Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
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 08 Oct 2010 (Friday) 21:32
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Side by side 100-400 vs 400?

 
J.Litton
Goldmember
Avatar
1,741 posts
Likes: 16
Joined Jan 2010
Location: Florida's Treasure Coast
     
Oct 08, 2010 21:32 |  #1

Anyone have side by side photo comparisons?


7D MK II.17-40L.100-400L.500L
www.jlitton.com (external link)
www.facebook.com/jlitt​on.nature.photography (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
liquidstone
insane Bird photographer
Avatar
1,088 posts
Likes: 102
Joined Dec 2005
     
Oct 08, 2010 21:40 |  #2

http://www.pbase.com …e/image/8641663​0/original (external link)


Romy Ocon, Philippine Wild Birds (external link)
Over 260 species captured in habitat, and counting.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
richardfox
Goldmember
Avatar
1,883 posts
Joined Oct 2009
Location: Bellbrook, Ohio, USA
     
Oct 08, 2010 23:09 |  #3

Well, this one will start a battle for sure! I've always had the general belief that primes are sharper than zooms, and there is a lot of data and tests confirming this situation. However, I've compared my 100-400 (set at 300mm for the test) with my 300 2.8. I'm finding the same result in that sharpness is nearly equal.

Anyone wanting to comment on the review that was posted? I'd like to see the opinions! Shooting charts is one thing, but field performance is what really matters!


Canon 50D gripped, EF 50/1.8, EF-S 10-22, 17-40L, 24-105L, 70-200 f/2.8L, 100/2.8 macro, 100-400L, 300 2.8L, Canon 500 f8 mirror with chipped EF mount, 580EX, 1.4x and 2x Canon teleconverters, Canon EF Life-Size converter.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
phreeky
Goldmember
3,499 posts
Likes: 11
Joined Oct 2007
Location: Australia
     
Oct 08, 2010 23:52 |  #4

The 100-400 is a complex zoom with heaps of elements. You'll probably find that all the primes are equally fantastic, and the zooms vary from stupidly sharp to somewhat disappointing. If I'd had the option of buying locally and testing prior to purchase I probably would've considered the zoom, but I had to buy online (due to my location).




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
liquidstone
insane Bird photographer
Avatar
1,088 posts
Likes: 102
Joined Dec 2005
     
Oct 09, 2010 00:35 |  #5

richardfox wrote in post #11061897 (external link)
Shooting charts is one thing, but field performance is what really matters!

Some samples from the field from my 100-400 IS:

http://birdphotoph.pro​boards.com …action=display&​thread=352 (external link)

And a comparison to my 500 f4 IS:

http://birdphotoph.pro​boards.com …action=display&​thread=353 (external link)


Romy Ocon, Philippine Wild Birds (external link)
Over 260 species captured in habitat, and counting.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
nightcat
Goldmember
4,526 posts
Likes: 25
Joined Aug 2008
     
Oct 09, 2010 00:38 |  #6

here's one comparison

http://www.luminous-landscape.com …enses/forgotten​-400.shtml (external link)




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
MOkoFOko
nut impotent and avoiding Geoff
Avatar
19,889 posts
Likes: 20
Joined Jun 2010
Location: Michigan, home of the Zombie plague
     
Oct 09, 2010 00:38 |  #7

richardfox wrote in post #11061897 (external link)
Well, this one will start a battle for sure! I've always had the general belief that primes are sharper than zooms, and there is a lot of data and tests confirming this situation. However, I've compared my 100-400 (set at 300mm for the test) with my 300 2.8. I'm finding the same result in that sharpness is nearly equal.

Anyone wanting to comment on the review that was posted? I'd like to see the opinions! Shooting charts is one thing, but field performance is what really matters!

Well that's a slight shocker... still, I'd rather have f/2.8 vs f/6.3 at that range :) Stopping down on the 300 2.8, you should easily blow away the 100-400 at the same aperture?


