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

[NovusPhoto]

Lol. No way. I'm HOME on the Island, I will never leave it, other than travel, etc. This place is better than anywhere I've ever lived. :D Calgary is a nice place to visit, but.. Wouldn't want to live there. :D

[tonylong]

Well, I put in a Facebook request. Geno, get the boat ready:)!

[NovusPhoto]

Well, I put in a Facebook request. Geno, get the boat ready:)!

Accepted!

Feel free (everyone) to promote the group! It doesn't have to be EXCLUSIVELY Vancouver and area members. It'd be great if POTN folks and photographers in general signed up, and real world photo excursions could take place on a regular basis. :)

[tonyniev]

The evening star, planet Venus tonight a quick shot, I need a sturdier tripod as the 100- 400 L is heavy for the cheapo tripod I used, because it moved:


http://tonyniev.smugmug.com/Astronomy/Astrophotos/IMG3165/812361141_X7nLM-M.jpg

[fogboundturtle]

Yeah, I gotta catch Venus this weekend. I am trying to close the my solar system checklist, Venus, Mercury and Pluto is what I left. You gotta connect that 5D to you C9.25 Tony.

[tonyniev]

yup, I should be using the 9.25" sct as the Orion 80 mm is only 400 mm too..I am waiting for the summer milky way too and will drive up to Bryce, one of the darker skies in the usa.

[Owl_79]

Tiny bird. 400mm / 5.6 / ISO400, 50% crop.

http://tonskulus.kuvat.fi/kuvat/Lintuja/sinitiainen10.jpg/_smaller.jpg

bigger image can be found here:
http://tonskulus.kuvat.fi/kuvat/Lintuja/sinitiainen10.jpg/full

[-g-]

You need a passport to get into Canada if I recall from my trip back in the summer.

Found this explanation online:

"Visitors from any country other than the U.S. have always needed a passport to enter Canada. On the other hand, because of a friendly border crossing agreement between Canada and the United States, Canada Border Services did not require U.S. citizens to present a passport to enter Canada. This friendly border crossing agreement used to be mutual; however, now the WHTI requires that U.S. citizens have a passport to return home. In this way, passport requirements for Canada and U.S. borders are different on paper, but, are in practice, the same. Canada will not allow a U.S. citizen into the country who does not have the proper documentation to return home."

[aviator.4.life]

I found this too..."As of June 1, 2009, everyone from every country arriving in Canada by air, land and sea has needed a passport or equivalent travel document."

Idk if the US/Canada relation changed as you mentioned.

[chomish]

Heres two from me.

[photobitz]

Tiny bird. 400mm / 5.6 / ISO400, 50% crop.

bigger image can be found here:
http://tonskulus.kuvat.fi/kuvat/Lintuja/sinitiainen10.jpg/full

Great shot! Cute bird too :)

[NovusPhoto]

Finally, some decent, sunny weather! It was pretty bright and clear, and about 14 degrees C, but, it was a COLD wind out of the north. All shots were handheld, no tripod, no monopod. I am VERY impressed with this lens so far. I'm pretty sure I got a nice sharp copy. :)


1: My 6 year old daughter, who within the first 30 minutes of being on a 2 wheeler, mastered it.

http://novusphotography.ca/imgs2/bike.jpg

2: A DeHavilland Beaver, docked at the harbor seaport.

http://novusphotography.ca/imgs2/beaver.jpg

3: Some sort of Canadian Military Cutter. The "Wolf", I believe. A senior living condo in the background.

http://novusphotography.ca/imgs2/downtown.jpg

4: Shot as the plane passed overhead and was about a quarter of a mile up.

http://novusphotography.ca/imgs2/plane.jpg

5: A single turbo Otter, taking off and bound for Downtown Vancouver.

http://novusphotography.ca/imgs2/otter2jpg

6: Same company, same type of plane, different paint scheme.

http://novusphotography.ca/imgs2/turbo.jpg

The following two shots were NOT from today, but, I found them in a folder and thought they were kinda interesting. They WERE shot on my 5D2 though.

7: Filming on an episode of "Human Target" in Downtown Vancouver. The shot is from the episode "Run", Season 1, episode 5.

http://novusphotography.ca/imgs2/movie.jpg

[NovusPhoto]

*added this image in a separate post, because apparently, POTN forum code is mildly retarded and cannot count. I got the "you are posting 8 images and may only post 9" error message - despite their being ONLY 8 image tags. :/ And now, 7 above, one below.

8: Beware of low-flying aircraft!!

http://novusphotography.ca/imgs2/otter.jpg

[FlyingPhotog]

Smilies count as images...

[photobitz]

8: Beware of low-flying aircraft!!



Yep, that's low. Is that common?

I have a similar pic of a Lockheed Neptune passing over traffic... granted there was a little more headroom ;)

[NovusPhoto]

Yep, that's low. Is that common?

I have a similar pic of a Lockheed Neptune passing over traffic... granted there was a little more headroom ;)

Yeah, it's REALLY regular. There's an airstrip in Abbotsford BC that is used by the Abbotsford Skydive Center. The end of the airstrip is RIGHT at the edge of the road, and they have traffic control that stops traffic and allows the planes to take off.

Here's a video of the same airplane in the picture, but from right on the edge of the road, literally INCHES over my head. Keeping in mind I'm 7'1", look at the photo and guess how far from my head that Twin Otter is from my skull. :D

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kOODyF-ly2I

[photobitz]

Ha! Nice :)

[aviator.4.life]

I wonder if those guys get paid to hold up the stop signs...

[AbPho]

I purchased the 100-400 just over a month ago now. It's been glued to the body pretty much for the entire time. Switched out for a macro every now and then. I even bought a sling pack just for the 100-400. :D Great lens.

Overall findings:
It takes great pictures then there is a lot of great light. :D Slightly overcast, high noon, evenings, etc are bad. Even with IS and static subjects. I just can't get a sharp image.

I am still fighting to capture small subjects, like birds. Does that make any sense? Not sharp enough for me to be happy with. Larger subjects, like people and dogs, yield better results. (Zoo trip still pending. That will be the real test for me).

Anyways, here are some I really like. Great colour in these. Detail level excellent.

