my copy. so if anyone wants it, its in the classifieds... :)
My Columbian Ground squirrel feels like a greyhound being compared to a "mutt" :rolleyes: People LOVE these guys. Not so much the prairie dogs ;)

[DragonSpeed]

oh and thats also one of the most "robust" prairie dogs ive ever seen!:lol:
Yeah - EG... that's one big "booty" on that 'dog.

[RolyRatman]

First time out with this lens, think it will take a bit of time to get used to it but loving it so far.

Pics taken with the 350D but now have a 50D as well, so I got a new camera and lens to learn...:D

http://i137.photobucket.com/albums/q234/rolyratman/Sealane%20Aug%2009/IMG_0149.jpg

http://i137.photobucket.com/albums/q234/rolyratman/Sealane%20Aug%2009/IMG_0013.jpg

http://i137.photobucket.com/albums/q234/rolyratman/Sealane%20Aug%2009/IMG_0121.jpg

http://i137.photobucket.com/albums/q234/rolyratman/Sealane%20Aug%2009/IMG_0017.jpg

http://i137.photobucket.com/albums/q234/rolyratman/Sealane%20Aug%2009/IMG_0006.jpg

http://i137.photobucket.com/albums/q234/rolyratman/Sealane%20Aug%2009/IMG_0002.jpg

[_aravena]

Can't wait, rental should be coming in tomorrow!

[Goincarcrazy]

This pic may already be in here somewhere, but I just wanted to post it as I noticed this has that weird background effect thing, but more-so, that effect covers the entire picture. This was shot at ISO 200 and is non-cropped from the original frame (just reduced via flickr). It looks very much like noise, but there is no reason an ISO 200 pic should look like this. Taken with an XSi

I will restate, that it might just be certain lighting conditions that the lens doesn't like or who knows? Maybe it was the camera. I can't recall having this problem with my 50D.

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3306/3226269129_f1c8bf053f_b.jpg

[_aravena]

I don't see noise. Interesting effect though. I've seen it before, can't recall the explanation. Was some of the tree/branch moving?

[Goincarcrazy]

well it was just somewhat of a slow shutter speed while the branch was moving, yes, but what I'm pointing out is the grainy look to the pic. It's not the ISO that did it, but I have no idea what else could have caused it other than the "weird background" this lens sometimes throws into pics.

[_aravena]

I don't see much grain...

[tonylong]

Did you have to up the exposure in post processing?

[Goincarcrazy]

nope. That's another thing, very minimally PPed. 'Tis a mystery.