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

[TeamSpeed]

Hello all, I've had my 100-400mm for about 2 years and I really love it for birds and airshows. However, I have seen a couple of posts in different POTN forums about the 100-400mm not getting along well with UV filters. I use a Canon sharp cut UV filter to protect my lens. I will have to try some photos without the filter. Any opinions about this lens and UV filters?

I have always had a UV filter on my 100-400. No problems that I have seen in my images. Maybe the really cheap standard filters cause issues, but the good ones, like the multicoated ones shouldn't.

[zeva]

does the lens *Require* a tripod? or is it perfectally handhold able

[nc-grayson]

i'm really interested in this lens...but is the push/pull factor annoying/difficult?

[tonylong]

does the lens *Require* a tripod? or is it perfectally handhold able

This is not a light lens...it's "best" on a tripod, "second best" on a monopod, but is very useable handheld.

I don't have as steady hands/arms as I did when I was young, so I tend to wobble a bit with the 100-400, but the IS helps tremendously! With the IS and a decent shutter speed (good light, high ISO and wide apertures working together) I can roam around with this lens and get good results!

i'm really interested in this lens...but is the push/pull factor annoying/difficult?

The push-pull keeps the length of the lens compact when you are walking around. You just get used to it. The best alternative would be getting a 400 prime, which are great lenses, but then you'd loose the compactness of the 100-400 when it's "pulled" in, as well as the versatility of the zoom.

Here, BTW, is a 100% crop of a shot I took this weekend, hand-held:
http://www.pbase.com/tonylong/image/95889691.jpg

[Eagle]

does the lens *Require* a tripod? or is it perfectally handhold able
Just like any other lens, it depends on the shutter speed. It is definitely hand holdable.
i'm really interested in this lens...but is the push/pull factor annoying/difficult?I think it's easier to use than twist to zoom.

[tonylong]

Well, I'm done processing Saturday's trek, and here are three more shots, all hand-held at 400mm, 100% crops:

A fresh water otter amongst storm debris:
http://www.pbase.com/tonylong/image/95941192.jpg

An osprey, out looking for lunch:
http://www.pbase.com/tonylong/image/95936678.jpg

A turkey vulture, which I believe is the Town Bird in Camas, WA:
http://www.pbase.com/tonylong/image/95942596.jpg

[adrianzg]

my first post here.. love the lens. :)
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2182/2425897270_c8b7cd5b2f_o.jpg
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2170/2425086913_f4cb18e628_o.jpg
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3030/2425897794_af19492192_o.jpg

[JoYork]

Welcome aboard, Adrian. Fab pics, I especially love the second one.

[nc-grayson]

Yeah Adrian, those pics are nice. were they handheld?

[MaDProFF]

Here is another hand held at 1/250th

[TheDA]

The 100-400 L IS is a great lens for what it is. Nothing better in its class.

[TeamSpeed]

The 100-400 L IS is a great lens for what it is. Nothing better in its class.

Yet.... wait until early/mid summer and we shall see....

[Canonised]

Hi Everyone,
I hope to garner the help/assistance of those who use the 100-400 regularly.

I discovered that my tripod/head situation needed to be upgraded to deal with the vibration shooting at the 400mm end. I disovered this when I tried to shoot the moon with the lens with and without the TC and even with IS on.

So I embarked on a quest to find the best solution. Unfortunately after weeks of research I only managed to buy a new ball head (Markins M10) but yet to find a suitably tripod that balances both the weight rating, stability and portability.

I would dearly love to hear from forummers here what they have in their setup for mounting the 100-400L.

Thanks in advance! :-)

[jaybird]

I disovered this when I tried to shoot the moon with the lens with and without the TC and even with IS on.




I didn't think that Canon recommended having IS on while attached to a tripod. I guess in mode 2 and panning it would be alright, but it may cause problems with a static shot.

How long are you exposing the moon for? It's actually pretty bright.

[Canonised]

I didn't think that Canon recommended having IS on while attached to a tripod. I guess in mode 2 and panning it would be alright, but it may cause problems with a static shot.

How long are you exposing the moon for? It's actually pretty bright.

I tried various settings e.g. f11 at 1/25 sec. Both with and without IS on. I got better results with it on as the tripod felt like an earthquake going on in the viewfinder.

[TeamSpeed]

I handheld my lens with the 1.4x TC for the shot I have above. Are you at ISO100 when are doing these shots?

My exif shows the following, but remember I did this during the day (actually early evening around 5pm), so the sky was still blue.
# Exposure Time (1 / Shutter Speed) = 1/1250 second = 0.00080 second
# Lens F-Number/F-Stop = 56/10 = F5.60
# Exposure Program = aperture priority (3)
# ISO Speed Ratings = 2000

At night, my shutter speeds are typically 1/320th or so with lower apertures than f/11.

[Jonathan]

Also posted this in the animals section but thought I would share it here. Hired this lens from LensForHire here in the UK for a recent trip to South Africa. Could not believe how sharp it was at 400mm - I love it!
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2162/2433432724_a0049d35ae_o.jpg

[ben805]

Bought mine last month from Amazon, lens code UW0217. This lens is fantastic, very sharp wide open at 400mm, usually i only stop down to gain more DOF. I hate using tripod or monopod so the IS is very useful.


