Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies. Read More.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses
Thread started 25 Jan 2018 (Thursday) 18:35
Prev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)

100-400mm basic questions

 
CyberDyneSystems
Admin (type T-2000)
CyberDyneSystems's Avatar
48,050 posts
Gallery: 78 photos
Joined Apr 2003
Rhode Island USA
Jan 28, 2018 23:24 |  #16

Snydremark wrote in post #18548990 (external link)
In 10 years, I've mounted this lens to a tripod fewer than 20 times,....

You've beat me by a factor of 20! I got my first one in 2004.


GEAR LIST
CDS' HOT LINKS
Jake Hegnauer Photography (external link)

LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)
Tom ­ Reichner
"I am a little creepy"
Tom Reichner's Avatar
Joined Dec 2008
Omak, in north-central Washington state, USA
Jan 29, 2018 00:10 |  #17

Snydremark wrote in post #18548990 (external link)
In 10 years, I've mounted this lens to a tripod fewer than 20 times, I'd say.


CyberDyneSystems wrote in post #18551445 (external link)
You've beat me by a factor of 20! I got my first one in 2004.

This lack of tripod use is interesting to me.

There is one kind of bird photography that I use this lens for a lot, and I have always HAD to use a tripod for it, because I have no idea how I would ever get the shots if I shot handheld. . This is shooting birds at cavity nests when I know precisely what composition I want before the birds even show up.

Either I am doing something REALLY WRONG, or you two don't do this one very specific type of photography with it.


.


"Your" and "you're" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one.
"They're", "their", and "there" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one.
"Fare" and "fair" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one. The proper expression is "moot point", NOT "mute point".

LOG IN TO REPLY
Snydremark
Myth-informed
18,010 posts
Gallery: 40 photos
Joined Mar 2009
Issaquah, WA USA
Jan 29, 2018 00:51 |  #18

Tom Reichner wrote in post #18551455 (external link)
This lack of tripod use is interesting to me.

There is one kind of bird photography that I use this lens for a lot, and I have always HAD to use a tripod for it, because I have no idea how I would ever get the shots if I shot handheld. . This is shooting birds at cavity nests when I know precisely what composition I want before the birds even show up.

Either I am doing something REALLY WRONG, or you two don't do this one very specific type of photography with it.

.

Correct; don't shoot cavities...would definitely have to use a tripod for that.


- Eric S.: My Birds/Wildlife (external link) (7D MkII, Canon 10-22 f/3.5-4.5, Canon 24-105L f/4 IS, Canon 70-200L f/2.8 IS MkII, Canon 100-400L f/4.5-5.6 IS)
"The easiest way to improve your photos is to adjust the loose nut between the shutter release and the ground."

LOG IN TO REPLY
Choderboy
I Chimp, therefore I am
Choderboy's Avatar
Joined Jul 2005
Sydney, Australia
Jan 29, 2018 01:00 |  #19

Tripod used for both of these shots. 5 stop ND filter used also.
Focus and horizon levelling done in first shot, waiting for the sun to make an appearance. Tripod allows me to swing camera into position with panning base of ballhead and then I don't want to risk eye damage looking through viewfinder. I don't want to damage my equipment either but I do value my eyesight more.
As it eventuated, the sun's appearance was not particularly photogenic but I was prepared and safe.

IMAGE: https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4754/39960729801_c873606f04_o.jpg

IMAGE: https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4662/39960729641_37cb9544f6_o.jpg

Dave
https://www.flickr.com​/photos/12185187@N00/ (external link)
5D4, 1D4, 1DS2. Canon, Sigma lenses
Image editing OK

LOG IN TO REPLY
CyberDyneSystems
Admin (type T-2000)
CyberDyneSystems's Avatar
48,050 posts
Gallery: 78 photos
Joined Apr 2003
Rhode Island USA
Post has been edited 25 days ago by CyberDyneSystems.
Jan 30, 2018 16:24 |  #20

Tom Reichner wrote in post #18551455 (external link)
This lack of tripod use is interesting to me.

There is one kind of bird photography that I use this lens for a lot, and I have always HAD to use a tripod for it, because I have no idea how I would ever get the shots if I shot handheld. . This is shooting birds at cavity nests when I know precisely what composition I want before the birds even show up.

Either I am doing something REALLY WRONG, or you two don't do this one very specific type of photography with it.

.