1) 400mm
http://i155.photobucket.com/albums/s320/xboxweasel/max01.jpg

2) 200mm
http://i155.photobucket.com/albums/s320/xboxweasel/IMG_1714-SunsetTone0.jpg

[Jred]

I have many of the same concerns on mine. On static objects in live view and manual focus they are not sharp. Thinking about sending it in for service...has anyone else had this experience?:cry:

[mattia]

A couple of pics from my first serious outing (3 days in Kruger) with the 100-400. Bit of a learning curve to shooting with it, and shooting wildlife in general, but I'm pretty pleased with the results. All shots with a 5DII.

Fruit bats:
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4044/4441783298_c3dcbd848b_b.jpg
http://www.flickr.com/photos/mattia_v/4441783298/

Elephant close-up:
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4021/4441719802_b44aa5139e_b.jpg
http://www.flickr.com/photos/mattia_v/4441719802/

[Jred]

Nice shots.

[NovusPhoto]

http://novusphotography.ca/imgs2/soccer.jpg

[krb]

Really does make a nice walkaround lens.
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2804/4455283709_6219c9fc21.jpg
http://www.flickr.com/photos/kennethrberry/4455283709/sizes/o/

[Owl_79]

Another pixelpeep shot - 400mm f/5.6, ISO400, EOS450D/XSi

http://tonskulus.kuvat.fi/kuvat/sekalaiset/tinttitesti1.jpg/_big.jpg

100% crop:
http://tonskulus.kuvat.fi/kuvat/sekalaiset/tinttitestikrop.jpg/_big.jpg

[AbPho]

Another pixelpeep shot - 400mm f/5.6, ISO400, EOS450D/XSi
This is the 100-400mm sample photo archive. :D And if you managed that with the 100-400 I am jealous. I have never gotten sharpen like that. Even my 400mm f/5.6 prime has trouble.

[Owl_79]

This is the 100-400mm sample photo archive. :D And if you managed that with the 100-400 I am jealous. I have never gotten sharpen like that. Even my 400mm f/5.6 prime has trouble.

I just wrote it "400 5.6", meaning those settings I used for that photo. 100-400L @ 400mm and f/5.6 aperture :)

That quality should be no problem for real 400 / 5.6L prime!

[Candersson]

Beautiful shots!
What was the actual distance (in meters) to the bird?

[Owl_79]

Beautiful shots!
What was the actual distance (in meters) to the bird?

I think it was few meters, maybe 3-4 (9-12 feet).

some more:
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_Aa1c1w0Twzc/S6ka05DJjmI/AAAAAAAAAjc/kYrNbgMEs40/s1600/stiainen10.jpg

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_Aa1c1w0Twzc/S6kaxMsz69I/AAAAAAAAAjU/jwZfvsFncxg/s1600/htiainen10.jpg

[Madweasel]

I have many of the same concerns on mine. On static objects in live view and manual focus they are not sharp. Thinking about sending it in for service...has anyone else had this experience?:cry:
If you have it on a tripod and do those things, there's no reason a properly-performing lens would not be sharp. If you are doing it correctly and the image is not sharp, then I'd say the lens is faulty. I get excellent results from mine, and not only in bright light.

[AbPho]

This is a 100% crop of my sharpest image with the 100-400mm. Distance from me to object is more that 10 feet.

400mm f8.0 1/320sec with IS on ISO200 RAW no post processing
http://i155.photobucket.com/albums/s320/xboxweasel/chickadee.jpg

This is what I get 99% of the time.
400mm f/7.1 1/400sec IS on ISO1600 RAW slight post processing. Image was slightly over exposed. I would have to guess as distance greater than 30 feet.
http://i155.photobucket.com/albums/s320/xboxweasel/downy.jpg

[CO Mac]

A tripod is not necessary as long as your shutter speed is high enough. I handhold my 400mm 5.6 prime all the time. I just make sure that my shutter speed is at least 1/1000. When the light starts to go down and also my shutter speed then I bust out a monopod and a better beamer.

If you have it on a tripod and do those things, there's no reason a properly-performing lens would not be sharp. If you are doing it correctly and the image is not sharp, then I'd say the lens is faulty. I get excellent results from mine, and not only in bright light.

[CO Mac]

You definitely will need to get closer to those small birds in order to get sharp images. The softness of those images is more than likely a function of distance. This is also an issue I'm battling with since I get a little impatient trying to sneak my way up to birds, or wait for them to come within a decent distance.

This is a 100% crop of my sharpest image with the 100-400mm. Distance from me to object is more that 10 feet.

400mm f8.0 1/320sec with IS on ISO200 RAW no post processing
http://i155.photobucket.com/albums/s320/xboxweasel/chickadee.jpg

This is what I get 99% of the time.
400mm f/7.1 1/400sec IS on ISO1600 RAW slight post processing. Image was slightly over exposed. I would have to guess as distance greater than 30 feet.
http://i155.photobucket.com/albums/s320/xboxweasel/downy.jpg

[tonylong]

XBox, I'd certainly agree that those shots are soft. Why they are that way is the question -- try doing the "standard test" of setting up on a tripod, using mirror lockup and either a cable release or the self timer and running through several aperture and focal length combinations. You don't say whether you are shooting hand-held so camera/lens shake could be an issue. But if you can't get better than this with the tripod setup then your lens has problems (unless it is switched to MF:))!

[AbPho]

You definitely will need to get closer to those small birds in order to get sharp images. The softness of those images is more than likely a function of distance. This is also an issue I'm battling with since I get a little impatient trying to sneak my way up to birds, or wait for them to come within a decent distance.
That is very interesting. I have noticed that too. Larger subjects photograph much sharper. Or is it because one won't zoom in as much when reviewing those images on the computer? On closer scrutiny all my pictures with the 100-400mm look soft.

I do not think it is a focus issue.

Kind of a bummer. :cry:

[AbPho]

...using mirror lockup and either a cable release or the self timer and running through several aperture and focal length combinations....

Those tests are all great but when I am walking around they are meaningless. Unless I can get great practical results I might as well sell it again.