If you can't see the photos you can visit my gallery here:
http://www.pbase.com/yauyi/100400

[adrianzg]

Yeah Adrian, those pics are nice. were they handheld?


yup, all handheld. :)

[ben805]

The froggy was handheld 1/90s @f/5.6, awesome result at 400mm. ;)

[Roy Webber]

Nice shot of the frog ben

[tonylong]

Here are a couple shots from a series of a far away osprey (both are 100% crops), taken at 400mm handheld:

http://www.pbase.com/tonylong/image/96303250.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/tonylong/image/96303252.jpg

[Torcidas]

100% crop of frog at 400mm with f5.6 hand held
http://www.planinarenje.net/galerija/albums/bruno_karadza/hrvatska/biokovo_svjure/2008_04_20/biokovo_9951.JPG

100% crop of birt at 275mm with 5.6 hand held
http://www.planinarenje.net/galerija/albums/bruno_karadza/hrvatska/biokovo_svjure/2008_04_20/biokovo_9976.JPG

[tonylong]

Close crops of pidgeons frolicking:

http://www.pbase.com/tonylong/image/96268684.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/tonylong/image/96268686.jpg

[swapnali]

Here are 2, in low tugstan light. Later temperature adjusted.

#1
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2358/2456069203_9e26b55efa.jpg?v=0


#2
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2066/2456897976_becc7c5d05.jpg?v=0

[Roy Webber]

Leminglover...great shot!

[jaybird]

I just got back my prints from MPIX. I have two enlargements where I used my 100-400 on my 30D and made 16x20s. They are abso-freakinly sharp, even enlarged to that size.

Lemminglover: Nice shot! I've been in Africa for nearly a year and haven't seen a single leopard yet.

[BrantG]

@400mm

http://www.brantgajda.com/images/gallery/landscape/large/flower2.jpg

[Roy Webber]

North shore Fuerteventura

[Metalphotographer]

From a recent zoo trip shot with a 20d handheld. I am still getting familiar with this lens. All were at 400mm, EXIF data should be intact.
http://www.blizzardbeast.com/albums/album100/04112008_22.jpg
http://www.blizzardbeast.com/albums/album100/04112008_32.jpg
http://www.blizzardbeast.com/albums/album100/04112008_34.jpg
http://www.blizzardbeast.com/albums/album100/04112008_20.jpg

[pdwhiteside]

If you use a 1.4x Tele Convertor do you still lose the auto focus function as you do with the 2.0x Tele Convertor?

[Rehuel]

Here is one I took yesterday @ 400mm and wide open.

[demar727]

so i just recently got a 100-400mm

and been messing with alot of settings getting everything ready for airshow season.. and i just cant get anything right :(

im seriously getting tired of editing every photo that i take.. they come out too dark or some white parts of the photo come out wayyyyy too white

so what settings work best for shooting?

i shoot with a XT


any help? thanks :)

[lance v]

so i just recently got a 100-400mm

and been messing with alot of settings getting everything ready for airshow season.. and i just cant get anything right :(

im seriously getting tired of editing every photo that i take.. they come out too dark or some white parts of the photo come out wayyyyy too white

so what settings work best for shooting?

i shoot with a XT


any help? thanks :)

sorry but its not the lens, thatl be camera/user not getting the exposure right. what mode do u shoot in?

[demar727]

sorry but its not the lens, thatl be camera/user not getting the exposure right. what mode do u shoot in?


i know its not the lense.. its me and the settings

i shoot in Auto or Sunny for white balance.. Mode is Av.. ISO 100.. F5.6 to 9.


this is for sunny days

[lance v]

i know its not the lense.. its me and the settings

i shoot in Auto or Sunny for white balance.. Mode is Av.. ISO 100.. F5.6 to 9.


this is for sunny days

What metering mode do you use?

[demar727]

What metering mode do you use?

partial

that may be the problem.. but i try them all..and get pictures that i still need to do major editing on

[wallybud]

yor going to have to meter for the correct area hit ae lock and then focus and shoot. i do that with spot metering for bird photography whenever i can

[lance v]

partial

that may be the problem.. but i try them all..and get pictures that i still need to do major editing on

yea id say depending on the weather and plane colour set the exposure in manual mode other than that figure out how to make ur camera do what u want- can u post an example?

[silvex]

This is a mousedeer - fully grown is less than 1.5 foot long.




This is an African Deer fully grown is over 6 feet tall and clearly weighs over 300 pounds.

http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y57/cyberlawprof/Deer-web.jpg
Beautiful!!!

[Canonised]

Beautiful!!!

