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 14 Jun 2011 (Tuesday) 08:41
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Which TeleZoom

 
wu343
Member
50 posts
Joined May 2010
     
Jun 14, 2011 08:41 |  #1

I'm returning my 55-250 for a higher quality long range zoom, and I'm having trouble deciding which one. It has been narrowed down to the Canon 70-200 f4 IS with a 1.4 tele or the Canon 100-400 IS. The 70-200 will have better IS, but will I be satisfied with the gen 1 IS on the 100-400? I would like to get the 100-400, but i want to us the lens hand held for my son's sporting events and worry about IS capabilities. I also read reports that the 70-200 is the sharpest zoom in the Canon lineup. Anyone have experience with both lenses care to share experiences?




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
rick_reno
Cream of the Crop
44,642 posts
Likes: 134
Joined Dec 2010
     
Jun 14, 2011 08:53 |  #2

the 70-200 consistently gets high marks here. are your sons sporting events outdoors? during the day?




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
wu343
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
50 posts
Joined May 2010
     
Jun 14, 2011 09:08 |  #3

rick_reno wrote in post #12590932 (external link)
the 70-200 consistently gets high marks here. are your sons sporting events outdoors? during the day?

I should have good light for the events and am not afraid to crank up the ISO if need be.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
thestone11
Goldmember
Avatar
1,203 posts
Joined May 2011
Location: Edmonton, Alberta
     
Jun 14, 2011 09:19 |  #4

wu343 wrote in post #12590994 (external link)
I should have good light for the events and am not afraid to crank up the ISO if need be.

Then you should pickup the 70-200 f/4 non IS and save some money for another lens. I just got the lens yesterday. It works very well in daylight, I tried to handheld for slower shutter speed at 1/40, no visible camera shake in the picture. Image are very shape, it has sweet bokeh as well.

After all, if you can afford and think it is worth to pay the money for the IS, by all means go for it. You never know when u will need it. But to me, I don't think I am going to use the lens indoor, since I have the 24-70mm f/2.8 for that matter. So I went with the non IS version and saved the money for something else.


Canon 5D MK II | Fuji X100 | Canon T2i | Canon 100mm macro f/2.8 | Canon 135L f/2 | Canon 50mm f/1.2 L | 17-40mm f/4 L | 24-70mm f/2.8 L | 70-200mm f/4 L IS USM |Canon 430EX II Flash X2 | Pocketwizard TT5 & TT1

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
bpark42
Senior Member
307 posts
Joined Jul 2009
     
Jun 14, 2011 09:22 |  #5

wu343 wrote in post #12590994 (external link)
I should have good light for the events and am not afraid to crank up the ISO if need be.

If by good light you mean daylight you should be fine with either lens. The 70-200 f4 IS is outstanding bare and remains very good with the TC.

The IS on the 70-200 is much better than the older version on the 100-400, but I'm not sure why this would be a deal breaker for shooting sports. You are going to need high shutter speeds to freeze the action no matter how many stops your IS gives you.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Silverfox1
Goldmember
Avatar
3,195 posts
Gallery: 3 photos
Likes: 55
Joined Aug 2009
Location: South Texas
     
Jun 14, 2011 09:28 |  #6

wu343 wrote in post #12590848 (external link)
I would like to get the 100-400, but i want to us the lens hand held for my son's sporting events and worry about IS capabilities.

1st of all unless you plan on shooting your Sons sporting events ONLY when he and his teammates are standing perfectly still or stationary the IS has absolutely no bearing whatsoever.

Now tell us what you foresee the average distance to subjects will be in feet or meters if you can give a rough estimate ?

Also time of day in relation to ambient lighting conditions ?

Regards, ;)


Silverfox1 POTN Feedback / TC Extender Tests / Gear List

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
wu343
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
50 posts
Joined May 2010
     
Jun 14, 2011 10:47 |  #7

Sporting events are not the only use this new lens will receive. I plan to use it for wildlife and some landscape. We are planning a trip to Glacier National Park in August this year and I would like to use it out there as well. I will not be using the lens indoors or at night without a tripod. I worry about IS because I like to move around a lot and shoot hand held whenever possible and may find a need to shoot with IS on.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Snydremark
my very own Lightrules moment
19,170 posts
Gallery: 58 photos
Likes: 3846
Joined Mar 2009
Location: Issaquah, WA USA
     
Jun 14, 2011 10:54 |  #8

As long as you're going to be shooting in daylight or really well lit arenas, I'd go with the 100-400. Once you get outside the confines of a sports field, the extra reach of the 400 will be nice; especially for trips to places like Glacier.