I do not use a tripod and mirror lockup with a remote trigger unless I am shooting the moon. The rest of the time it is hand held.

I will try the test and see what the results are. I will post them here.

Any idea if this is something that can be "fixed" by sending it in for service? It was an expensive purchase. I might be able to get most of that back selling it. Getting the lens services is only more money out of my pocket.

Thanks for the help.

[Madweasel]

Just one quick question XboxWeasel: are you using a filter? If so, try it without. I have found the 100-400 to be very fussy with filters.

[Madweasel]

A tripod is not necessary as long as your shutter speed is high enough. I handhold my 400mm 5.6 prime all the time. I just make sure that my shutter speed is at least 1/1000. When the light starts to go down and also my shutter speed then I bust out a monopod and a better beamer.
I meant it in the context of stringent sharpness testing. I use mine handheld almost all the time.

[AbPho]

I just put a UV filter on. I tend not to carry the hood with me. The bag I use is a tight fit and I do not want to damage the hood when I insert/remove the camera. Hence the filter to protect the glass from shrubs, sticks, fingers, noses, etc while walking around.

But that filter was put on after the images that I uploaded.

Cool. Just realized you are a weasel too. Welcome to the pack.

[tonylong]

Those tests are all great but when I am walking around they are meaningless. Unless I can get great practical results I might as well sell it again.

I do not use a tripod and mirror lockup with a remote trigger unless I am shooting the moon. The rest of the time it is hand held.

I will try the test and see what the results are. I will post them here.

Any idea if this is something that can be "fixed" by sending it in for service? It was an expensive purchase. I might be able to get most of that back selling it. Getting the lens services is only more money out of my pocket.

Thanks for the help.

The point here is that if you get sharp images using the tripod test, then you have eliminated the variable of hand-held technique. The shots you showed are soft -- I typically shoot with the 1.4x TC with this lens and I would consider those shots rejects. But shooting hand-held in less-than-optimal lighting certainly is challenging. Some portion of my shots are certainly rejected because even with IS sometimes the shutter speeds are just slow. I often use a monopod when I'm shooting, which helps a lot but even then isn't as good as a tripod, but I don't like to carry a tripod when I'm out trekking after birds and such.

There is a shot and a close crop taken with that combo (560mm, 1/160, f/11, ISO 400) -- I used a monopod and a Better Beamer flash extender:

http://www.pbase.com/tonylong/image/120484272/original.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/tonylong/image/120484458/original.jpg

[Tom Reichner]

No ducks, I promise.

Why not - it would be awesome to see the traditional duck shot for your first 100-400 post!

[NovusPhoto]

Why not - it would be awesome to see the traditional duck shot for your first 100-400 post!

Lol. Alright - as you wish:

http://novusphotography.ca/imgs2/duck2.jpg

[peterbj7]

http://www.pbase.com/tonylong/image/120484272/original.jpg

That bird looks strangely two-dimensional, almost like a cardboard cutout. Maybe an effect of the flash.

[tonylong]

That bird looks strangely two-dimensional, almost like a cardboard cutout. Maybe an effect of the flash.

Probably so. I hadn't worked with the Better Beamer so I'm not sure what optimal settings are, but it sure does a nice job of lighting up the critters:)!

[photobitz]

You definitely will need to get closer to those small birds in order to get sharp images. The softness of those images is more than likely a function of distance. This is also an issue I'm battling with since I get a little impatient trying to sneak my way up to birds, or wait for them to come within a decent distance.

I would have to agree. That said those shots still look a little fuzzy even for 100% crops. Might I suggest using a faster shutter speed? You generally want to keep it higher than the focal length ie. faster than 1/400s for 400mm especially if you have only just started using it. I found that when I picked mine up. It's a fairly heavy piece of kit which can be difficult to keep stable if you aren't used to it. Now that I've been using mine for a little while I can usually get away with less than 1/250s at 400mm but I definitely opt for the fastest possible shutter if the conditions allow it.

Another suggestion... when you test it, try a fast shutter in bright light with IS OFF. If the lens is at fault it's quite possibly an issue with the IS unit.

[Owl_79]

And when shooting birds at the distance of few meters, there should be noted that DOF is very narrow. At 400mm / f5.6, its only 10-15mm. Yesterday when I was there shooting those tiny birds, I took maybe 50 photos. Only 5-10 was razor sharp, 10 was acceptable and rest 30 was too soft. Caused by incorrect focusing (focus should be on eye of the target) and yes and/or too long shutterspeed (1/1000 isn't always enough).

I think its more likely that getting soft images means you have wrong technique. Because yes, I get some similar soft images too, but sometimes this 100-400L really gives me razor sharp images even wide open. It just requires care (and some luck)!

[AbPho]

...Might I suggest using a faster shutter speed? You generally want to keep it higher than the focal length ie. faster than 1/400s for 400mm...It's a fairly heavy piece of kit...I definitely opt for the fastest possible shutter if the conditions allow it.

Another suggestion... when you test it, try a fast shutter in bright light with IS OFF. If the lens is at fault it's quite possibly an issue with the IS unit.I agree with what you are saying. The weight is not an issue for me. I have used a 400mm prime hand help in the past with shutter speeds of 1/250 sec without IS. So, that should not be a problem either.

One this I was trying today was turning IS off. Not 100% conclusive but it seems that more of my shots without IS turn out sharper. I will have to play with this some more. This weekend I am going to the zoo (hence the purchase of the 100-400 in the first place). After that I can send it in for calibration (if that is even possible). I have the next 2 days to try as many things out as possibly to ensure that I get sharp pictures.

And when shooting birds at the distance of few meters, there should be noted that DOF is very narrow. At 400mm / f5.6, its only 10-15mm.I knew it was thin, but not that thin.

I hope it only comes down to technique. The previous owner swore by how sharp the lens was. He mentioned it comes close to the 400 prime. He once pulled the ad because he could not part with it.

Thanks for all the great help people. I will be back. Hopefully with razor sharp "careful or you'll get cut" pictures. :D

Cheers!!!

