Should I buy a 100-400L [Archive] - Canon Digital Photography Forums

Spatch

29th of May 2005 (Sun), 18:01

Pb2Au

29th of May 2005 (Sun), 19:14

I have just received a £750 rebate for changing my mortgage to another company. The question is - should I put this towards a 100-400L?? I currently have a 17-40L, 70-200 F2.8L and 1.4TC, but having come back from safari in Africa I have been thinking of getting a longer telephoto.

I, therefore, have 2 choices, either plough the money back into paying off the mortgage or get the 100-400L. My heart says lens, my head says mortgage. Added to this, with the possibility of starting a family in the not too distant future (and all the associated costs) me thinks I ought to get the lens now while I can.

Since I will be paying for mortgage and kids for the next 20 yrs, a small investment now in a lens seems like the correct course of action........
I love my 100-400L, and it has enabled me to take many shots that are literally impossible without the lens. I have shot at 1/250 at 400mm with no stability/blur problems with IS enabled. The lens is heavy, but I carry it hendheld for 4+ mile hikes through rocky, hilly areas with little problem (I admit to switching hands every once in a while). The push-pull zoom is FAST and can go from 100 to 400 in a heartbeat. 400mm handheld:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v683/pb2au/_MG_5250.jpg

I bought mine from Dell (US) for about $1225 US, and I think that's a heck of a deal (free shipping, no tax).

joeseph

29th of May 2005 (Sun), 22:00

Yes, buy the 100-400L - you can't take decent photo's with a mortgage!

29th of May 2005 (Sun), 22:47

Yes, buy the 100-400L - you can't take decent photo's with a mortgage!LOL!:D I'm going to tell my wife that one...

Rigby470

29th of May 2005 (Sun), 22:58

Spatch, buy the 100-400L. It will hold it's value almost as well as your home. If you ever need to sell it in the future, you can. But with children on the way, you might not be able to buy it any time soon.

Lesmac

30th of May 2005 (Mon), 01:55

Agree, the white L lenses hold the value very well, so if everything went pear shape, money wise, you could sell it with very little loss.
I bought mine from a forum member from the states, because of the good sterling/dollar exchange rate, it was a great deal, with significant savings over buying in the UK. And buying privately rather than through an online store, you can usually avoid vat/import duties, and the cost of shipping this heavy lens from the states by air parcel was a reasonable £20.
I also have used URGalaxy and Keaphoto on E-bay with good transactions.
Whichever way you go, good luck, it's an excellent (albeit) heavy lens.

Les
http://lesmclean.photoblink.com/

FatPete

30th of May 2005 (Mon), 04:28

Les
http://lesmclean.photoblink.com/

(totally off-topic, but Les - I was just taking a look at your image gallery - woah! Stunning photos)

lensmen

30th of May 2005 (Mon), 05:58

In a nutshell. BUY

Got this pre-owned late last year. I love this lens , espcially the IS.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v258/Snoopy88/Birds/0SBG-Sunbird12a.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v258/Snoopy88/Laguna1204-8a.jpg

photo was reduced for easier uploading

sixshot

30th of May 2005 (Mon), 06:48

Buy buy buy. Yes so in my opinion.....Buy.

ghocking

30th of May 2005 (Mon), 10:29

Its sharp, its fantastic, the IS is great, its quick.

Buy

lordjim

30th of May 2005 (Mon), 11:42

Well by asking in this forum, you should expect a biais toward buying the lens because all of us love taking photos and using great lenses. my opinion is not different from the others: buy the lens!

It is overall probably the best long telephoto zoom you can find on the market.
The Bigma is heavier and the Tamron 200-500 is lighter but extremely cumbersome at 500mm from what I have read. Both the Bigma and Tamron do not have IS either.

The 100-400 is the best option (but also the most expensive one).

Spatch

30th of May 2005 (Mon), 13:54

Thank you all for the feed back. You are quite right, asking on this forum was somewhat planned and the fact that you have all have said 'buy' has added much weight to my argument with the wife - she has been impressed with the support for buying the lens. Many thanks again.

Anyone in the UK got a good example of this lens second hand for sale?

Cheers
Mark.

bimbo

30th of May 2005 (Mon), 14:20

Since you already have an excellent zoom 70-200mm with TC, why don't you think about 400mm/5.6?

Spatch

30th of May 2005 (Mon), 15:08

Bimbo,

I had thought about going for the fixed focal length 400mm F5.6 lens but there is no benefit in speed etc. If the fixed 400 was F4, for example, then it would be a serious contender (for exactly the reasons you mention) but these start to become more expensive. I also like the idea of the extra flexibility of the zoom (less lens changes).

