Canon 100-400mm Lens

Deillub · 29th of March 2009 (Sun)

I have the Canon 50D camera .. with a Tamron 18-200mm lens.
I would love to be able to get pictures of those skittish birds from a distance or in flight ... but find my current lens is just not up to it.
I can't afford multiple lenses and therefore I'm very conscious of getting value for the buck.
My question is ... what do you experts think about the:
Canon 100-400mm f4.5-5,6L IS SM EF Lens

Are there other lenses out there that are compatable or would I get results using a teleconverter (which I know nothing about) ??

katodog · 29th of March 2009 (Sun)

If the only lens you are considering is the 100-400mm, then you made a fine choice. It's an excellent lens for a lot of subjects, not just birds. However, if you're leaving yourself open for suggestions, I'd recommend the Sigma 150-500mm OS. The Sig is heavier, but otherwise it's pretty much the same as the Canon only longer reaching. The IQ difference is pretty small, and after processing the difference is gone. The stabilization on the Sig is a dream, and I've heard people say it might be better than the Canon IS. I don't know if that's the case because I used the 100-400mm and the IS was great.

But, you're going to find, like we all did, that for birding you are always going to want more reach. Adding a TC is an option, but with any lens, no matter what it is, you're going to lose some image quality. Otherwise, you're looking at primes, and that's gonna cost you. Go for the lens that goes the longest for the least amount of money, and still gets you excellent IQ. Look through the archive for the Sig and you'll see plenty of excellent shots from the lens.

And since you say you're conscious of getting the best bang for buck, I'd say the Sig over the Canon, because it's got longer reach, almost identical IQ, and is a lot cheaper.

SuzyView · 29th of March 2009 (Sun)

I opted for the 100-400 after seeing some shots in the Sports forum. I have 2 soccer boys, and they are in bigger fields now. The 70-200 wasn't getting to them. It was a good choice for me. I love that lens. If you want something not too expensive and very sharp, the 100-400 is well worth it.

Deillub · 29th of March 2009 (Sun)

Thanks everyone ... the Sigma 150-500mm option sounds like a good choice, and from waht others have told me it appears to have a good reputation.
Anyone else wish to comment on this suggested choice?

Skonk · 2nd of April 2009 (Thu)

Isn't the sigma a bit slower on focussing?

I own the 100-400mm and iv very happy with it but I seem to remember watching a video of someone demoing the sigma's AF and it appeared to be quite slow.

I may be mixing it up with another sigma lens though.

James.

Tom Reichner · 2nd of April 2009 (Thu)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Deillub

Thanks everyone ... the Sigma 150-500mm option sounds like a good choice, and from waht others have told me it appears to have a good reputation.
Anyone else wish to comment on this suggested choice?

Read the reviews on the B&H website. It appears that alot of folks are very happy with the Sigma. I, personally, was not happy with it, and after shooting thousands of frames with it over 10 days I opted to send it back to B&H for a full refund.

As far as sharpness goes, the 400 5.6 prime is simply sharper than the 100-400 zoom. If you are extremely picky about IQ / sharpness / clarity you might want to go with a prime lens rather than a zoom.

JuliusUpNorth · 3rd of April 2009 (Fri)

I also have the 100-400, and it stays on my camera 90% of the time, it seems. Photos taken with it sell...

TheDA · 14th of April 2009 (Tue)

The Canon 100-400 is a fantastic general use wildlife lens.

Tom Reichner · 14th of April 2009 (Tue)

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheDA

The Canon 100-400 is a fantastic general use wildlife lens.

If only it were as sharp and clear as Canon's "big" lenses - the 300 f2.8, the 400 f2.8, the 500 f4, the 600 f4, and the new 800 f5.6

Unfortunately, the 100-400 isn't even close in terms of IQ

Skonk · 14th of April 2009 (Tue)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tom Reichner

If only it were as sharp and clear as Canon's "big" lenses - the 300 f2.8, the 400 f2.8, the 500 f4, the 600 f4, and the new 800 f5.6

Unfortunately, the 100-400 isn't even close in terms of IQ

But fortunately is isn't even close... in terms of price.

matonanjin · 14th of April 2009 (Tue)

You might want to glance at this?

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/...d.php?t=677555

gh patriot · 20th of April 2009 (Mon)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skonk

But fortunately is isn't even close... in terms of price.

+1 WOW

29th of March 2009 (Sun)	#1
Deillub Member Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: Peterborough, Ontario Posts: 123 IMAGE EDITING OK	Canon 100-400mm Lens I have the Canon 50D camera .. with a Tamron 18-200mm lens. I would love to be able to get pictures of those skittish birds from a distance or in flight ... but find my current lens is just not up to it. I can't afford multiple lenses and therefore I'm very conscious of getting value for the buck. My question is ... what do you experts think about the: Canon 100-400mm f4.5-5,6L IS SM EF Lens Are there other lenses out there that are compatable or would I get results using a teleconverter (which I know nothing about) ??