[Hendrik C.]

http://i70.photobucket.com/albums/i97/cyriopagopus/IMG_2975.jpg

[Owl_79]

Hendrik C: That is one awesome high quality shot there!

btw, sometimes I get sharper images using 5.6 compared to f/8. That is something like 1/400s vs. 1/800s. Sometimes that 1/400s is just not enough at 400mm handheld. Even imagestabilizer cant do miracles. My sharpest pictures were taken using tripod without IS or very short shutterspeed, close to 1/1000s. Its not just "point and shoot", it requires lots of care and some practice.

So what we learn?
This lens (good copy?) is capable for sharp enough images but are you?:)

[DragonSpeed]

Big - A lioness from Tanzania:
http://www.fotothing.com/photos/fc2/fc25bdff25f97d81cb0caeacc0537e1a_140.jpg

Small - Oregon Junco in my backyard:
http://www.fotothing.com/photos/532/532d5cfe18d8b51d1317cb66ad54b50a_c83.jpg

[photobitz]

One this I was trying today was turning IS off. Not 100% conclusive but it seems that more of my shots without IS turn out sharper. I will have to play with this some more. This weekend I am going to the zoo (hence the purchase of the 100-400 in the first place). After that I can send it in for calibration (if that is even possible). I have the next 2 days to try as many things out as possibly to ensure that I get sharp pictures.


Actually I have noticed having IS on will occasionally blur images if I manage to hold the camera still enough by leaning against something. It definitely blurs if you use IS when tripod mounted and I suspect it's a similar thing. The IS will only help to correct camera movements so if you do a better job at keeping the camera still than the IS does keeping the image still then just turn it off.

I only resort to IS when I'm photographing my kids running around, tracking planes or flying birds (but this is generally in Mode2 assuming they are travelling left-right) or when I'm putting shutter speeds way down to get motion blur on propelers etc.

[peterbj7]

Hand holding a 400mm lens requires correct technique. Older photographers who were used to hand holding long lenses before the days of image stabilisation may well have this technique, many younger ones (in my experience) do not. I regularly take photos with my 100-400 at 400 with a shutter speed of 100th or less, and from a technical point of view most are keepers. How about this one, taken at focal length of 400 with shutter speed of 1/30th sec?

http://i219.photobucket.com/albums/cc230/peterbj7/Ximg_3708sm-1.jpg (http://s219.photobucket.com/albums/cc230/peterbj7/?action=view&current=Ximg_3708sm-1.jpg)

[AbPho]

Hendrik C. and DragonSpeed, those are very nice lion pictures. Quality is excellent.

Peterbj7 great job at 1/30 second. I take it you are one of those "older" photographers.

I went for a walk yesterday and took a few images. I purposely turned IS off. I believe that IS is giving me the soft images. There was a HUGE difference in sharpness. I also took a few of the moon last night. On the preview they look very sharp. I will post some pictures soon.

Thanks.

[DragonSpeed]

Hendrik C. and DragonSpeed, those are very nice lion pictures. Quality is excellent.

Peterbj7 great job at 1/30 second. I take it you are one of those "older" photographers.

I went for a walk yesterday and took a few images. I purposely turned IS off. I believe that IS is giving me the soft images. There was a HUGE difference in sharpness. I also took a few of the moon last night. On the preview they look very sharp. I will post some pictures soon.

Thanks.
Don't forget - IS takes a 1/4-1/2 sec to stabilise. You can't just focus and shoot.

[peterbj7]

I take it you are one of those "older" photographers

Yes, though far from one of the most capable! Between the ages of 12-20 I only used a Zeiss Contina viewfinder camera, which didn't offer any assistance to taking a photo whatsoever other than high quality lens and shutter. I learned a lot of basics then. I got my first SLR when the Canon A1 came out in 79/80 and bought a Tamron SP 70-210 at the same time. A wonderful lens which gave superb results, and unlike the Dust Pump had a built in macro all the way down to 1:1 (not switchable, just continuous focussing). If that would only work with the EOS system I'd still be using it now.

[AbPho]

Don't forget - IS takes a 1/4-1/2 sec to stabilise. You can't just focus and shoot.I know. I can see that.

Here are some samples of me using the 1-4c without the IS.

1) 135mm 1/400sec f/5.6 ISO200 handheld IS=off. No post processing. Just a 100% crop. Very nice.
http://i155.photobucket.com/albums/s320/xboxweasel/1-4cnonISsample01.jpg

2) 400mm 1/250sec f/5.6 ISO200 tripod mount with mirror lock, cable release, and manual focus via live view. Highpass filter blended in with about 50% opacity for some sharpening. Not as sharp as an image captured with a 400 prime.
http://i155.photobucket.com/albums/s320/xboxweasel/1-4cnonISsample02.jpg

Comments?

Personally, I find these to be a huge improvement. I only expect to get better images from here on it. Question then is, should I send it in for service. Can the softness caused by the IS being on be corrected? Any thoughts?

[aviator.4.life]

Here's one of my first pics with my newly acquired lens, UX for $1230 isn't bad eh?
Anyways this is a rare heavy coming into PIT (A332) from France. It was raining, this isn't the greatest picture but it is what it is.

http://i154.photobucket.com/albums/s278/mini_fanatic/IMG_8257.jpg

[Kronie]

Just got mine. This is my first shot. 100% crop with a 1.4TC. I will take it out tomorrow and make sure everything is working like it should....

http://i586.photobucket.com/albums/ss304/akronie/moon2.jpg?t=1269652071

[photobitz]

I know. I can see that.

Here are some samples of me using the 1-4c without the IS.

1) 135mm 1/400sec f/5.6 ISO200 handheld IS=off. No post processing. Just a 100% crop. Very nice.


2) 400mm 1/250sec f/5.6 ISO200 tripod mount with mirror lock, cable release, and manual focus via live view. Highpass filter blended in with about 50% opacity for some sharpening. Not as sharp as an image captured with a 400 prime.

Comments?

Personally, I find these to be a huge improvement. I only expect to get better images from here on it. Question then is, should I send it in for service. Can the softness caused by the IS being on be corrected? Any thoughts?

Yep, I'd get it serviced making specific mention of the photos being blurry with IS turned on.

[Hendrik C.]

