What lens would you buy in the 300mm to 400mm range

[Mr848]

Ultimately for shooting motorsport bikes in particular, I need the zoom due to the shooting distance at most tracks in Australia as it varies greatly.
I am completely stumped whether i should get a Telephoto or a Telephoto zoom lens?

Does a telephoto say a 400mm mean i can only shoot at 400mm and anything closer will be out of the picture?

The 100-400mm L IS USM would be ideal but lacks contrast and has some average to poor reviews.

Thanks

[R32Big_boy]

I think you'll find that the 100-400's problem lies with the user more so than the lens. I'm not saying that it is a perfect lens or anything, but if you use it correctly then it is a fantastic lens. If you want a prime lens tho, a 300mm F4 is hard to go past, and stick a 1.4 converter if you want some more length. Oh and if you get a "prime" then yes you are stuck at 400mm or 300, which ever you choose.

[Cadwell]

I think you'll find that the 100-400's problem lies with the user more so than the lens. I'm not saying that it is a perfect lens or anything, but if you use it correctly then it is a fantastic lens.

I'll suggest that it's quite a poor lens with a number of significant flaws. Of course it might be that I don't know how to handle a long telephoto properly. Care to give me some pointers?

[GSH]

If you definitely need a zoom then as far as i'm concerned there are 2 realistic options.

1 is the Sigma 120-300 f2.8 and the other is the 100-300f4. Combine either with a monopod and 1.4x TC to get over 400mm.

I'd only consider a 100-400L as a lightweight option if i get bored with motorsports and start doing airshows.

[Mr848]

If you definitely need a zoom then as far as i'm concerned there are 2 realistic options.

1 is the Sigma 120-300 f2.8 and the other is the 100-300f4. Combine either with a monopod and 1.4x TC to get over 400mm.

I'd only consider a 100-400L as a lightweight option if i get bored with motorsports and start doing airshows.

I looked at this one Sigma 120-300 f2.8 a read some reviews and it apparently has very poor auto focus which i need for panning...

I was thinking of a Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L IS USM with a 1.4 EF extender but will i loose auto focus "Autofocusing is also possible with lenses whose maximum aperture is f/4 or faster." what does this mean? Will the F/4 be just ok or will work fine as most of my shooting is F/9 to F/14.

Or a EF 70-200mm f/2.8L USM with the same extender is the IS really neccisary for motorsport and panning?

Would i be better with he F/2.8 with no IS or the F/4 with IS but i need it to work optimally with the extender i.e autofocus...

Cheers heaps

[andrewc]

I think Cadwells, GSH's and DaveG's posts with the 120-300 f2.8 shows that the Sigma 120-300 f2.8 is a great lens for motorsport.

IS isn't really needed for motorsport, however, you may use the camera for other things.

All Canon bodies with exception of Canon 1d series require widest aperture to be f/5.6 or better to maintain AF (f/8 on 1d) A x1.4 extender adds 1 stop making a f/4 lens f/5.6 and therefore AF will be maintained. AF is done before the camera stops down to your chosen aperture.

[The Moose]

Many people use the Sigma 120-300/2.8 for sports and it's a pro lens for a reason. I wish I had one.

[canonnoob]

I looked at this one Sigma 120-300 f2.8 a read some reviews and it apparently has very poor auto focus which i need for panning...

I was thinking of a Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L IS USM with a 1.4 EF extender but will i loose auto focus "Autofocusing is also possible with lenses whose maximum aperture is f/4 or faster." what does this mean? Will the F/4 be just ok or will work fine as most of my shooting is F/9 to F/14.

Or a EF 70-200mm f/2.8L USM with the same extender is the IS really neccisary for motorsport and panning?

Would i be better with he F/2.8 with no IS or the F/4 with IS but i need it to work optimally with the extender i.e autofocus...

Cheers heaps

cant answer the extender question. but here is the thing that only gets you to 280mm.. which is not even in the 300mm range...

IS is not nescessary for panning but it definatly does help conidering you will be shooting at speeds of 1/100th or lower...