Cheers,

Andy D

30th of May 2005 (Mon), 17:32

Yes!

JBillings

30th of May 2005 (Mon), 17:46

I fully understand what the forum leads to. An empty wallet. I got my 100-400 Thursday and had the time today to play with it. I'm plenty satisfied. This was shot at ISO 800 at 1/250 @f/8 and handheld

defordphoto

30th of May 2005 (Mon), 18:34

Ahhhhh...the 100-400. Let me see if I can find a decent photo... ;)

Shot with the 10D.

http://www.defordphoto.com/SportsGalleries/2003/CART/Portland/3_Day/img_4261_std.jpg

MDJAK

30th of May 2005 (Mon), 19:17

I have the 70-200 f/2.8IS along with the 70-300DO IS. I've always thought about getting the 100-400 until I read the following:

"For a while after it was first introduced this was one of the most used lens in my selection. I used it for compressed landscapes as well as wildlife when the 300mm f/2.8 was too bulky to carry. It is a remarkable value for the money and is capable of decent results, even wide open. Stopped down it is very good. My only real complaint is that the zoom is a push/pull design — not one that I'm very partial to and the lens hood attachment point is flawed. Every one I've ever seen has a lens shade that falls off easily. It also can be a bit soft at 400mm wide open.

"The IS capability has allowed me to hand-hold the lens at 1/125sec while at 400mm, while achieving very fineresults. But, once I got the Canon 1Ds I found that the lens was not as good as I had originally believed, since this camera shows up every deficiency in lenses attached to it. Today it is among my least used lenses."

To what do you attribute his change of heart? The above is a quote from the author of the Luminous Landscape.

defordphoto

30th of May 2005 (Mon), 19:32

To what do you attribute his change of heart? The above is a quote from the author of the Luminous Landscape.

Not like that matters. :rolleyes: His change of heart (possibly) is the fact that like most of the digital photography world we pixel-peep. Maybe a tick snobbish? Who knows. Who cares.

The lens is still a performer, even though I don't use mine that much anymore on my MKII, though my reasons are much different. My wife shoots that lens with the 20D and I mainly use the 400 f/5.6 with the MKII. Not because it's technically sharper, but because the focus is faster.

As for the IS on the 100-400, I rarely used it. Wife uses it constantly. So, I do not miss that at all.

Keep in mind that the 1DMKII resolves better in most cases than the 1Ds. I have not seriously shot with with the 100-400 since purchasing the MKII, so...

However, that presents a challenge. I have a sports shoot next weekend in Idaho (USSBA Sprint Boats) and will make a point of shooting with the 100-400 with the MKII along with the 400 to make a comparison.

Spatch

31st of May 2005 (Tue), 03:25

Andy D,

Was that a yes to buying one, or a yes to having one for sale?

Cheers,

shiato storm

31st of May 2005 (Tue), 04:10

spatch, i think you have your answer! we shall be expecting some fantastic shots any time soon with a 100-400L

Spatch

31st of May 2005 (Tue), 05:26

Shiato,

Yes, I have the answer I wanted, and the wife has seen the responses too and she has been impressed. Just need to find a good quality second hand example.

Cheers,

Cadwell

31st of May 2005 (Tue), 09:25

I have a 100-400L and I wouldn't buy another one after the problems I have had with it. The image stabilisation mechanism has failed and occasionally the 1D Mark II dies when the lens is attached (doesn't matter whether the camera is powered up or not at the time of lens change and out of all of my lenses this is the only one that this happens with). I have to remove the battery and re-insert it to restart the camera. Canon have failed to make anything approaching a satisfactory repair on the lens even though it's under warranty and being "professionally repaired" as part of Canon's CPS scheme.

For the 8 months that it was working, it was a decent enough lens with slightly better than average optics and a reasonably quick focusing speed... hardly outstanding but that's as far as I'll go in terms of singing it's praises. Now, it's £1,000 lemon and I wish I had never wasted my money on it.

Canuck

31st of May 2005 (Tue), 09:30

Cadwell, u forgot to mention the sidekick...I hope urs is working as well as mine! Ja, the 5 3/4 lb beast is what I am eluding to.

Simon Spiers

31st of May 2005 (Tue), 09:35

Well I'm gonna get one even though the prive 400 is sharper.
It has got to be the most versitile lens in this range.