Despite the really bad weather I got this shot today:

http://i70.photobucket.com/albums/i97/cyriopagopus/IMG_9704.jpg

[blackzzz]

Despite the really bad weather I got this shot today:

http://i70.photobucket.com/albums/i97/cyriopagopus/IMG_9704.jpg

Great, great catch Hendick.

[PrimeGlass]

Despite the really bad weather I got this shot today:

http://i70.photobucket.com/albums/i97/cyriopagopus/IMG_9704.jpg

Wow! I never get shots like this at the zoo. Very nice.

[Hendrik C.]

Thanks for your kind comments!

Another shot...

http://i70.photobucket.com/albums/i97/cyriopagopus/IMG_9643_2.jpg

[Hendrik C.]

Now one special, pretty old shot... nearly 100% crop, please don't hit me for the IQ... in the wild:

http://i70.photobucket.com/albums/i97/cyriopagopus/IMG_2939.jpg

[Sydor25]

http://sydor25.com/Pictures/Fort_Worth_Tigers-761.jpg

[quattroatl]

Now one special, pretty old shot... nearly 100% crop, please don't hit me for the IQ... in the wild:




This shot is in the wild!

If so, then wow!

[AbPho]

Finally got to the zoo. I took tons of pictures with the 100-400. I am in the process of copying them over to the mac. Then it is crunch time. It looks like a got some great shots while previewing them on the camera.

This trip was the test. If I get a lot of keepers then I will keep the lens and get it serviced to correct the problem with the IS.

Keep posted for pictures. Coming soon.

By the way, Hendrik C., great pictures. Zoos are great.

[aridan]

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4049/4468483664_40fab776eb_o.jpg

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2740/4468483748_db3b29cc1f_o.jpg

[Kronie]

OK. Did a little shooting today just to test front/back focus and get a feel for the lens. Seems fine to me! Not sharp like my 70-200 but definitely good enough. Sorry no ducks...but here is a rabbit!

http://i586.photobucket.com/albums/ss304/akronie/bunny.jpg?t=1269734363

100mm:
http://i586.photobucket.com/albums/ss304/akronie/100.jpg?t=1269734704

400mm:
http://i586.photobucket.com/albums/ss304/akronie/400.jpg?t=1269734748

No front/back focus:
http://i586.photobucket.com/albums/ss304/akronie/16.jpg?t=1269734787

Kind of pushing it here.....1/20TH!!!.....
http://i586.photobucket.com/albums/ss304/akronie/hank.jpg?t=1269734840

[AbPho]

Here are some from Saturday's Zoo trip.

1) Snow Leopard shot through a fence. 400mm 1/400sec f/8 ISO400 IS off.
http://i155.photobucket.com/albums/s320/xboxweasel/IMG_2592---Snow-Leopard.jpg

2) Crop of #1.
http://i155.photobucket.com/albums/s320/xboxweasel/IMG_2592---Snow-Leopard-crop.jpg

3) African Elephant. 400mm 1/400sec f/8 ISO200 IS off.
http://i155.photobucket.com/albums/s320/xboxweasel/IMG_3065---Elephant.jpg

4) Red Panda. 235mm 1/200sec f/6.3 ISO200 IS off.
http://i155.photobucket.com/albums/s320/xboxweasel/IMG_2519---Red-Panda.jpg


What do you think? Much better with IS off. Day was sunny enough to allow it. Had to bump ISO to capture some pictures.

[Sydor25]

http://sydor25.com/Pictures/Fort_Worth_Cats-050.jpg


http://sydor25.com/Pictures/Fort_Worth_Cats-010.jpg

[Jred]

Here's four shots with the dust pump from a track day in Houston, Yesterday.



http://i413.photobucket.com/albums/pp220/jgredford/Track%20Days/MotardTrackDay2010-03-27251.jpg


http://i413.photobucket.com/albums/pp220/jgredford/Track%20Days/MotardTrackDay2010-03-27315.jpg


http://i413.photobucket.com/albums/pp220/jgredford/Track%20Days/MotardTrackDay2010-03-27406.jpg


http://i413.photobucket.com/albums/pp220/jgredford/Track%20Days/MotardTrackDay2010-03-2742.jpg

[photobitz]

This shot is in the wild!

If so, then wow!

Agreed! If that were my shot it would be all blurry from me making a run for it in the opposite direction :lol:

[PrimeGlass]

This is how new little Blue Angels are made


Shot with a 1.4x TC
http://i42.tinypic.com/iee58y.jpg

[Keesbeest]

40D, 100-400mm, ISO 200, F/5.6, 1/80

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2687/4474381734_6d864306d9_o.jpg

40D, 100-400mm, ISO 400, F/5.6, 1/250

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4061/4474381494_a742e44eb1_o.jpg

40D, 100-400mm, ISO 400, F/5.0, 1/200

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2691/4474382074_abc3da0139_o.jpg

[rishu_pepper]

I recently purchased a 100-400 on the used market. The lens is fine and all, picture quality etc.

The push/pull zooming is really tight though, takes a lot of effort to zoom, even on the "Smooth" setting. Is there anything I can do about it, or is it normal?

[aviator.4.life]

It shouldn't be tight at all. If you hold it vertically it should be able to fall to it's contracted position.
Take it to a local camera shop to see what they think.

[rishu_pepper]

It shouldn't be tight at all. If you hold it vertically it should be able to fall to it's contracted position.
Take it to a local camera shop to see what they think.

Thanks. Hopefully I can get this issue resolved.

EDIT: Oh never mind... silly me didn't know there was another step to turning the ring... boy is my face red. :oops:

[photobitz]

Another step? :confused:

[aviator.4.life]

I bet you were turning the focus ring ;)

[rishu_pepper]

You bet right... just too excited with my first L, is all... ;)

The lens came with a Hoya Super HMC pro1 UV filter. Shoot with it or not? (I'm a eternal hood user, BTW)

[photobitz]

Ah... I see :lol:

The HMC filters are pretty darn good (assuming it's genuine). I also always use the hood when shooting but since I store the lens in my bag attached to the camera facing downward with the hood reversed, I decided it would be better to have a filter take any damage rather than the front of the lens. ie. without a filter, if the cap comes off it's going to scratch the crap out of the front element like that.