I suggest something like the 300f4 IS or the 400 5.6... that is if you want something that long.

[Lowner]

Cadwell,

"I'll suggest that it's quite a poor lens with a number of significant flaws".

All I can say is I've been very pleased with my 100-400L. I've certainly not noticed any low contrast issues specific to the lens.

[Simon Harrison]

I looked at this one Sigma 120-300 f2.8 a read some reviews and it apparently has very poor auto focus which i need for panning...

I was thinking of a Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L IS USM with a 1.4 EF extender but will i loose auto focus "Autofocusing is also possible with lenses whose maximum aperture is f/4 or faster." what does this mean? Will the F/4 be just ok or will work fine as most of my shooting is F/9 to F/14.

Or a EF 70-200mm f/2.8L USM with the same extender is the IS really neccisary for motorsport and panning?

Would i be better with he F/2.8 with no IS or the F/4 with IS but i need it to work optimally with the extender i.e autofocus...

Cheers heaps

If you look hard enough, you'll find good and bad reviews for just about everything on the internet........

All canon lenses do their focusing wide open, regardless of what aperture you have set. They only stop down at the point when you hit the shutter button. When you put a 1.4XTC on to an f4 lens, you lose a stop meaning that the fastest aperature you can get is no longer f4, but f5.6. This significantly reduces the amount of light entering the lens, and hence means that the AF sensors have a much harder time in acquiring and then tracking - Canon's own figures demonstrate this (Cadwell will be able to post what they are as I'm having a 'senior moment' just now). Your F4 lens will still autofocus with a 1.4XTC attached, but it's performance will take a hit.

This is why most people want fast lenses - not because they intend doing much shooting at f2.8, but because they want the maximum light hitting the AF sensors while focusing is going on. If it were my choice, I would take a 70-200 f2.8 non IS over an f4 IS version anyday for motorsport use.

As for IS, well I shoot motorsport 99%+ of the time, and don't own a single IS lens. I used to, but always shot moving subjects with the IS switched off as I felt like it was fighting against me all of the time, as well as slowing things down as the IS gyros spooled up.

I have never owned or used a 100-400 so I'm staying out of that debate. I do however own a 120-300 f2.8 and with the performance I get from it I wouldn't even consider swapping it for a Canon 300 f2.8 never mind anything else.

Simon.

[GSH]

I looked at this one Sigma 120-300 f2.8 a read some reviews and it apparently has very poor auto focus which i need for panning...


I never suggest a lens that i have either a) not used/owned or b) seen anything less than good shots from in the hands of someone i know. You'll find that's fairly rare on here as the "experts" in the gear section mostly base their opinions on hearsay and b/s.

I speak (like Cadwell) as someone with direct experience of both the 120-300 and 100-400L. The Sigma's AF makes the Canon look very average indeed and mine was one of the Holy Grail-like "good" copies. I owned them both simultaneously for around 18 months and for 12 months of that, the Canon was little more than a door stop...eventually i sold it.

Like Cadwell, Simon Harrison and many others in the Motorsports section, my 120-300 has seen Sun, Rain, Snow and all the temperatures that go with it and is yet to let me down. It's seen action on a 20D, 50D and 1DMK2N with and without Teleconvertors of both types and has probably made the vast majority of my print sales from 6x4s up to 18x12s and the occasional 30x20...

Also, you don't need IS for Motorsports. Yes, the IS lenses have a "Panning" mode but you'll find that most of the time it tries to work against you.

A sample or 2..

On the 1DMK2N with a 1.4x TC fitted..
http://homepage.ntlworld.com/geoff.hubbert/Pics/Other/GSH_3340.jpg

On the 1DMK2N (no TC).
http://homepage.ntlworld.com/geoff.hubbert/Pics/Images%202009/Pirelli/Pirelli09-0451.jpg

http://homepage.ntlworld.com/geoff.hubbert/Pics/Images%202009/Riponian/Riponian-0103a.jpg

http://homepage.ntlworld.com/geoff.hubbert/Pics/Images%202009/Various/PM3H0200.jpg

http://homepage.ntlworld.com/geoff.hubbert/Pics/Other/Escorts/NHFR-0265.jpg

And just to prove that i can do something other than cars & bikes...it was considerably duller than it looks when i shot this (ISO1000 should give it away). In those conditions the 100-400L will just pop up a little white flag to match its paint job ;)
http://homepage.ntlworld.com/geoff.hubbert/Pics/Images%202009/Rugby/15Feb-0156.jpg

[andrewc]

excellent samples.