29th of March 2009 (Sun)	#2
katodog Goldmember Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: Carol Stream, Illinois Posts: 3,922 IMAGE EDITING OK	Re: Canon 100-400mm Lens If the only lens you are considering is the 100-400mm, then you made a fine choice. It's an excellent lens for a lot of subjects, not just birds. However, if you're leaving yourself open for suggestions, I'd recommend the Sigma 150-500mm OS. The Sig is heavier, but otherwise it's pretty much the same as the Canon only longer reaching. The IQ difference is pretty small, and after processing the difference is gone. The stabilization on the Sig is a dream, and I've heard people say it might be better than the Canon IS. I don't know if that's the case because I used the 100-400mm and the IS was great. But, you're going to find, like we all did, that for birding you are always going to want more reach. Adding a TC is an option, but with any lens, no matter what it is, you're going to lose some image quality. Otherwise, you're looking at primes, and that's gonna cost you. Go for the lens that goes the longest for the least amount of money, and still gets you excellent IQ. Look through the archive for the Sig and you'll see plenty of excellent shots from the lens. And since you say you're conscious of getting the best bang for buck, I'd say the Sig over the Canon, because it's got longer reach, almost identical IQ, and is a lot cheaper. __________________ The only stupid question is the one that goes unasked - Photographers shoot to thrill, not to kill My Gear - Flickr - Facebook Smoke Photography - Sound-Activated Paint

29th of March 2009 (Sun)	#3
SuzyView Ms Moderator and Grandma Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: Northern VA Posts: 31,514 IMAGE EDITING OK	Re: Canon 100-400mm Lens I opted for the 100-400 after seeing some shots in the Sports forum. I have 2 soccer boys, and they are in bigger fields now. The 70-200 wasn't getting to them. It was a good choice for me. I love that lens. If you want something not too expensive and very sharp, the 100-400 is well worth it. __________________ Suzie - Still Speaking Canonese! *5D2* *7D & G12, the new iPad, iPhone 5 , 5 L's & 2 Primes* 23 bags - 4 Domke, 3 Lowepro, 1 Crumpler, 2 Tamrac, 5 Kata, 3 Thinktanks, 1 Pelican, 1 Tenba bag, 1 Epiphanie Paris & 2 Coach Handbag! And no excuses. My children are the reason, but it's the passion that drives me to get the perfect image of everything. My Gear and Wishes

29th of March 2009 (Sun)	#4
Deillub Member Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: Peterborough, Ontario Posts: 123 IMAGE EDITING OK	Re: Canon 100-400mm Lens Thanks everyone ... the Sigma 150-500mm option sounds like a good choice, and from waht others have told me it appears to have a good reputation. Anyone else wish to comment on this suggested choice?

2nd of April 2009 (Thu)	#5
Skonk Member Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: UK, Yorkshire, Barnsley Posts: 147 IMAGE EDITING OK	Re: Canon 100-400mm Lens Isn't the sigma a bit slower on focussing? I own the 100-400mm and iv very happy with it but I seem to remember watching a video of someone demoing the sigma's AF and it appeared to be quite slow. I may be mixing it up with another sigma lens though. James. __________________ Canon EOS 40D \| 1000D MP-E 65mm \| EF 100-400mm L \| EF-S 18-55mm IS \| Sigma 105mm Macro \| EF 50mm f/1.8 MT-24 EX \| 580EX II \| Kenko Tube Set 12-20-36 \| BG-E2N Battery Grip Full Gear List

3rd of April 2009 (Fri)	#7
JuliusUpNorth Member Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Whitehorse, Yukon Territory, Canada Posts: 481	Re: Canon 100-400mm Lens I also have the 100-400, and it stays on my camera 90% of the time, it seems. Photos taken with it sell...

14th of April 2009 (Tue)	#8
TheDA Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Orange County, Texas Posts: 80	Re: Canon 100-400mm Lens The Canon 100-400 is a fantastic general use wildlife lens.

14th of April 2009 (Tue)	#11
matonanjin Goldmember Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: Omaha, NE Posts: 2,349	Re: Canon 100-400mm Lens You might want to glance at this? http://photography-on-the.net/forum/...d.php?t=677555 __________________ My Web Site My Equine Photography Blog My Stuff and Feedback

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS Lens	neil.robinson	Canon EF and EF-S Lenses	9	12th of January 2006 (Thu) 15:39
Canon 100-400mm L lens	jamil	Canon EF and EF-S Lenses	9	7th of December 2005 (Wed) 07:16
Canon - 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L EF IS Lens	shannonb	Canon EF and EF-S Lenses	25	16th of October 2005 (Sun) 17:30