Cadwell

31st of May 2005 (Tue), 10:03

Cadwell, u forgot to mention the sidekick...I hope urs is working as well as mine! Ja, the 5 3/4 lb beast is what I am eluding to.

Hello mate :) Yup, the beasty is going well. Still the best money I ever laid down on a lens :D

Canuck

31st of May 2005 (Tue), 10:13

Cadwell,
Hi as well, I have been mega mega monsterously busy of late! Glad to hear the monster is holding up well, mine is too. The Bald Eagle pics were shot w/ the monster. I totally agree, it is what forever changed my mind about photography and pro lenses.

Have a look at the site if you get a chance. I can PM it or you if you have misplaced it. Did you see the bald eagle pics, and there are some I added earlier today. The large Concorde has been removed, and there is a new gallery started as well, the ones from Scotland which there is only one there at the moment. I have also posted 3 pics in the landscape topic in the share photos if you're interested. It is great up here and just getting out is what I have been up to of late, now that the midwinter thaw has come! :rolleyes: Oh yes it is also called summer. I almost forgot, and we're quickly closing in on 19 hrs of daylight fropm sunrise to sunset! This is wild!

lensmen

31st of May 2005 (Tue), 10:32

BUY BUY BUY

shiato storm

31st of May 2005 (Tue), 10:56

Shiato,

Yes, I have the answer I wanted, and the wife has seen the responses too and she has been impressed. Just need to find a good quality second hand example.

Cheers,
ebay my good friend, ebay... (i got mine there :) )

xc611

31st of May 2005 (Tue), 11:31

...having come back from safari in Africa ........

Oh my God, you traveled to Africa without a 100-400L?

awp

31st of May 2005 (Tue), 15:32

Andy D

31st of May 2005 (Tue), 19:01

Andy D,

Was that a yes to buying one, or a yes to having one for sale?

Cheers,

Buying one Mate!

Cadwell

31st of May 2005 (Tue), 23:24

I am so glad that you asked that question. I have the 70-200 2.8 IS and 20D. I am shooting sports and the 200 is not enough. I was considering the Sigma 120-300. Now, I know that 400 is what I want! Thanks also to all of you that shared your photos! Spatch, I thinks you oughta get it too! I AM!

With a 1.4x TC on the Sigma 120-300mm is better optically than the 100-400L, a full stop faster and 20mm longer. Without the TC on there is simply no comparison. The Sigma is more expensive, but if you want the best then you have to pay for it.

Rob612

1st of June 2005 (Wed), 00:08

Why not look for an used 35-350 ? I have one and I must say that I am really satisfied, especially considering the fact that being discontinued you can have one cheap.

Here a sample pic and a 100% crop, but please keep in mind that this is the best I have available here at the office, at home I have a lot that are MUCH better.

Spatch

1st of June 2005 (Wed), 01:54

Shiato, I have my eye on one at the moment on ebay. The only issue is spending that sort of money on something that you have no real guarantee on. I must say I would rather spend a bit more on a second hand example from a shop than risk it from ebay. I know alot of people who swear by ebay and have bought some great stuff but I cannot bring myself to buy a lens that way - perhaps I am too cautious.

xc611, I have a 1.4TC but yes, within a few hours of being on safari I wish I had had a longer lens. Next time I will be more prepared. I still got some good pics though and I will post them on the website when I get round to it.

Belive it or not, having read a number of other posts on this forum (and bimbo got me thinking about this) I am now also considering the 300 F4L (or maybe the 400 F5.6L). At the moment the 300 is winning as it is a bit faster and will work well with the 1.4TC.

Decisions decisions......

Cheers.

Spatch

2nd of June 2005 (Thu), 03:46

lordjim

2nd of June 2005 (Thu), 08:53

Spatch -

I am also thinking about buying the 100-400 L. I must say that I am using this thread to convince my wife (even though, and probably because, there is an obvious biais toward the answer I like). :lol: but I would not go with a used copy. In fact, there are a number of posts on the internet of people having problems with the IS or USM motors. Those who had an extended warranty seemed glad to have one! In addition, good used copies of the lens are not cheap on Ebay. They generally go for around CAD1600 (roughly USD1200). The lens holds its value quite well (it is an L after all). I have even seen one with dust, mold and fungus around USD800 on Ebay whith people bidding on it!!!:rolleyes:

Don't know what the others think but I would save a bit more and go with a new one with an extended warranty if I were you.

