100-400 IS L AND 400 f/4.5 L????

[PacAce]

For those who have both the 100-400IS L and the 400 f/4.5 L, why keep both? I'm contemplating getting the 400 f/4.5L but if I do, I'd like to get rid of the 100-400 IS L and maybe get the 300 f/4 L instead a little later. I already have the 70-200 f/2.8 IS L to cover the lower half of the 100-400. So, can anybody tell me why I should keep the 100-400, assuming I already have the 400 f/4.5L and the 70-200 and a 1.4x TC? Thanks for your insights.

[defordphoto]

Actually the 400 is f 5.6. ;)

You'll never know how much you miss the zoom until you're stuck with only the 400. If you're shooting multi-camera, as I will be this year, then it won't be so bad, but if you only shoot with one camera it can be a hassle. And, of course, it depends on what you're shooting.

This year I plan on going out with the 70-200L 2.8 IS on the 10D and the 400 on the MKII. My wife will shoot with the 20D and the 100-400.

[Skip Souza]

You just can't have too much glass. It is a natural law of the universe that you will wish you had the one you just sold.

Besides, whoever dies with the most toys wins!!

If you do however choose to ignore my sage advice.......How much do you want for the 100-400L :mrgreen:

[PacAce]

Actually the 400 is f 5.6. ;)

You'll never know how much you miss the zoom until you're stuck with only the 400. If you're shooting multi-camera, as I will be this year, then it won't be so bad, but if you only shoot with one camera it can be a hassle. And, of course, it depends on what you're shooting.

This year I plan on going out with the 70-200L 2.8 IS on the 10D and the 400 on the MKII. My wife will shoot with the 20D and the 100-400.
Thanks for the correction, Jim. I meant to type 5.6 but my fingers were off by one key position. ;)

I do have two bodies but let's assume I'm only using one. Then how do you decide which one to take? The 100-400 or the 400 prime? If changing lenses is going to be a hassle and you opt for the zoom lens, then when is the prime ever going to get used? With my luck, the day I take the prime is the day I wished I had the zoom instead. :lol: See the dilemma one's faced with?

Or maybe the question I should be asking is "In what situations would one opt to use one lens over the other?".

[PacAce]

You just can't have too much glass. It is a natural law of the universe that you will wish you had the one you just sold.

Besides, whoever dies with the most toys wins!!

If you do however choose to ignore my sage advice.......How much do you want for the 100-400L :mrgreen:
LOL :lol: You can be sure that if I do decide to sell it, you'll be the first to know. :)

BTW, which camera were you thinking of using it on? The A70 or the Pro1? :mrgreen:

[Maureen Souza]

BTW, which camera were you thinking of using it on? The A70 or the Pro1? :mrgreen:[/QUOTE]

This is the wife with the 20D... I want that lens!!!!:lol: :lol: :lol:

[CyberDyneSystems]

Thanks for the correction, Jim. I meant to type 5.6 but my fingers were off by one key position. ;)



Ahhh yes young grasshopper,... I'll make a typist of you yet! :p :lol:

On the serious side,. I'd have a hard time parting with my 100-400.. but with the 70-200mm and 300mm it might happen.

Best way to fond out is to get the 400mm and hold on to the zoom for a while,.. see what happens :)

[Skip Souza]

LOL :lol: You can be sure that if I do decide to sell it, you'll be the first to know. :)

BTW, which camera were you thinking of using it on? The A70 or the Pro1? :mrgreen:

Ignore the wife. MY 20D should arriveby Wednesday.

[PacAce]

This is the wife with the 20D... I want that lens!!!!:lol: :lol: :lol:
Ignore the wife. MY 20D should arriveby Wednesday.

OK, since I don't want to be in the middle of a domestic dispute, why don't you two duke it out and whoever wins, give me a yell. On the other hand, to be fair to Skip and to give hime a fighting chance, how about I just have an auction and you can each bid for the lens. :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen:

But seriously, I still haven't decided whether I want to get rid of the 100-400 lens yet but I will let you know if I do, assuming you haven't gotten one already by then. :)

[PacAce]

Ahhh yes young grasshopper,... I'll make a typist of you yet! :p :lol:

On the serious side,. I'd have a hard time parting with my 100-400.. but with the 70-200mm and 300mm it might happen.

Best way to fond out is to get the 400mm and hold on to the zoom for a while,.. see what happens :)
CDS, you have a good point there about holding on to the zoom for a while to see how the prime works out. You know, I have a sneaky suspicion that maybe that's what the other owners of both lenses are doing, too. :lol:

[timmyquest]

Why dont you just keep the 100-400 for a while and see how much you'll use it.

[ssim]

I have the 400 f4.0 DO IS. I know there are mixed reviews on this lens but I find it to be very good. There is a huge difference in physical size between the this lens and the 400 f4.5. I still use the DO lens when I am shooting locally. I tend to travel a fair bit and the 100-400 is a nice light versatile lens for travelling.

