Tough decision

[Medic1]

I am looking at buying a telephoto (prime or zoom) lens.....I have been leaning heavily toward the 300 f4L (and using it with a TC to get 420mm). I have also considered the 100-400. The only problem I have with the 100-400 is the push/pull zoom. I have seen it, used it and really wasn't sure whether I could get used to it (I didn't like my first experience with the zoom....the lens is great though).

I am not sure how practical the fixed focal length is though.......for alot of my photography it would be fine as I need the 400mm to get to the subject, and have thought the prime would be the sharper route. Lately though, I have started thinking the 100-400 may be more practical (due to its versitility through zoom).

Question: should I just compromise and for sake of practicality hope I get used to (and like) using the push/pull zoom?

I shoot mainly aviation and nature (mostly aviation)

I'm also looking at replacing my 28-105 with the 28-135 IS

[Timm]

...Question: should I just compromise and for sake of practicality hope I get used to (and like) using the push/pull zoom?

I shoot mainly aviation and nature (mostly aviation)...

I've not seen the 100-400, however a good few years back I did a lot of aviation stuff and used a push/pull zoom (albeit not in the league of the 100-400 ;)) and found it very natural when panning on an approaching/receding subject.

A possible qualifier on the usability may be that I was using a light weight 70-210 handheld - something bigger & mono/tripod mounted could be a totally different matter. :confused:

[hauff]

Remember that with the 1.6 crop of the 20D a 300mm fixed would be the equivilant of 480mm and add the 1.4X and your looking at 672mm. I don't think I could get used to the push/pull, especially here on the prairies where there is dust everywhere for the push/pull to collect.

[Medic1]

Hard to say........I wonder if I will be able to get used to it or not. Its a great lens, and I would love to add it to my collection, but based on my experience so far I am hesitant.

This may be on hold right now....I was going to be getting it soon as an addition for out local airshow photography access, but it has just been cancelled because a sponsor pulled out.

Keep the opinions coming.....

[aam1234]

I find the push/pull to be faster and more intuitive than regular lenses.

[Jon]

The push-pull's fine. Not a problem to get used to, in fact totally intuitive. I'm more concerned about getting third-party lenses which zoom and focus backwards from Canon's lenses. And I don't know of any actual proof that it's more of a dust collector than twist zoom. Get it! A prime and TC may be somewhat better quality, but it's less flexible and changing focal lengths means changing lenses (essentially).

[ghocking]

Have had my 100-400 L IS for 4 weeks now and I did not fancy the push pull, but its fine to use with no problems, as long as you remember to twist the lock on if carry it vertical, and its as sharp as hell.


EOS 20D
EOS 350D
EF S 10-22
EF 28-135 IS
EF 75-300 IS
EF 24-70 L
EF 100-400 L IS

[WepWaWep]

I have no problems with the push/pull. I set the lock to allow a smooth action and can extend the lens fluidly when I get the subject in the view finder.

Now if this rain system would just go away for a few days so I can get out and play!

[ed2day]

I've had mine for a couple months now and the push-pull isn't a big deal. Takes a little getting used to. Definitely not as precise as a twist zoom which can be frustrating at times. But faster than twist zoom which is an advantage for sports, etc. Also I think the push-pull makes it easier to hold since your left hand is always positioned under the lens, cupping the lens in your palm. At least that's how I hold it. This was the one lens I had the most misgivings about ordering and the one lens I fell in love with the quickest. I figured I'd still want a prime super-tele, but I don't feel the need for one now.

[clicky]

Sigma 120-300 AF f/2.8 could be the lens for you...?