Thanks Silvex - appreciate it :-)

[cesstrelle]

Here's a few more recent images from me taken with the 100-400mm f4/5.6 USM IS L and the Canon XTI:

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3229/2468988417_3ec8405ba9.jpg

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3203/2465786699_f069e32525.jpg

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3272/2456091887_33a29026b4.jpg

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2066/2456911826_c830f22b0a.jpg

[danny87]

From Donington at the Weekend

@400mm 1/100, F7 ISO:200 350D

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2130/2469184426_61376b7fb6.jpg

Larger http://www.flickr.com/photos/13009956@N05/2469184426/sizes/o/

[adrianzg]

100-400 w 1.4tc, servo, F8. shot w 1d3. :)

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2138/2479904236_9c384338eb_o.jpg
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2198/2479090511_5d4092fe53_o.jpg
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2101/2479090173_c1f1acdd05_o.jpg

[Roy Webber]

Fuerteventura North shore surf

[BrantG]

http://www.brantgajda.com/images/gallery/wings_over_pittsburgh/large/wings_over_pittsburgh35.jpg

http://www.brantgajda.com/images/gallery/wings_over_pittsburgh/large/wings_over_pittsburgh41.jpg

[TeamSpeed]

100-400 at the park @ 400mm...

[lkb-28]

Just got mine on Saturday (May 17), and I'm just blown away at how quick & sharp this lens is...

40D, 100-400 @ 400, ISO200, f/5.6, 1/1600

http://i174.photobucket.com/albums/w103/Billy_Bodgit/Birds/IMG_0120.jpg

Cheers;

Lee

[billhercus]

Got mine today. Carefully read this excellent post for budding 100-400 owners. Noticed the sun was shining and the dog needed a walk.

Test time.


http://photography-on-the.net/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=273344&stc=1&d=1211394568


Perfect weather for this lens and am delighted to have followed up with a few bird shots etc., all the best images I've taken.

Brilliant!!

[Roy Webber]

I just love my 100-400

[blackzzz]

Just got mine on Saturday (May 17), and I'm just blown away at how quick & sharp this lens is...

40D, 100-400 @ 400, ISO200, f/5.6, 1/1600

http://i174.photobucket.com/albums/w103/Billy_Bodgit/Birds/IMG_0120.jpg

Cheers;

Lee


Well done...saving up for mine as we speak. ;)

[egordon99]

Awesome shots everyone! I'm debating between this and the new Sigma 120-400mm. The Canon rebates (and Canoga's great price) put the Canon a bit more into my budget, so if I can convince the powers that be that it's worth the extra bucks, then "big white" it might be :) (plus my 70-200mm f/4 IS could use the company :lol: )

[Roy Webber]

egordon99,

Go for the Canon...great lens. I have seen some images from the Sigma 120-400 and was not impressed.

[BrantG]

egordon99,

Go for the Canon...great lens. I have seen some images from the Sigma 120-400 and was not impressed.

I agree. Even with the price advantage, the images that seem to be produced don't justify the price.

The rebates for Canon go through July 19. Save up the money and get the Canon 100-400.

[Keith R]

I have seen some images from the Sigma 120-400 and was not impressed.
Decidely lacklusture so far, I agree.

And while I'm here, another from my 100-400mm (on a 40D), handheld at 400mm, just to keep the pot bubbling:

http://www.capture-the-moment.co.uk/tp/images/552.jpg
Male stonechat

[egordon99]

aghhhhhhhhhhhh, stop showing these awesome pictures. Looks like I'll try to see if I can scrounge up the extra cash for the Canon. Canoga has it for ~$1200, I'll see what my local shop can do.

[Pete]

With a Canon 1D Mk II N

Straight out of the camera with no PP or sharpening.

This is a severe crop (1793px wide)

http://www.the-aperture.com/EE/photos/normal/20080522_APER5870.jpg

full 100% crop - http://the-aperture.com/Squirr100.jpg

[TeeTee]

I believe this was at 400mm or close. Either way, this lens is amazing at 400mm @ f8.

http://eljackimages.com/The_Works/Pages/Nature_files/Media/378I4133-2/378I4133-2.jpg

[Keith R]

It was at 350mm, TeeTee - and 1600 ISO.

[Roy Webber]

excellent example of what this can achieve Pete

[DragonSpeed]

Here's a post where pretty much all the shots were at 400:

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=504585

I'm lovin' it :)

[IanC]

Camera: Canon EOS 40D
Exposure: 0.006 sec (1/180)
Aperture: f/11
Focal Length: 160 mm
ISO Speed: 800

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3063/2518105100_8a94ec0477_b.jpg

[dabler]

I have only had the lens a week or so and even handheld at 400mm i am very happy with it

[Crayons15]

wow this lens is amazing!!! i was set on the 70-200mm 2.8 IS but now i'm not so sure!!!

[JeffreyVB]

http://www.brantgajda.com/images/gallery/wings_over_pittsburgh/large/wings_over_pittsburgh35.jpg

http://www.brantgajda.com/images/gallery/wings_over_pittsburgh/large/wings_over_pittsburgh41.jpg


Damn, I wish my airshow pics turned out this good!!! Care to share your settings and any PP that was done?

[BrantG]

Damn, I wish my airshow pics turned out this good!!! Care to share your settings and any PP that was done?