I use the 100-400mm for hand held use exclusively. It's my fast pointer. When i am going to lug a tripod, I just go ahead and bring my 500mm too.

On my MkI I removed the collar and used to pack it on occasion in case I though I might use it. Never did.
On my MkII I removed the foot altogether, ( I was mad they wouldn't let me remove the collar) In the field I wouldn't even have a way to mount it if I decided too.


GEAR LIST
CDS' HOT LINKS
Jake Hegnauer Photography (external link)

LOG IN TO REPLY
Tom ­ Reichner
"I am a little creepy"
Tom Reichner's Avatar
Joined Dec 2008
Omak, in north-central Washington state, USA
Jan 30, 2018 16:58 |  #21

CyberDyneSystems wrote in post #18552786 (external link)
I use the 100-400mm for hand held use exclusively. It's my fast pointer. When i am going to lug a tripod, I just go ahead and bring my 500mm too.

.
That makes sense. . The reason this doesn't work for me is because so many times at these "set ups", I need to shoot from a fixed spot (no way to move closer to the subject or further from the subject), and I need focal lengths that are much shorter than 500mm. . In fact, very few of my 100-400mm shots are taken at 400mm.

Often times at these types of shoots, one reason that the tripod is necessary is because I have to have the camera set up at a place where I can't reach it to get my finger on the shutter button. . So the only way to shoot is to have the camera and the 100-400mm all set up on a tripod and then trigger the shutter with a remote release.

I just don't have any idea how this could be accomplished without a tripod, and I have no idea how it could be done with a 500mm if you need a much wider field of view, such as 192mm or 265mm or whatever.


.


"Your" and "you're" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one.
"They're", "their", and "there" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one.
"Fare" and "fair" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one. The proper expression is "moot point", NOT "mute point".

LOG IN TO REPLY
amfoto1
Cream of the Crop
10,228 posts
Joined Aug 2007
San Jose, California
Post has been edited 22 days ago by amfoto1.
Feb 02, 2018 12:26 |  #22

I shoot with 100-400mm II hand held a lot... But for longer shooting sessions the 3 lb. lens on a 2 lb. camera can get pretty tiring (especially since I usually have at least a second camera, with shorter lens on it that I'm also carrying and using). At some events I'm shooting for 5, 6 or 8 hours or longer, nearly continuously. And at those times I'll put it all on a tripod (w/gimbal head when shooting sports action) or at least a monopod.


Alan Myers "Walk softly and carry a big lens."
5DII, 7DII(x2), 7D(x2) & other cameras. 10-22mm, Tokina 12-24/4, 20/2.8, TS 24/3.5L, 24-70/2.8L, 28/1.8, 28-135 IS (x2), TS 45/2.8, 50/1.4, Tamron 60/2.0, 70-200/4L IS, 70-200/2.8 IS, 85/1.8, Tamron 90/2.5 Macro, 100/2.8 USM, 100-400L II, 135/2L, 180/3.5L, 300/4L IS (x2), 300/2.8L IS, 500/4L IS, EF 1.4X II, EF 2X II. Flashes, studio strobes & various access. - FLICKR (external link) - EXPOSUREMANAGER (external link)

LOG IN TO REPLY
Archibald
You must be quackers!
Archibald's Avatar
Joined May 2008
Calgary
Feb 02, 2018 13:39 |  #23

I'm also a hand-held shooter with the 100-400mm orig before I sold it and the 100-400mm II currently. If I am going to be in one place more or less, I will use a monopod. For a few situations (for instance, moon eclipse), I use a tripod.

The bokeh is usually fine with these lenses, but it depends on the situation. Sometimes there is a weird doubling in fine highlights.


Pentax Spotmatic F with 28/3.5, 50/1.4, 50/1.8, 135/3.5; Canon digital gear
C&C always welcome.
Picture editing OK

LOG IN TO REPLY
wyntastr
Senior Member
wyntastr's Avatar
Joined Mar 2012
Bradenton, FL
Feb 02, 2018 17:40 |  #24

The original Mk I version of this lens is very capable in a variety of situations. It is my go to lens for shooting my daughter's softball and lacrosse games. One caveat though, it really likes good light and that's where it shines. It is also my main lens for motorsports like the Rolex 24 last weekend. Like Jake said, it is easy enough to hand hold and once you get used to the push/pull zoom, you can catch action pretty quickly. With a capable body, you can push the ISO up at night and still get good results. I got some nice pans at ISO 3200 at night with this lens on my 1D Mk III.
The prices for this lens used right now make it a bargain for that kind of performance. I've only used a tripod with it when shooting the moon. This version also really doesn't do well with teleconverters.
Some examples:

IMAGE: https://farm3.staticflickr.com/2917/32736259774_d64b64d138_b.jpg
[IMAGE'S LINK: https://flic.kr/p/RSMT​vY] (external link)SRQ PiF day2-083 (external link) by Jonathan (external link), on Flickr

IMAGE: https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4453/38154446351_002f9762a5_b.jpg
[IMAGE'S LINK: https://flic.kr/p/218z​vBV] (external link)Vs. W Tampa-201 (external link) by Jonathan (external link), on Flickr

IMAGE: https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4764/28250484349_3224a93911_b.jpg
[IMAGE'S LINK: https://flic.kr/p/K3p7​Ln] (external link)race-159 (external link) by Jonathan (external link), on Flickr

60D - 1D Mk III - Rebel T3 - Rokinon 8 fisheye - Tokina 12-24 f/4 - 40 f/2.8 STM - 50 f/1.8 Mk I - 85 f/1.8 - 70-200 f/4L - 80-200 f/2.8L Magic Drainpipe - 300mm f/4L - 100-400L

LOG IN TO REPLY
nero_design
Member
nero_design's Avatar
Joined Nov 2012
Sydney, Australia
Feb 09, 2018 01:33 |  #25

kat.hayes wrote in post #18548944 (external link)
1. Do you need a tripod when shooting with one of these for either photos or videos?


HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.
The EOS M6 Mirrorless on the EF 100-400mmL II lens. Usually I have this lens on an EOS 6D.

No you don't need a tripod. The 4-Stop Image Stabilizer on the 100-400mmL II lens is VERY effective - and it's quite impressive to observe when it's operating. But you can make your life easier by using a Monopod. I bought a small Manfrotto monopod to go with this camera and it enables me to carry it more easily and to stand for hours at a time without any fatigue. If I'm shooting wildlife or surfers it makes things simple. If you want to shoot pictures of the moon at night then you can choose to shoot handheld or use a Tripod.


HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.
Photo from nero_design's gallery.


I tend to carry this lens via the Tripod-mount foot which is included with the lens as part of the ring-mount. But the foot is not particularly long so only two or three fingers can grasp it... But by adding the monopod, it allows me to further grip the lens with my thumb around/against the base of the monopod. It's safer to carry this way because the grip is more secure. Using a large lens on a camera mount usually applies critical pressure to the mount on the camera. So it's often recommended to use the mounting foot and a safety tether (there's a slot on the front of the foot). I don't know anyone who uses a tether. The Monopod I use cost me about $46 and is rated to the weight of the lens + camera.

kat.hayes wrote in post #18548944 (external link)
2. How well does this lens work with creating a bokeh effect behind the subject?


HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.
An example of Bokeh for an up-close subject. My wife is the burry blob on the far right. She had been bringing food to the local park to feed the critters and this large Eastern Water Dragon had accepted her as a friend. When I sat on the grass to take her picture.... he ran up to me to try and scare me away from her. I snapped him instead. The bokeh here is about as good as I could hope to ask for from a lens.

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.
Photo from nero_design's gallery.
Even at maximum zoom, you can get distinct subject separation with a shallow DOF from this lens. I took a number of shots over the water (from a bridge) and found that objects that were closer created stronger bokeh than you can see in this shot. I had just obtained this lens when i took this picture and had not updated the lens correction and vignetting correction on my camera.


HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.
Photo from nero_design's gallery.
Some strong Bokeh from a subject shot with the EF 100-400mmL II + EF 2x III Extender attached. The green color was the result of heavy rain on the grass and was not enhanced.

The Bokeh from this lens (as you can see from Gonzogolf's reply) is really quite beautiful and it's also pronounced.



LOG IN TO REPLY
Archibald
You must be quackers!
Archibald's Avatar
Joined May 2008
Calgary
Feb 09, 2018 09:37 |  #26

Here is an example of the bokeh that the Mark II makes at times. The Mark I was similar.

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.
Photo from Archibald's gallery.