[peterbj7]

If it's a bag designed for carrying a camera there shouldn't be any damage. My (backpack) bag will carry my 5D with any of my 4 lenses attached and hanging vertically, with the other lenses stored in the bag. The objective ends of the lens are not in contact with anything, as the body is fully supported.

A friend makes a point of carrying and storing his Nikon with his $1600 zoom lens permanently attached and the lens cap off - says it makes it quicker to use. But repairs to one of his lenses have already cost $500. I reckon I can put up with a couple more seconds' delay in getting my camera ready to use!

[richwig83]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pqP4xNfRGFg

Just a silly vid i made today! Only just got the 1-4 and its raining so can use it for anything constructive!

[rishu_pepper]

LOL good stuff richwig! :lol:

[rishu_pepper]

Just took this pic outside in the rain! I was too excited that not even mother nature could stop me (that's what weather sealing is for in the 7D I guess!).

Centre focus point at the Hybrid plate. No PP, converted from RAW to JPEG and resampled to a smaller size for upload.

Can you tell me if its sharpness is on par with usual 100-400? I was blown away by the sharpness but I haven't had prior experiences with L lenses :oops:

(P.S. Also had the Hoya SuperHMC filter on at the time of shooting this pic)

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4039/4475495632_d4c073835a_b.jpg

[photobitz]

Looks pretty darn good to me!

[rishu_pepper]

Looks pretty darn good to me!

That's all I needed to know ;)

At which f/stop is the lens at its sharpest (at different FL's)?

[photobitz]

I've only really paid attention at 400mm... at that point I think f/8 is the sweet spot but f/5.6 isn't that far off.

[tonyniev]

Sunset over Mt Charleston:
http://tonyniev.smugmug.com/Astronomy/Astrophotos/IMG3641/823275053_G5whn-L.jpg

[Owl_79]

I've only really paid attention at 400mm... at that point I think f/8 is the sweet spot but f/5.6 isn't that far off.

That is true. At f/5.6 @ 400mm this is sharp lens but at f/8 its very sharp.
Im using full aperture most the time when shooting at 400mm, I only use smaller apertures if I need larger DOF.

[rishu_pepper]

Cool, thanks for the pointer guys. I'll be sure to try to utilize it at f/8. Hopefully the weather will gimme a break tomorrow and I can go to shoot some geese at the local park or something.

[NovusPhoto]

Good luck! I've been waiting almost two weeks for the sun to come out for a whole day since getting my 100-400. Rain, rain, and more rain. And I'm just across the Strait of Georgia from you! lol.

If you see some sun, send some this way. :)

[FlyingPhotog]

Encountered a situation tonight where I actually wished I'd have brought my 1-4 instead of my 300 f/2.8 or 500 f/4.

Full Moon rise over a mountain range that had I had the 1-4 and been able to use my two-stop Grad ND, I'd have probably gotten the shot.

Using a large prime (the 300 in this case) I was unable to selectively hold back any portion of the sky.
Unfortunately, by the time the moon actually crested the mountains, the un-filtered contrast ratio was too much and I didn't get anything usable.

So, the next time someone bags on you for "only" having the 100-400, ask them how they go about using hard- or soft-edged ND filters on their bazookas! ;)

Just some 100-400 food for thought.

[DragonSpeed]

It hasn't ALWAYS been rainy in Vancouver... last Saturday:
http://www.fotothing.com/photos/3db/3db5c704e2ef2f2005a18eacf337fd9f_52e.jpg

[JesperA]

Just got this lens today, tried it in the field today, unfortunatly it started to get dark and, havnt used such a long focal length before so it takes some time getting used to!

All of them is handheld and it seems like i am having some frontocusing issues but i think that i´ve got one of the sharp ones (i think i can squize out some more sharpnes out of the lens).

The lens is best when taking photo of objects that is pretty big, it does struggle abit with smaller objects!

No PP exept for cropping

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2776/4476042769_49a120dcb7_b.jpg

Exposure: 0.003 sec (1/400)
Aperture: f/8.0
Focal Length: 400 mm
ISO Speed: 800

Sharp enough for me:
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2693/4476054299_f8b3a5898f_b.jpg

Exposure: 0.001 sec (1/800)
Aperture: f/5.6
Focal Length: 100 mm
ISO Speed: 800

Bokeh
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4008/4476059919_435f05bd41_b.jpg

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2772/4476829358_cbb62ecc59_b.jpg

Exposure: 0.001 sec (1/1250)
Aperture: f/5.6
Focal Length: 400 mm
ISO Speed: 320

Autofocus test and i am really impressed, probably thanks to the 7D, in Servo mode it followed moving object pretty good and rarely missed, it is a little bit soft but that was thanks to me, i shaked alot in the cold!

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2777/4476049557_b758e99ac5_b.jpg

[peterbj7]

it seems like I am having some front focussing issues

I keep seeing this, and "back focussing". Can you explain what you mean? I thought I understood it at one point but now I'm sure I don't.

[rishu_pepper]

It hasn't ALWAYS been rainy in Vancouver... last Saturday:
http://www.fotothing.com/photos/3db/3db5c704e2ef2f2005a18eacf337fd9f_52e.jpg

Nice GWT. Where did you see this guy? If I had to guess Burnaby, Deer Lake perhaps?

[DragonSpeed]

Nice GWT. Where did you see this guy? If I had to guess Burnaby, Deer Lake perhaps?
Burnaby Lake... It was a bit windy and cool, so it kept the masses away a bit better :)

[rishu_pepper]

Burnaby Lake... It was a bit windy and cool, so it kept the masses away a bit better :)

Nicely done.

How close were you to the drake when you took this pic?

[photobitz]

I keep seeing this, and "back focussing". Can you explain what you mean? I thought I understood it at one point but now I'm sure I don't.

Refers to when the AF thinks the subject in focus but the lens is focused further forward (front focus) or behind (back focus) the targeted subject resulting in the subject being out of focus.

[DragonSpeed]

Nicely done.