If you to go to my Flickr Page (http://www.flickr.com/photos/brantgajda/sets/72157604988588428/), all the images are there with EXIF data intact.

As to PP, I always do a little level tweaking, some saturation, some Noise Reduction (if I do too much PP), and USM.

For the 2 posted, I would have done some level tweaking, Saturating, and USM.

[dawnron1]

If you to go to my Flickr Page (http://www.flickr.com/photos/brantgajda/sets/72157604988588428/), all the images are there with EXIF data intact.

As to PP, I always do a little level tweaking, some saturation, some Noise Reduction (if I do too much PP), and USM.

For the 2 posted, I would have done some level tweaking, Saturating, and USM.

Great shots Brant! I just added you to my Flickr 'contacts' :D I've just purchased this lens from a fellow POTN member(lightrules, GREAT guy!) and hope to have some shots to post next week, very excited!! Fortunately we live near alot of ducks :p

Ronnie

[mdr]

I have both the 100-400 and 70-200 f4 IS with 1.4x. If I had to choose on sharpness, then I'd probably go for the 100-400. See sample shot taken with the 100-400, handheld at 400mm with IS using a 20D from a moving boat. Image cropped by about 30%.

http://www.marcderidder.com/galleries/image.php?page=1&gallery_id=29&image_id=168

Where I find the 100-400 lacking is autofocus speed. That is where the 70-200 f4 IS / 1.4x combo outshines the 100-400 by far. I have had more success with shooting fast moving animals and birds such as lurchers/greyhound and birds of prey with this combo than with the 100-400. For this reason, I'm actually considering the 300 f2.8 IS with the 1.4x, although I'm reluctant due to it's size/weight.

[BrantG]

Great shots Brant! I just added you to my Flickr 'contacts' :D I've just purchased this lens from a fellow POTN member(lightrules, GREAT guy!) and hope to have some shots to post next week, very excited!! Fortunately we live near alot of ducks :p

Ronnie

I added you as well to my contacts. LR is a great person to deal with and you are going to love this lens. Plus we demand Duck pictures since you have easy access to them.

[rpearce12]

With all of these shots, is it safe to conclude that the 100-400mm f/4.5L is NOT soft at 400mm?

[JoYork]

It's actually f/5.6 at that aperture and it appears that most lenses are sharp at 400mm. Obviously the few who had soft copies aren't likely to post any samples here...

The is a 100-400 owners poll on this forum and 3/4 of owners report zero problems.

[dawnron1]

I'd say so ;) This was taken by my buddy Johnathan with his at 400mm.

Ronnie

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2001/2532142558_927f7425db_o.jpg

[qwalls]

Just got the lens Friday evening, and so far I'm very pleased and impressed. The following 3 shots are at 400mm, wide open, and right right out the camera converted from RAW in DPP. Normally would have used the 70-200 F/2.8.

Started out Saturday morning at my son's soccer game:

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2154/2518971302_85071e1349_b.jpg

Then off to the Asian Festival:

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2377/2519302079_55cc54568a_b.jpg

And then to the zoo on Monday:

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2371/2524889575_abfed2eb93_b.jpg

[kjhart0133]

The young girl is way cute. Nice captcha.

I've also had very good luck with my 100-400 L. Enjoy!

[FlyingPhotog]

Here's one that's a little different...

Call it Macro from accross the street:

http://www.pbase.com/flyingphotog/image/97709390/original.jpg

[pjfrad]

Hey everyone,

This thread has really inspired me to look at getting on of these lenses. I'm going to the US next month and so am thinking about buying it there as it seems to be a bit cheaper (epically with the good exchange rate from GPB at the moment).

If I bring the lense back to the UK and it needs warranty can I take it in here or will it need to be sent back to the US.

Are there any other issues I should be aware of?

Thanks
Peter

[Molnies]

If I bring the lense back to the UK and it needs warranty can I take it in here or will it need to be sent back to the US.
Canon has international warranty on all lenses (but not camera bodies) so you can take it in for repair in the UK.

[tdodd]

Taken at 400mm, 1/250 and f/11 at 100 ISO, with flash. I don't remember whether I had my Kenko 1.4X teleconverter fitted at the time, and as I tape the pins it would not show up in the EXIF. Shot in raw and sharpened(4)/resized(25%)/converted(7) in DPP.

[rpearce12]

Taken at 400mm, 1/250 and f/11 at 100 ISO, with flash. I don't remember whether I had my Kenko 1.4X teleconverter fitted at the time, and as I tape the pins it would not show up in the EXIF. Shot in raw and sharpened(4)/resized(25%)/converted(7) in DPP.

There's no TC on this shot. The exif says it was taken at 400mm

[tdodd]

There's no TC on this shot. The exif says it was taken at 400mm
".....as I tape the pins it would not show up in the EXIF."