Croasdail

2nd of June 2005 (Thu), 09:18

I used to shoot a push pull zoom - and it was quit happy. But now I have primarily shooting another zoom that is not of that design - and prefer the non-push-pull design. When there is plenty of time to compose the shot - Push/Pull is more then adequat. But for fast moving sports and recomposing shots on the fly, I find the traditional ring zoom to be much faster. Resting my left hand on top of the zoom while mounted on a monopod, I can quickly re-adjust the zoom to keep the action in frame as it approaches. While this surely can be done with a push pull, the amount of effort is a lot less with a ring adjusted zoom. So for static shots, or those that you can compose more carefully like birds or planes in flight - push pull may be the ticket. But for field sports - I found it more combersome. Just my observations.

Spatch

2nd of June 2005 (Thu), 09:22

Lord Jim,

The lens that is for sale is brand new and is in Hong Kong. It is not a 100-400L but a 300 F4L. I have had a slight change of heart and think that I may for for a prime instead of the zoom. I already have up to 280 covered with the 70-200 + 1.4TC. With the 300 + TC I can get to 420 with IS plus autofocus. This seems, at the moment quite a good way to go. I may, of course, change my mind and come back to the 100-400L

Cheers,

lordjim

2nd of June 2005 (Thu), 11:20

Sounds like a good alternative. I have read good reviews of the 300mm F4L. You may end up with sharper pics too.

Personnally, I prefer Zooms for the ability to reframe easily without having to move (especially with a long telephoto).

Also, the 100-400 becomes a 140-560 with a 1.4X TC (although it becomes F8 at 560mm and looses AF on the 300D).

Let us know how you find your new lens when you receive it and feel free to post some pics.

Cheers,

PS: I will hide your last post to my wife so that she continues to believe that there is no alternative to the 100-400 :lol: (although she probably guessed already).

LadyHawk

2nd of June 2005 (Thu), 11:26

Wow... that picture says it all. This lens is next on my list...

Spatch

2nd of June 2005 (Thu), 11:30

LordJim,

You cant have anything getting in the way of new L glass, just say and I will mod my post.

Cheers,

Timm

2nd of June 2005 (Thu), 15:54

Having said I was cautious of buying on Ebay, I have seen a lens for sale from DigitalRev in Hong Kong. Has anyone on this forum dealt with them, or have any comments about them, their feedback looks good and they are a power seller.

Cheers,

I've used DigitalRev (24-70L) and they could not have been better - great communication, fast delivery and rapid re-imbursement of import duty - I'll use them again when the bank acc has recovered! :confused:

Have also used URGalaxy who were also superb. Both items were shipped to the UK.

Spatch

3rd of June 2005 (Fri), 01:52

Timm,

Thanks, it is good to hear that. I feel somewhat more confident parting with the money now.

Cheers,

lordjim

3rd of June 2005 (Fri), 19:26

Spatch -

No need to mod your post, I will be strong and tell the truth to my wife: "there is no alternative to the 100-400" !:D

More seriously your thread made me hesitate between the 100-400 and the 300 F4 L IS. In fact, I have read good reviews of the 300 F4 L (including with a TC) recently. I think it is a very strong Prime contender to the 100-400.

As you may know (I discovered this two days ago thanks to this forum (great forum indeed)), you can see some sample pics per lens at:

http://www.pbase.com/cameras/canon/ef_300_4is

The above link is for the 300 F4L but you can find sample pics for any lens. The sharpness of some of the pics is amazing.

Finally, I also found a very interesting information on this forum recently (information that I knew but had forgotten), some credit cards offer to double the original manufacturer warranty when used to purchase an item such as a lens. This is a great thing to remember when buying a new lens.

Cheers,

Spatch

4th of June 2005 (Sat), 06:51

LordJim,

Be strong, the force is with you :D. Thanks for posting the links for the pictures. As for the 300, it may not have the flexibility of a zoom but it is faster, very sharp, has IS and the AF will still work with the 1.4TC fitted. The 300 is for me now.

I am currently waiting for some answers back from the Ebay vendor. If the responses are OK I will buy the 300 :D :D

Cheers,

rssfhs

4th of June 2005 (Sat), 06:58

Since you already have an excellent zoom 70-200mm with TC, why don't you think about 400mm/5.6?