How close were you to the drake when you took this pic?
This is only very slight crop (if any), so he was full frame. Probably 12-15ft. at most. He was very obliging. Got some good shots of the missus too, but that's for another series :)

[rishu_pepper]

This is only very slight crop (if any), so he was full frame. Probably 12-15ft. at most. He was very obliging. Got some good shots of the missus too, but that's for another series :)

Cool stuff.

One day, I'm gonna haul my gear to my friend's farm in Surrey. TONS of waterfowl there, ranging from:

Mallards
Pintails
Widgeons
Canada geese (lesser and greater)
Northern Shoveler
GWT
BWT
CWT (rare)
Swans

Down a few blocks from there, there are also woods, mergansers (common and hooded), and a whole bunch of other stuff I don't remember.

I need to practice my duck calling skills (or the lack thereof :oops:)

[Owl_79]

Few more small birds, both at 400mm - f/5.6. It was cloudy and rainy when I took that first one.

http://tonskulus.kuvat.fi/kuvat/Lintuja/htintti16.jpg/_big.jpg

http://tonskulus.kuvat.fi/kuvat/Lintuja/sinitintti16.jpg/_big.jpg

[Arslan]

First 100-400 use in sport.

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4051/4479493491_3dcfe9afcd_b.jpg

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4046/4479499165_a419b2d0b7_b.jpg

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4059/4479504397_38b4c13dec_b.jpg

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4027/4479508403_a78049fc57_b.jpg

[pixelbasher]

Haven't posted here for a while. Both at 1/250th, First at F/9 second F/11 First one at 135 mm, second at 310 mm

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2759/4466098891_5963786cca_o.jpg

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4042/4469000347_331f07091c_o.jpg

[KenjiS]

Nice, where was that?

I really need to get myself to an airshow this year

[PrimeGlass]

First 100-400 use in sport.

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4051/4479493491_3dcfe9afcd_b.jpg

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4046/4479499165_a419b2d0b7_b.jpg

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4059/4479504397_38b4c13dec_b.jpg

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4027/4479508403_a78049fc57_b.jpg


These are excellent IQ shots! Were these with your 5D? If so, A 5D & 100-400 is supposed to be a no no in shooting sports ;)

[peterbj7]

Rules are made to be broken :), and that includes those about combinations of particular bodies and lenses, and those about minimum shutter speeds for long lenses.

[FlyingPhotog]

These are excellent IQ shots! Were these with your 5D? If so, A 5D & 100-400 is supposed to be a no no in shooting sports ;)

Yeah, funny how that works, ain't it? :lol:

People here say it so it must be true, right? ;)

[Arslan]

Yes these are with 5D and not only at this time i really appreciate this combo

[James Thomas 1975]

One of the first shots I took a couple of weeks ago with the 7D.


http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2739/4430006346_0edd276365_b.jpg

[TeamSpeed]

7D + Kenko 2x + manual focus... (tough to do!)

Shots 80-82: http://teamspeed.smugmug.com/Church-and-Family/The-Kids/9350014_HBAT4#825097204_rzwJX

http://teamspeed.smugmug.com/Church-and-Family/The-Kids/IMG0597/825097204_rzwJX-L.jpg
http://teamspeed.smugmug.com/Church-and-Family/The-Kids/IMG0569/825097166_EXg5A-XL.jpg
http://teamspeed.smugmug.com/Church-and-Family/The-Kids/IMG0561/825097189_sEZFP-XL.jpg

[KenjiS]

I'm ashamed my first go with the 100-400 this year and my 7D came out this poorly :(

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v170/scifiguy1012/Photography/IMG_1643.jpg

Oh well, i have more im working on right now

[stonyzmom]

That's a tough sky there. I've never taken anything with that kind of sky and had it come out decently.

[KenjiS]

That's a tough sky there. I've never taken anything with that kind of sky and had it come out decently.

Indeed, same here really, So im pretty upset about it, but at the same time, its the first bird i got with my 7D..So I felt like posting it lol

[rishu_pepper]

Posted these pics on the Birds section, thought I'd share in the Dust Pump section as well.

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=850757

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=850559

[Scott_1469]

New owner and loving it!

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2800/4483567480_9068907049_b.jpg

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4069/4460883645_472528de87.jpg

[promocop]

what fantatstic shots of the football game AND gretttt shot of that Eagle...worthy of NATGEO..well done..I want that lens!!!!

[blackzzz]

Classic eagle shot, Scott. Now I know what a field mouse's last view of the world would be...

[Candersson]

Truly a lot of amazing shots here. :)

And when shooting birds at the distance of few meters, there should be noted that DOF is very narrow. At 400mm / f5.6, its only 10-15mm. Yesterday when I was there shooting those tiny birds, I took maybe 50 photos. Only 5-10 was razor sharp, 10 was acceptable and rest 30 was too soft. Caused by incorrect focusing (focus should be on eye of the target) and yes and/or too long shutterspeed (1/1000 isn't always enough).

I think its more likely that getting soft images means you have wrong technique. Because yes, I get some similar soft images too, but sometimes this 100-400L really gives me razor sharp images even wide open. It just requires care (and some luck)!

That's so true Owl
Did a test today on birds with closer distance (shot through a window)

http://www.anderssonbros.com/foto1/IMG4.jpg

and a 100% crop
http://www.anderssonbros.com/foto1/IMG4crop.jpg

[Sydor25]

http://sydor25.com/Pictures/FW_Primates_4.2.10-199.jpg

[Sydor25]

http://sydor25.com/Pictures/FW_Animals_4.2.10-097.jpg

[Owl_79]

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_Aa1c1w0Twzc/S7Xv6_gUU1I/AAAAAAAAAlk/Oh3o1G8ocIg/s1600/pikkuvarpunen.jpg

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_Aa1c1w0Twzc/S7XvsQh_UHI/AAAAAAAAAlc/I6GBkPbjGYw/s1600/nokikana5.jpg

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_Aa1c1w0Twzc/S7dX9zNOCJI/AAAAAAAAAm8/aEhZ9XsDO7Y/s1600/sorsat1.jpg

[xMClass]

Heavily cropped.

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2721/4467695745_82641c7c0a_b.jpg

[promocop]

there are some VERY talented shooters here...very impressive...I'm humbled

[James Thomas 1975]

Shot with the 7D.