[a.huhton]

Hi
Just got my lens today here are a couple of shots iso 640 @400mm- 5.6 hand held with no sharpening, just cropped

[Mac10]

Straight from camera ( 5D ) 400mm iso 400 no crop, no sharpening.

http://i218.photobucket.com/albums/cc36/macc591/400.jpg

100% crop, no sharpening

http://i218.photobucket.com/albums/cc36/macc591/_MG_0082.jpg

With NR and sharpening
http://i218.photobucket.com/albums/cc36/macc591/_MG_00821.jpg

[tonylong]

Well, I came across a little nature preserve a couple of days ago and dashed off a bunch of shots with my 100-400 handheld. I'm posting here an uncropped shot with a 100% crop with some LightRoom PP including sharpening. Any softness is from my handholding, any sharpness is from a great lens and good IS!

Note, some blown highlights here, sorry! I need to get into the habit of using Highlight Tone Priority!
A goose, not a duck:
http://www.pbase.com/tonylong/image/97831949/original.jpg

A 100% crop of, well, the butt:):
http://www.pbase.com/tonylong/image/97831948/original.jpg

[Tony McSpadden]

http://img165.imageshack.us/img165/1194/smallrobinxz3.jpg

shot on a nasty spring day, was on and off raining, no sun at all.

400mm

I love the lense.

[Stic[]WiT[]iT]

Still learning this lens sweet spots.
http:/http://i160.photobucket.com/albums/t199/SticWitiT/seagullflyingaway.jpg/i160.photobucket.com/albums/t199/SticWitiT/Seagulllookingat40d.jpg

[Stic[]WiT[]iT]

Still learning the sweet spots with this lens.
http://i160.photobucket.com/albums/t199/SticWitiT/Seagulllookingat40d.jpg
http://i160.photobucket.com/albums/t199/SticWitiT/seagullflyingaway.jpg

[aladyforty]

This is a mousedeer - fully grown is less than 1.5 foot long.

http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y57/cyberlawprof/Mousedeer1jpg_filtered.jpg


This is an African Deer fully grown is over 6 feet tall and clearly weighs over 300 pounds.

http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y57/cyberlawprof/Deer-web.jpg


That african deer is one of the sharpest shots Ive ever seen out of a 100-400. beautiful

[Canonised]

That african deer is one of the sharpest shots Ive ever seen out of a 100-400. beautiful

Thanks very much for the comment. For me, the 100-400mm is a great surprise. Having heard that there was differing views on the quality of this lens, I did take the time to test a few copies of the lens at the shop but found that all three they had were identical when tested. I came home and started shooting the next day and I took to it like fish to water. The push pull thing was no consequence whatsoever. Maybe that is because I started shooting back in the late 70s but this lens is wonderful. Just a few days ago I shattered my fliter on the lens as I hit the lens onto a wall corner and my heart sank. I cleaned up the lens very carefully making sure I do not scratch the front element. After replacing the filter the lens is working as good as new! Phew. Thank goodness for the L quality build!

Honestly - I wish I had bought this lens before I got the 70-200L f2.8 IS. That lens is underused because of the 100-400. Its permanently on my 40D. I use the 70-200 on my 5D for events, portraits and parties. BUT I can never overstate how satisfied I am with the 100-400.

If you like my animal photography, I started a separate thread on Zoo Animals which is almost (95%) shot with the 100-400, check it out HERE (http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=489452&highlight=deer).

[gpx4]

Many say this lens is only good for the outdoors at daytime. Well here's a stage ballet performance using the 100-400 IS.

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3086/2551211610_73cde5743f_o.jpg
Camera: Canon EOS 5D
Exposure: 0.002 sec (1/500)
Aperture: f/8
Focal Length: 250 mm
ISO Speed: 1600
Exposure Bias: 0 EV
Flash: Flash did not fire


http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3056/2551218806_11b836ca6f_o.jpg
Canon EOS 5D
Exposure: 0.005 sec (1/200)
Aperture: f/5.6
Focal Length: 400 mm
ISO Speed: 1600
Exposure Bias: 0 EV
Flash: Flash did not fire

[aladyforty]

Thanks very much for the comment. For me, the 100-400mm is a great surprise. Having heard that there was differing views on the quality of this lens, I did take the time to test a few copies of the lens at the shop but found that all three they had were identical when tested. I came home and started shooting the next day and I took to it like fish to water. The push pull thing was no consequence whatsoever. Maybe that is because I started shooting back in the late 70s but this lens is wonderful. Just a few days ago I shattered my fliter on the lens as I hit the lens onto a wall corner and my heart sank. I cleaned up the lens very carefully making sure I do not scratch the front element. After replacing the filter the lens is working as good as new! Phew. Thank goodness for the L quality build!

Honestly - I wish I had bought this lens before I got the 70-200L f2.8 IS. That lens is underused because of the 100-400. Its permanently on my 40D. I use the 70-200 on my 5D for events, portraits and parties. BUT I can never overstate how satisfied I am with the 100-400.

If you like my animal photography, I started a separate thread on Zoo Animals which is almost (95%) shot with the 100-400, check it out HERE (http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=489452&highlight=deer).