I have been on a bit of a binge on buying more primes lately and do tend to use them more these days than the 100-400. I don't think that I could part with it though. For the kind of shooting that I do, I like the options of having a zoom (beats zooming a prime with your legs). I am seriously considering passing the 400 DO over to my son since I picked up the 300 f2.8 L IS which is just an amazing piece of glass.

[defordphoto]

Thanks for the correction, Jim. I meant to type 5.6 but my fingers were off by one key position. ;)

I do have two bodies but let's assume I'm only using one. Then how do you decide which one to take? The 100-400 or the 400 prime? If changing lenses is going to be a hassle and you opt for the zoom lens, then when is the prime ever going to get used? With my luck, the day I take the prime is the day I wished I had the zoom instead. :lol: See the dilemma one's faced with?

Or maybe the question I should be asking is "In what situations would one opt to use one lens over the other?".

If I was one shooter then I'd probably dump the 100-400 and get the 300 f2.8. Then I'd have the 70-200, 300 and 400. With two bodies that'd be a sweet combo. With two shooters I don't see use letting loose of the 100-400 anytime soon.

I lower-light, low contrast situations the 400 prime shines and the weaknesses of the 100-400 become present, but for a sunny-day situation, it's real darn hard to beat the 100-400. It can produce some quite stunning photographs and is no slouch in spite of how some people bash it.

Should I post the Player's pitstop photo again? LOL!!!

[LazyPhotographer]

I have both lenses... and am hoping to sell the 400 5.6 to get on the way to the 300 2.8 (coz I can't afford a 500!). My major complaint with the 400 is no IS, and I really didn't see anything magnificent from it. I'm pretty sure it's the lens fault and not the photographer. ;-)

[Scottes]

I have both and consider them to be different lenses completely, except that they can both do 400mm. Other than the length they're different lenses. Oh, they have a lot of overlap, but in most situations one of these lenses is a clear winner.

You have read my comparison, right? Maybe it's time to re-read it?

[JAZZ D.P.G.]

I have the 400 f4.0 DO IS. I know there are mixed reviews on this lens but I find it to be very good......... I am seriously considering passing the 400 DO over to my son since I picked up the 300 f2.8 L IS which is just an amazing piece of glass.

:D HI DAD :D

[PacAce]

Should I post the Player's pitstop photo again? LOL!!!
LOL :lol: Heck, why not, Jim?!? There are a bunch of new members who I'm sure haven't seen it yet so go for it! :lol:

[PacAce]

I have both lenses... and am hoping to sell the 400 5.6 to get on the way to the 300 2.8 (coz I can't afford a 500!). My major complaint with the 400 is no IS, and I really didn't see anything magnificent from it. I'm pretty sure it's the lens fault and not the photographer. ;-)
Hmmm, interesting point about the 300 f/2.8, Lazy, because that lens is in my "to get" list. :confused:

[PacAce]

I have both and consider them to be different lenses completely, except that they can both do 400mm. Other than the length they're different lenses. Oh, they have a lot of overlap, but in most situations one of these lenses is a clear winner.

You have read my comparison, right? Maybe it's time to re-read it?
OK, Scott. I went back and dug up your old post as well as one by Scott Berger and another similar post. After reading them again, I think I'm going to hold on to the 100-400 after all even if I do get the 400 or the 300 prime sometime in the near future.

And, for the benefit of anybody else interested in reading these older threads, here they are:


Canon 400mm f/5.6 L versus Canon 100-400 f/4.5-5.6 L (http://www.photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=43436&highlight=100-400+f%2F5.6)

Canon 100-400 IS L vs 300 F4 + 1.4X Test Results (http://www.photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=34809&highlight=100-400+f%2F5.6)

100-400mm f4.5-5.6L or 400mm 5.6? (http://www.photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=13566&highlight=100-400+f%2F5.6)

[GeForceFX]

LOL :lol: Heck, why not, Jim?!? There are a bunch of new members who I'm sure haven't seen it yet so go for it! :lol:

idd :lol:

[Scottes]

I'm still positive that I'll never give up my 100-400. Even if I got a 500mm, it's size and lack of "hand-hold-ability" would mean that I'd still want to keep my 400mm Prime.

My goal is to be able to write a thread on "19 Ways To Shoot 400mm"
:-)

[PacAce]

I'm still positive that I'll never give up my 100-400. Even if I got a 500mm, it's size and lack of "hand-hold-ability" would mean that I'd still want to keep my 400mm Prime.

My goal is to be able to write a thread on "19 Ways To Shoot 400mm"
:-)
Is that going to be a sequel to Belmondo's "4 Ways to Shoot 400mm"? :lol: :lol: :lol:

[Scottes]

Yes. With proper credits, of course. The man simply inspires me.