I agree! I just bought one. They are sharper, lighter and cheaper than the 100-400 and the auto focus is much better, especially with a 1.4 converter!

lordjim

5th of June 2005 (Sun), 07:39

Well I did it :o . I became the proud owner :cool: of a new 100-400. So the next thing I will need to acquire will be ... experience and skills to get the most out of the lens. In fact, I am getting fewer and fewer excuses for missed shots.;)

Rssfhs: no doubt that Primes 300 F4 L or 400 F5.6 L will be sharper but I am not sure whether I will notice the difference and I like the versatility of the 100-400. There are many situations I can think of where 400 could become too long and where moving would not be an option (i.e., on a boat, in a car. etc...) that where a zoom makes sense I guess. At the end of the day, this is the old debate between zoom and primes, both have their advantages and disadvantages.

Spatch

5th of June 2005 (Sun), 13:21

LordJim,

Nice one, did you buy it off ebay? There was an auction for one of these lenes that ended just recently.

Cheers,

lordjim

5th of June 2005 (Sun), 18:14

Spatch -

I did not buy it on Ebay. In Canada, Ebay prices are not that great (due to sales tax on import from the US and custom broker fees) and the warranty conditions are not that clear either (when any). I feel more comfortable with some protection on the investment. I would probably see things otherwise if I were living in Europe where prices are significantly higher.

Cheers,

DigiDi

5th of June 2005 (Sun), 18:41

Your rebate could help pay some taxes but I hardly think it will put a dent in your mortgage.
I'd put this money towards your lens. I like the flexibility of being able to have the 100-400 zoom capabilities and even though it's a tad heavier, its easier to cart around in it's case than the 400mm lens. My husband loves this lens also!

Merlin Driver

5th of June 2005 (Sun), 22:37

I never knew that Dell sold these. Now my 100-400L is on the way....

Thanks,

Lynn

dmwierz

6th of June 2005 (Mon), 09:37

With a 1.4x TC on the Sigma 120-300mm is better optically than the 100-400L, a full stop faster and 20mm longer. Without the TC on there is simply no comparison. The Sigma is more expensive, but if you want the best then you have to pay for it.

Hear, hear! I also vastly prefer the constant length zoom of the Sigma - no dust sucking (which can be a problem with any variable-length zoom, push-pull or turn-zoom).

xuxu1

6th of June 2005 (Mon), 10:12

I agree! I just bought one. They are sharper, lighter and cheaper than the 100-400 and the auto focus is much better, especially with a 1.4 converter!

True in some way. :) But imagine all of a sudden a 400 would be too long and a 200 too short ! :shock: :shock: :shock:

Now what? :confused:

You would be happy with the 100-400 L IS. :grin:

It´s about time to make up your mind! GO FOR IT !!! (100-400L IS). It´s a great high quality lens!

ED

Spatch

6th of June 2005 (Mon), 11:20

I've made up my mind and gone for the Canon 300 F4L IS. Smack bang between 200 and 400 and can become a 420 with my 1.4TC, still retain autofocus and IS to boot. This lens worked out to be the best solution for what I wanted.

Cheers,

lordjim

6th of June 2005 (Mon), 12:55

Congrats Spatch. It seems that you made the right choice for your needs.

Here are some sample pics with my new 100-400 L (I like it (not in love yet though) but I confirm that is soft at 400mm (nothing dramatic either)):

http://www.pbase.com/lordjim/image/44406489 (http://www.pbase.com/lordjim/image/44406489)

http://www.pbase.com/lordjim/image/44403276 (http://www.pbase.com/lordjim/image/44403276)

http://www.pbase.com/lordjim/image/44403275 (http://www.pbase.com/lordjim/image/44403275)

http://www.pbase.com/lordjim/image/44403274 (http://www.pbase.com/lordjim/image/44403274)

I think I could have gotten better results if I had tought about stopping down further (I had a tripod and the birds ("heron" in French not sure in English) were not moving). I am still learning.:)

Spatch

6th of June 2005 (Mon), 14:06

LordJim,

I would have said the first 2 look pretty sharp to me, the second two could be just a bit of movement as all looks a bit soft. I see that quite often if my shutter speed is not high enough when using the 70-200 2.8L with the 1.4TC. Look forward to seeing more and I will post some from the 300 if I ever get it - I am desperately trying to set up my PayPal account........

Cheers,

Tom W

6th of June 2005 (Mon), 14:21

It's a great lens.

http://www.pbase.com/photosbytom/image/41697011/original.jpg

lordjim

6th of June 2005 (Mon), 14:29

Could be the shutter speed but I was using a tripod at 1/400sec. It could also be the bird that moved but again at 1/400 sec, it should be sharp. I did not switch the IS off on the tripod so it could be due to the IS. I will continue to practice and see if I can get something better out of it.