You seem to have either a good copy or you know what you are doing with the lens. It’s hard to tell if the problems with the lens are user ability or the lens itself. I’m not saying that there are not lenses that don’t have problems but often I think a lot of it is about learning how to get the best out of a lens. I don’t own this lens but maybe someday. I have the 400 5.6, that’s a lens that I have found you have to practice with to get good handheld shots. I have recently got the 70-200 F2.8 non IS. I’ve found I can shoot handheld quite well but it also is a learning curve, this lens does not react the way my F4 version of the lens did. Overall I’m happy with the combo I have.

[Roy Webber]

...:cool:

[Roy Webber]

North Shore

[egordon99]

Just thought I'd pop back in and I got the 100-400! (from B&H since I've shopped there before) From my limited shooting (my dog in the backyard), it's VERY sharp wide open @400m! It's also really heavy :confused: I think I'll have some fun with it once I go out and do some real shooting!

aghhhhhhhhhhhh, stop showing these awesome pictures. Looks like I'll try to see if I can scrounge up the extra cash for the Canon. Canoga has it for ~$1200, I'll see what my local shop can do.

[tonylong]

Here's a set (I accidentally posted a shot on the 70-200 thread, because I had been using that lens all yesterday, until the very end, when I switched to the 100-400 and got this set):

http://www.pbase.com/image/98614343.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/tonylong/image/98614345.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/tonylong/image/98614346.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/tonylong/image/98614347.jpg

[drPheta]

Exif intact
w/ Canon 1.4x TC
http://www.petertphan.com/pics/dc_06-2008/images/IMG_0817.jpg

[dontshootmek]

basically my first shot with this lens (not a duck! :P)

f6.3
ISO 400
1/400
handheld

http://i29.photobucket.com/albums/c267/dontshootmek/IMG_5798copy.jpg

[Trainboy]

Soft? No sir.
Both wide open, 400mm.
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3058/2553236320_a420a02eb1_o.jpg
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3171/2553249938_ed670546f7_o.jpg

[egordon99]

Woof Woof! 400mm @f/5.6 1/1000s, ISO200 (40D)

279836

[johnathan]

Here is one of a Blue Jay in the back yard. Johnathan

http://johnathan.smugmug.com/photos/308354362_x3iZD-XL.jpg

[egordon99]

Great shot of the bluejay! I have yet to go out birding with my 100-400. Hopefully sometime this week.

[johnathan]

Thank you egordon99
With me saving this for the web in PSE6 it has lost a little detail. If used in adequate light this lens is very sharp.I love the colors and bokeh from this lens. Johnathan

This Blue Jay comes to the yard and calls for a peanut. My wife or I put some out and he returns until they are gone. Lots of fun.

Trainboy
Those are amazing !

[Pete]

http://www.the-aperture.com/EE/photos/normal/20080614_aper6730.jpg

http://www.the-aperture.com/EE/photos/normal/20080614_aper6530.jpg

[dawnron1]

Here's one I took this morning using a tripod with the IS turned off.

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3259/2587571102_2a63070851_o.jpg

[Roy Webber]

...nice shot.

[tdodd]

100% crop, first with no sharpening and then with a little smart sharpening in Photoshop CS3.

[Roy Webber]

WOW...a huge difference

[tdodd]

Yep. I normally avoid using CS3 (really I just cannot be bothered to learn it) and prefer the simplicity of DPP and Lightroom, but I was not happy with the results I could achieve there. So I reluctantly wheeled out CS3 to have a stab at it and I admit, I am impressed.

I wonder what buried treasure people may have lurking in their slightly soft images, that usually get binned.

[egordon99]

I shot the moon last night too, and I found the 100% unsharpened crop to be similar to what you got.

Funny story - I grab my 100-400 and point it at our upstairs window which has a clear view of the bright moon. I pull (push?) it out to 400mm and look through the viewfinder. The (out of focus) moon took up almost the entire frame! I was like, cool! This has more reach that I expected. Half-press the shutter and the lens brings the moon into focus (fairly quickly I might add), and the moon suddenly isn't so big anymore :(

Anyway, I was pretty happy with the handheld shots of the moon.

[cmarion]

This is a helpful thread. I'm thinking about renting the 100-400 for an airshow. I want to get the sharpest pics possible. I think I'll be able to handle this lens better than the 400.

[Strayz]

here is mine 330mm at F8 1/125

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v446/jcsilverhand/Photos/Alaska10copy.jpg

[tdodd]

here is mine 330mm at F8 1/125
Not a big deal (to me), but this thread is for examples shot at 400mm. There is another thread for shots at other focal lengths.

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=373778

The 100-400 does have a reputation for softness at the 400mm end, especially when wide open. Posting shots at 330mm sort of defeats the purpose of making a special thread for the 400mm shots.

[Overkill]

;)here is mine 330mm at F8 1/125

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v446/jcsilverhand/Photos/Alaska10copy.jpg

Hmm if this is the result on 330mm and F8 (i think not sharp:confused:)!! I can understande that you dont want to post the 400mm F5.6 shots! ;)

[Roy Webber]

...