Pentax Spotmatic F with 28/3.5, 50/1.4, 50/1.8, 135/3.5; Canon digital gear
C&C always welcome.
Picture editing OK

LOG IN TO REPLY
Tom ­ Reichner
"I am a little creepy"
Tom Reichner's Avatar
Joined Dec 2008
Omak, in north-central Washington state, USA
Feb 09, 2018 09:54 |  #27

Archibald wrote in post #18559965 (external link)
Here is an example of the bokeh that the Mark II makes at times. The Mark I was similar.

It's only fair to point out that you shot this at f9.

If your goal had been to create more creamy bokeh, the lens would have been very capable of doing so if you had used different settings and positioned yourself a bit differently. . That choppy, "nervous" bokeh is not a fault, or a characteristic, of the lens.


.


"Your" and "you're" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one.
"They're", "their", and "there" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one.
"Fare" and "fair" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one. The proper expression is "moot point", NOT "mute point".

LOG IN TO REPLY
Archibald
You must be quackers!
Archibald's Avatar
Joined May 2008
Calgary
Post has been edited 15 days ago by Archibald.
Feb 09, 2018 09:56 |  #28

Tom Reichner wrote in post #18559974 (external link)
That choppy, "nervous" bokeh is not a fault, or a characteristic, of the lens.

Obviously it is. LOL.


Pentax Spotmatic F with 28/3.5, 50/1.4, 50/1.8, 135/3.5; Canon digital gear
C&C always welcome.
Picture editing OK

LOG IN TO REPLY
Tom ­ Reichner
"I am a little creepy"
Tom Reichner's Avatar
Joined Dec 2008
Omak, in north-central Washington state, USA
Post has been edited 15 days ago by Tom Reichner.
Feb 09, 2018 10:02 |  #29

Archibald wrote in post #18559977 (external link)
Obviously it is. LOL.

No, it is a result of the type of background you chose to put behind the subject, and of the ratio between the camera-to-subject distance and the subject-to-background distance. . And also a result of the aperture you chose to use. . Not a fault or characteristic of the lens.


If you do everything you possibly can to make bokeh look bad, and then it does look bad, how can that be blamed on the optics? . That's like missing a target at 50 yards by 20 feet, and then saying that the firearm was to blame for the inaccuracy.


.


"Your" and "you're" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one.
"They're", "their", and "there" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one.
"Fare" and "fair" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one. The proper expression is "moot point", NOT "mute point".

LOG IN TO REPLY
Archibald
You must be quackers!
Archibald's Avatar
Joined May 2008
Calgary
Post has been edited 15 days ago by Archibald.
Feb 09, 2018 10:10 |  #30

Tom Reichner wrote in post #18559985 (external link)
No, it is a result of the type of background you chose to put behind the subject, and of the ratio between the camera-to-subject distance and the subject-to-background distance. . And also a result of the aperture you chose to use. . Not a fault or characteristic of the lens.

If you do everything you possibly can to make bokeh look bad, and then it does look bad, how can that be blamed on the optics? . That's like missing a target at 50 yards by 20 feet, and then saying that the firearm was to blame for the inaccuracy.

The Mark I and II versions of the 100-400mm are known to produce this kind of ropy bokeh at times. They are not the only ones. Other lenses do the same.

Anyway, it's silly to say that it doesn't produce the bokeh that it produces.

https://www.photo.net ...0-400-is-lens-help.50754/ (external link)
http://community.usa.c​anon.com ...-6-and-slower/td-p/175391 (external link)
https://fstoppers.com ...8-r-lm-ois-wr-lens-176642 (external link)


Pentax Spotmatic F with 28/3.5, 50/1.4, 50/1.8, 135/3.5; Canon digital gear
C&C always welcome.
Picture editing OK

LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)

3,141 views & 28 likes for this thread
100-400mm basic questions
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses


Not a member yet? Click here to register to the forums.
Registered members get all the features: search, following threads, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, settings, view hosted photos, own reviews and more...


AAA

Send feedback to staff    •   Jump to forum...    •   Rules    •   Index    •   New posts    •   RTAT    •   'Best of'    •   Gallery    •   Gear    •   Reviews    •   Polls

COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies. Privacy policy and cookie usage info.

POWERED BY AMASS 1.4version 1.4
made in Finland
by Pekka Saarinen
for photography-on-the.net
Spent 0.00119 for 6 database queries.
PAGE COMPLETED IN 0.09s
Latest registered member is josejoseph1
829 guests, 457 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 6430, that happened on Dec 03, 2017