I'm sold :)

[Mr848]

Thanks for the clarification and perfect examples, besides the price it will be one of my next few lenses for sure.
I forgot to mention this is only going a 400D till i wait for the 60D or get a good deal on the 50D.
Thanks for all the informative info

[petris]

I never suggest a lens that i have either a) not used/owned or b) seen anything less than good shots from in the hands of someone i know. You'll find that's fairly rare on here as the "experts" in the gear section mostly base their opinions on hearsay and b/s.

I speak (like Cadwell) as someone with direct experience of both the 120-300 and 100-400L. The Sigma's AF makes the Canon look very average indeed and mine was one of the Holy Grail-like "good" copies. I owned them both simultaneously for around 18 months and for 12 months of that, the Canon was little more than a door stop...eventually i sold it.

Like Cadwell, Simon Harrison and many others in the Motorsports section, my 120-300 has seen Sun, Rain, Snow and all the temperatures that go with it and is yet to let me down. It's seen action on a 20D, 50D and 1DMK2N with and without Teleconvertors of both types and has probably made the vast majority of my print sales from 6x4s up to 18x12s and the occasional 30x20...

Also, you don't need IS for Motorsports. Yes, the IS lenses have a "Panning" mode but you'll find that most of the time it tries to work against you.



My one of two lenses are 100-400L and i am quite happy with it(not fully). For shooting rallies it have been excellent for using only one lens(poor photographer as i).
When i looked your shots with Siggy it makes me want to try broke my promises to not touch Siggy anymore(had 70-200 2.8).
Maybe i will test it in next time( my friend will lease it), before it i have to go and stay for a while in gym :D

[andrewc]

Well hopefully I've just done the deal on a 120-300 f2.8. Used as I can't stretch to a new one. Did a deal for my Sigma 10-20 plus cash. It may arrive tomorrow which means I can give it a try at Donington for the BTCC practise day.

Edit: Won't arrive until Monday. Boo!

[andrewc]

My new (to me) 120-300 f2.8 has arrived. It was cheap because the previous owner had managed to get the lens hood cross threaded - I think it took a light knock as there is a bit of a dent on the hood.

10 minutes of time, a set of jewellers screwdrivers got the hood off and gentle force applied in the correct way, got the lens hood off, revealing a Sigma 105mm UV filter I wasn't bargaining on getting and some light superficial scratches around the hood mounting area. The hood itself has a dinged edge but a few minutes in our workshop should sort that out.

Some paint wear to zoom ring and tripod foot but apart from that it seems in good condition. The lens cap was missing which I knew about so I'll order one from Sigma.

[GSH]

My new (to me) 120-300 f2.8 has arrived. It was cheap because the previous owner had managed to get the lens hood cross threaded - I think it took a light knock as there is a bit of a dent on the hood.

10 minutes of time, a set of jewellers screwdrivers got the hood off and gentle force applied in the correct way, got the lens hood off, revealing a Sigma 105mm UV filter I wasn't bargaining on getting and some light superficial scratches around the hood mounting area. The hood itself has a dinged edge but a few minutes in our workshop should sort that out.

Some paint wear to zoom ring and tripod foot but apart from that it seems in good condition. The lens cap was missing which I knew about so I'll order one from Sigma.


I don't bother with filters much but the 105mm size for the 120-300 cost a ridiculous amount so you've scored there. As for the infamous paint issues, i've taken to peeling mine off in moments of boredom (particularly at Silverstone) to pass the time. When it's suitably bare i'll get a lens coat for it :D