[tonylong]

Here's one or two!

http://www.pbase.com/tonylong/image/98042521.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/tonylong/image/98042523.jpg

[Eagle]

Not the best shot but it was at 400 about 50 feet away. The inset on the lower left is a 100% crop. Lost some sharpness saving it to post

[bob_r]

I haven't added to this thread for a while, so thought I'd post this one.

30D - 1/800s f/5.6 at 400.0mm iso800
http://www.pbase.com/bob_r/image/97863645.jpg

Bob R

[philthejuggler]

Never seriously considered the 100-400 L, but looking at this thread makes it tempting, but also makes we worry about copy variation. Some super shots & others that look rather soft. Could be user error I suppose...

[bob_r]

Never seriously considered the 100-400 L, but looking at this thread makes it tempting, but also makes we worry about copy variation. Some super shots & others that look rather soft. Could be user error I suppose...

Couldn't you return it if you get a soft copy? This is probably my most used lens. Here's a few more to help you make up your mind.:)

30D - 1/80s f/5.6 at 400.0mm iso500 (handheld - the IS works!)
http://www.pbase.com/bob_r/image/85631061.jpg

St Louis zoo - 30D - 1/100s f/5.0 at 190.0mm iso200
http://www.pbase.com/bob_r/image/91405542.jpg

Panama City - 30D - 1/200s f/5.6 at 400.0mm iso400
http://www.pbase.com/bob_r/image/81571309.jpg

30D - 1/2000s f/5.6 at 400.0mm iso400
http://www.pbase.com/bob_r/image/87274402.jpg

Bob R

[GR8FUL DAD]

^^^^Awesome Bob!!

[bob_r]

^^^^Awesome Bob!!

Thanks, Greg.

Bob R

[Roy Webber]

Gull

[tdodd]

Never seriously considered the 100-400 L, but looking at this thread makes it tempting, but also makes we worry about copy variation. Some super shots & others that look rather soft. Could be user error I suppose...
If you include fitting a (cheap/ropey) UV filter (or any filter) as user error then I would have to agree with you.

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=502711

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=509164&highlight=100-400+uv+filter+soft

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=437387&highlight=100-400+uv+filter+soft

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=424098&highlight=100-400+uv+filter+soft

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=332846&highlight=100-400+uv+filter+soft

http://www.talkphotography.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=61214&highlight=100-400+soft

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=295056&page=7 (read down from post #93 onwards)

[TeamSpeed]

One from the zoo today!

[TeamSpeed]

2 recent macro shots!

[Canonised]

One from the zoo today!

Thepeacock is is an outstanding capture. Congrats!

[fishingjts]

Putting Mode 2 to work... LOL

http://www.v6john.com/Photo/Racing/Tulsa_2008/tulsa1.jpg

http://www.v6john.com/Photo/Racing/Tulsa_2008/tulsa2.jpg

http://www.v6john.com/Photo/Racing/Tulsa_2008/tulsa10.jpg

[Double Negative]

^ Nice shots - and nice 'Stangs!

[fishingjts]

^ Nice shots - and nice 'Stangs!

Thanks! I got a chance to go out to the Mid America Ford & Team Shelby Nationals in Tulsa a couple weeks ago... spent a couple days out at Hallett Raceway.. More pictures at:

http://www.v6john.com/Photo/Racing/Tulsa_2008_Thur/2008_mid_america_ford1.htm

and

http://www.v6john.com/Photo/Racing/Tulsa_2008_Late_Model/2008_mid_america_ford.htm

[egordon99]

http://blog.evangordon.com/__oneclick_uploads/2008/06/img_9746.jpg

http://blog.evangordon.com/__oneclick_uploads/2008/06/img_0632.jpg

http://blog.evangordon.com/__oneclick_uploads/2008/06/img_0646.jpg

[Mintam]

My First Shots With My 100-400L, Just Delivered Today.
Taken At 400mm On My 40D And Only Converted From Raw To Jpeg.
Sorry About The Quality Of The Shot But It Was only A Quick Check
To Test The Lens.

[Superficialodds]

400mm @ 5.6
http://superficialodds.smugmug.com/photos/282707657_Tuyby-L.jpg
400mm @ 5.6
http://superficialodds.smugmug.com/photos/282706800_pBNsD-L.jpg

[Mintam]

Edited In CS3

[sigmonster]

I am always surprised how many of these lenses I see around so it's obviously a good lens,people who say it's soft are probably not using it correctly.
This is supposition on my part I am not a big canon lens user as you may notice.

[Mintam]

I have never used a lens at 400mm with IS before, so I will need a lot of practice, my first impressions are that I have a sharp copy.

[Metalphotographer]

A baby barnswallow on it's first day out of the nest. Lighting wasn't so hot so this was at ISO1600 F 5.6 1/200 sec

http://www.blizzardbeast.com/albums/babybirds/babybird800.jpg

100% crop - Not the best but pretty good for handheld. At least I think so :)
http://www.blizzardbeast.com/albums/babybirds/babycrop.jpg

[Overkill]

A baby barnswallow on it's first day out of the nest. Lighting wasn't so hot so this was at ISO1600 F 5.6 1/200 sec

http://www.blizzardbeast.com/albums/babybirds/babybird800.jpg

100% crop - Not the best but pretty good for handheld. At least I think so :)
http://www.blizzardbeast.com/albums/babybirds/babycrop.jpg

Not bad at all... esp for a Tele Zoom lens!