My Gearlist

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
C4Miles
Goldmember
Avatar
1,050 posts
Joined Sep 2007
Location: South Texas
     
Oct 09, 2010 02:50 as a reply to  @ MOkoFOko's post |  #8

Here is another comparison link, http://www.naturescape​s.net …iewtopic.php?f=​1&t=127089 (external link)


Miles
Canon 40D & 350D; Canon EF 400[COLOR=Black] f/5.6L, EF 100-300L, EF 28-105, Nifty Fifty MK I, Sigma 17-70

"The camera is a mirror with a memory, but it can not think." Arnold Newman

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
condyk
Africa's #1 Tour Guide
Avatar
20,886 posts
Likes: 21
Joined Mar 2005
Location: Birmingham, UK
     
Oct 09, 2010 03:42 |  #9

Owned three 100-400s and none compared to my 3 x 400mm's ... others may find different results. My opinion is the zoom has variable quality across copies while the prime is consistent. This has been debated many times and really the only way to satisfy yourself is buy both and return the one you don't like. You can only count on the lens you have on your own camera.


https://photography-on-the.net …/showthread.php​?t=1203740

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Tanglefoot47
Goldmember
Avatar
2,413 posts
Joined Oct 2005
Location: Tulalip WA about 40 miles north of Seattle
     
Oct 09, 2010 04:04 |  #10

adam8080 wrote in post #11061507 (external link)
Do a search

Maybe he has?? never hurts to ask sometimes you might find what your asking for :D




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
harcosparky
Goldmember
2,425 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 55
Joined Mar 2010
Location: Harford County - ( Bel Air ) Maryland
     
Oct 09, 2010 05:24 |  #11

Go to a camera shop and do your own side by side comparison.
This way you won't be misled by someone posting up two pics that may or may not have been post processed.
I shot them both side by side on two different cameras.
A friend of mine had the 50D and 400mm prime.
I have the 7D and 100-400.
We both took turns swapping out the lenses and bodies, during a day of shooting wildlife.

Today I have the 7D and 100-400mm IS L.
My friend?
He still has his 50D and a brand new 100-400 IS L.

adam8080 wrote in post #11061507 (external link)
Do a search

And if he does a search, and finds a 6 year old thread on the topic?
Say he posts a comment, and revives the thread, then what?
Someone will come along and say ..... " wow, way to dig up the dead thread "
SEARCH <-- you get bitched at if you don't and bitched at if you do.

Telling someone to do a search, helps nobody.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
jm4ever
Senior Member
Avatar
848 posts
Gallery: 16 photos
Likes: 385
Joined Dec 2006
Location: Welland, Ontario
     
Oct 09, 2010 06:31 |  #12

A few years ago I decided to buy the 400L even thou I already had the 100-400 as I kept reading people saying over and over the prime was much better. But in the end I returned the prime as it didn't really give me anything better than I was already getting with the zoom.

If I really pixel peeped I would give the edge to the prime on a couple of shots but on most I couldn't really see much if any difference. Certainly not enough to give up the versatility of the zoom and IS.

If Canon ever gets around to updating the 400 5.6 and adds IS I would be eager to try it again. Still not sure if I would give up my 100-400.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Livinthalife
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
5,118 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Jan 2006
Location: Austin,TX
     
Oct 09, 2010 06:34 |  #13

Focus speed and bokeh are the most noticeable differences. Fast focus on a prime as there are less elements. And for the samples, bokeh is better on the prime as well...BUT having the flexibility of a zoom is a huge befit....


-Andy-

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
J.Litton
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
Avatar
1,741 posts
Likes: 16
Joined Jan 2010
Location: Florida's Treasure Coast
     
Oct 09, 2010 07:21 |  #14

Thanks for the links and support! Does anyone have any pictures of the two of together them for a size comparison?


7D MK II.17-40L.100-400L.500L
www.jlitton.com (external link)
www.facebook.com/jlitt​on.nature.photography (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Tyreman
Goldmember
1,061 posts
Joined Aug 2006
Location: Cambridge,Ontario,Canada
     
Oct 09, 2010 07:37 |  #15

I have had and used both.
Sold the prime 400 though.
still with the 100-400 here.
you have to have owned both to really know and judge for yourself


1D Mark III / 100-400 L Version II
430ex II

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

4,574 views & 0 likes for this thread
Side by side 100-400 vs 400?
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


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


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is Joonpark9
916 guests, 325 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.