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2680/4489446811_104af397ea_b.jpg

[KenjiS]

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v170/scifiguy1012/Photography/IMG_1816.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v170/scifiguy1012/Photography/IMG_1776.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v170/scifiguy1012/Photography/IMG_1783.jpg

^- much better pics compared to the one before

[Jred]

Nice shots!

[gertjan411]

1of mine with the 100-400 and 7D

http://members.upc.nl/g.vlaanderen1/test/tn_reiger.jpg

[Madweasel]

All taken at Thruxton, UK on 4 April; 100-400L on 40D.

http://i72.photobucket.com/albums/i192/garlicpickle/Canon/lr1small-1300.jpg

http://i72.photobucket.com/albums/i192/garlicpickle/Canon/lr1small-1179.jpg

http://i72.photobucket.com/albums/i192/garlicpickle/Canon/lr1small-1614.jpg

http://i72.photobucket.com/albums/i192/garlicpickle/Canon/lr1small-2041.jpg

[vitacura]

Great pics Mark! Love the last one!

[Pete]

A bit of portraiture for a change...

http://www.the-aperture.com/EE/photos/normal/20100404__PER1457.jpg

100% crop
http://the-aperture.com/Chris-100.jpg

Slight loss of sharpness due to ISO800 (not the best for a 1D Mk IIN)

[adrian5127]

Just found this thread, some great shots. Here are a few of mine with a 40D

http://aephotographic.smugmug.com/Animals/wildlife/MG4311/733353395_UHTMN-L.jpg

http://aephotographic.smugmug.com/Animals/wildlife/MG2300/772533835_44u94-L.jpg

http://aephotographic.smugmug.com/Animals/wildlife/MG1565/628279998_yJTFR-M.jpg

http://aephotographic.smugmug.com/photos/772538629_aHiYp-L.jpg

[JoYork]

Some awesome shots, guys.

Has anyone sold their 70-200 for this lens? How do they compare, apart from the obvious difference in focal length?

[aviator.4.life]

Technically I did, went from 70-200mm 2.8 non-IS to 300mm to this. For what I shoot this lens it perfect for me as I rarely shot at 2.8.
Having IS for a first time is definitely a plus and will never have a telephoto lens without it again. I don't know what 70-200 you have but I am very happy with my switch.

[gertjan411]

just another one, i have the lens for 2 weeks now and i like it a lot.

http://members.upc.nl/g.vlaanderen1/test/tn_2.jpg

[photobitz]

Wow! Great shot. Very bold :)

[rick99gsx]

Hand held shot straight of the camera :) had to use high ISO due to light/shaded area but I still like it. This was shot at a zoo in Tokyo.

Canon 50D
1/100, 5.6, ISO 1600, 400mm

[tonyniev]

sea lion and pelicans -La Jolla cove, CA
http://tonyniev.smugmug.com/Photography/La-Jolla-Cove-sea-lions-park/IMG4190/831650403_WXEnS-L.jpg

http://tonyniev.smugmug.com/Photography/La-Jolla-Cove-sea-lions-park/IMG4189/831648864_zhbRA-L.jpg

[Owl_79]

http://tonskulus.kuvat.fi/kuvat/Lintuja/Laulujoutsen/pari1.jpg/_big.jpg

[wtlwdwgn]

Those last two eagle shots must be about the very best I've ever seen from any camera or lens. I might have to rent it the next time instead of the 400 f/5.6. Good shooting! :D

[M.Mobin]

http://masoudm.persiangig.com/4/IMG_7606.jpg

[richwig83]

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2061/4508594384_c1ddcb43d6_o.jpg

[wtlwdwgn]

M.Mobin, that's a nice intimate bird shot. The OOF background makes the birds stand out very well. :D

[A.Christopher]

Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS USM + 1.4x Kenko Pro 300 DG TC

http://www.adamchristopher.net/img/v6/p749256908-5.jpg

100% Crop
http://www.adamchristopher.net/img/v8/p1065668729-5.jpg

Camera make: Canon
Camera model: Canon EOS-1D Mark IV
Focal length: 560 mm
Max lens aperture: f/8
Exposure: 1/250 at f/8
Flash: Not fired
Exposure bias: 0 EV
Exposure mode: Auto
Exposure prog: Normal
ISO speed: ISO 800
Metering mode: Pattern

[Clueless163]

Now what were you guys talking about soft pictures using this lens?

[tonylong]

Now what were you guys talking about soft pictures using this lens?

Heh!

I went to my nearby beaver pond today, which I affectionately call Critter Lake because it's a hang out for plenty of ducks -- Mallard, Wood Ducks, and a new breed today, a "hybrid mallard", some geese, big rodents called Nutria and Great Blue Heron, and then evidently come out at night and chomp down trees, leaving a mess for the next day, but hey, it's their pond...

So, I shot with the 1DM3 and used the 100-400 with the 1.4x TC on a monopod. Slow shutter speeds from trees impeding direct light. Later in the shoot I put on a Better Beamer flash extended -- I got mixed results because I think I need to dial down the flash a bit, but I got in all OK results.

Here's a shot that was taken without the flash: the first pic is uncropped (the duck was a ways away) the second is a 100% crop, the third is my "end result" crop. Not the best/sharpest shot in the bunch but an example of what one can get, even with a slow shutter speed.

1/125s f/11.0 at 560.0mm ISO 800

http://www.pbase.com/tonylong/image/123489679/original.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/tonylong/image/123489678/original.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/tonylong/image/123489155/original.jpg

[Owl_79]

http://tonskulus.kuvat.fi/kuvat/sekalaiset/pienijoutsen.jpg/_big.jpg

http://tonskulus.kuvat.fi/kuvat/Lintuja/Laulujoutsen/lekottelu5.jpg/_small.jpg

http://tonskulus.kuvat.fi/kuvat/Lintuja/Laulujoutsen/roiskeet.jpg/_small.jpg

http://tonskulus.kuvat.fi/kuvat/Lintuja/Laulujoutsen/ahmintaa.jpg/_big.jpg

[promocop]

Magnificent photos...very well done indeed!