[Roy Webber]

Corralejo....kiteboarding

[tonylong]

Roy, is that Corralejo Spain? I'm getting into kiteboard shooting in the Pacific Northwest, USA, yesterday at Sauvie Island, OR -- it's a blast! And, of course, the 100-400...how else can you keep track of these crasy guys?!

[Roy Webber]

Hi Tony,

Yes, Corralejo in Fuerteventura, which is in the Canary Islands and about 60 km from the African coast.

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=526446

If you can get close to the waterfront, the 100-400 is perfect.

[egordon99]

I LOVE this lens!
Rabbit shot from around 8 PM yesterday evening.
http://blog.evangordon.com/__oneclick_uploads/2008/07/img_2456.jpg

[RikWriter]

http://www.pbase.com/rikwriter/image/99809920.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/rikwriter/image/99810453.jpg

[egordon99]

Those are awesome! I take it those weren't taken in Lakeland, FL? :)

[usnameless]

Are you guys (all 100-400L owners) just better in pp or is the 100-400L really better than the other lenses in that range? Not only I have seen a lot of amazing pics with great sharpness, the color is just great! The blues and greens are just amazing. Pictures from Sigma lenses inclines to be more "yellowish" like an aged photo. Is that just me who thinks this way? Thank you all in sharing these incredible images!!!

[TeamSpeed]

Between picture style differences and the different PP techniques, that is where you mostly will see the color differences. Sharpening a pic from the camera is an entirely different technique, and there are so many ways to do that as well. But you have to have a good picture to start with, no real amount of PP will make a bad picture a good one, you can tell which ones have been oversharpened or oversaturated if you know what to look for.

Also don't forget taking a large JPG image and resizing down to fit the constraints of the board will automatically sharpen up any photo! ;)

[PGSmyth]

No regrets on acquiring this lens. Stop by my site...many of shots are with 100-400/20D combo.
Pat

[RikWriter]

Those are awesome! I take it those weren't taken in Lakeland, FL? :)

Yellowstone. :D

[RikWriter]

Are you guys (all 100-400L owners) just better in pp or is the 100-400L really better than the other lenses in that range? Not only I have seen a lot of amazing pics with great sharpness, the color is just great! The blues and greens are just amazing. Pictures from Sigma lenses inclines to be more "yellowish" like an aged photo. Is that just me who thinks this way? Thank you all in sharing these incredible images!!!

I have used the Sigma 50-500 and 100-300 f4 and the 120-300 f2.8 in this focal length/price range and in my experience, the 100-400 has more "pop" than those lenses---it seems more contrasty. I have not had a chance to use the really big Canon primes, but the only telephoto lenses I've used that has had more pop and is also sharper than the 100-400 are the 300 2.8 with 1.4X TC and the 400 5.6 prime.

[ForzaF1]

Putting Mode 2 to work... LOL







Very nice panning work. This lens is definitely on my wish list.

[cicopo]

Shot almost 2 weeks ago at a Radio Control flight exhibition, using my 1Dmklln in 5 FPS mode and shooting at that rate (or whatever the camera could manage in the light at my settings). This photo is from a series and all are sharp but this was in the right placement for a reflection to catch my eye while editing the days photos. The first photo is the full frame, the second is a 100% crop of what caught my eye. Mighty happy with the IQ and focus abilities.
The full image is here. Use the magnifying glass icon to enlarge to 1600 pixels if desired.
http://picasaweb.google.com/cicopo/LensSamples/photo#5221907726890982354
and the center area with the wing reflecting the script.
http://lh4.ggpht.com/cicopo/SGwz9b42JVI/AAAAAAAAMHc/VBcbyU-_Cww/INGR3920.JPG

EDIT: Moderator changed your images to links as they were not showing up. They are still not working though. Check to make sure you have the right link.
I'll try again, as they did show up when I first posted. Strangely when I use my AOL service I can't post photos nor view my own here, but I can see it using Firefox, which is how I was able to post the crop. The full image may exceed the allowed size so I have just used the link. The crop (if it isn't viewable here) is the next image in that album and using the right arrow will take you there. Thanks, Larry.

[usnameless]

Between picture style differences and the different PP techniques, that is where you mostly will see the color differences. Sharpening a pic from the camera is an entirely different technique, and there are so many ways to do that as well. But you have to have a good picture to start with, no real amount of PP will make a bad picture a good one, you can tell which ones have been oversharpened or oversaturated if you know what to look for.

Also don't forget taking a large JPG image and resizing down to fit the constraints of the board will automatically sharpen up any photo! ;)

I agree with what you said but that is ture for pictures taken with any lenses. It still does explain why the pictures taken with the 100-400 look better. Is it just my imagination or the "L" magic?