While it is older and wouldn't be hurt by an update, the IS in the 100-400 works just fine in situations where you may need it.


- Eric S.: My Birds/Wildlife (external link) (7D MkII/5D IV, 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 I/II)
"The easiest way to improve your photos is to adjust the loose nut between the shutter release and the ground."

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
bpark42
Senior Member
307 posts
Joined Jul 2009
     
Jun 14, 2011 11:04 |  #9

The light weight, superior IS, and superior image quality make the 70-200 a compelling choice over the 100-400 for travel, but you will have to weigh all of that against the reach of the 100-400, especially if you plan to shoot wildlife.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
rick_reno
Cream of the Crop
44,642 posts
Likes: 134
Joined Dec 2010
     
Jun 14, 2011 11:11 |  #10

Go with the 70-200 f4, you'll have to decide if IS is something you want/need. I have it on many of my lenses, but it's turned off 95% of the time.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
KVN ­ Photo
Goldmember
Avatar
1,940 posts
Joined Jun 2010
Location: Jakarta, Indonesia
     
Jun 14, 2011 11:13 |  #11

Get the 100-400 if light is usually available, the 2 stop IS is actually pretty effective, @400mm you can handhold it at -1/100s. It will give adequate background blur for panning as well.


X-Pro1 + 18-55 f/2.8-4 OIS + 55-200 f/3.8-4.5 OIS
TS-E 24 f/3.5L II + XF 35 f/1.4 + XF 56 f/1.2
Sony RX100 II + G12
Travel the world!

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
thestone11
Goldmember
Avatar
1,203 posts
Joined May 2011
Location: Edmonton, Alberta
     
Jun 14, 2011 11:14 |  #12

wu343 wrote in post #12591564 (external link)
Sporting events are not the only use this new lens will receive. I plan to use it for wildlife and some landscape. We are planning a trip to Glacier National Park in August this year and I would like to use it out there as well. I will not be using the lens indoors or at night without a tripod. I worry about IS because I like to move around a lot and shoot hand held whenever possible and may find a need to shoot with IS on.

IS is good to have! But if you are shooting in daylight, most of the time you won't need IS since shutter speed is fast! Keep in mind, IS will be almost useless on moving objects. You mentioned u won't use this lens indoor/night without a tripod, I think IS is not really needed for you, use the extra money u saved to get a better tripod/flash and go with the 70-200mm f/4 non IS!


Canon 5D MK II | Fuji X100 | Canon T2i | Canon 100mm macro f/2.8 | Canon 135L f/2 | Canon 50mm f/1.2 L | 17-40mm f/4 L | 24-70mm f/2.8 L | 70-200mm f/4 L IS USM |Canon 430EX II Flash X2 | Pocketwizard TT5 & TT1

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
amfoto1
Cream of the Crop
10,256 posts
Likes: 86
Joined Aug 2007
Location: San Jose, California
     
Jun 14, 2011 11:17 |  #13

The 70-200/4 IS would be my choice... used with a 1.4X teleconverter on occasion. It won't give you quite as much reach as the 100-400, but has excellent IS and image quality, "workhorse" build quality... should be long enough for most field sports... and is compact, easily handheld. There will be times it's good to have f4 instead of f5.6, too.

All the 70-200s are traditional "two ring" zooms... one ring to zoom, the other to focus manually. The 100-400 is a push-pull zoom... one ring does both and you slide it inward or outward to zoom. I'm not a fan of this type zoom, I find them harder to get a steady shot. Some folks like them and they are fast handling (although with modern AF cameras it's just about as fast to use only the zoom ring on a two-ring zoom).

I should qualify the above that I use a couple different 300mm and a 500mm prime, too, all with and without 1.4X and 2X teleconverters.

And, don't be tempted by a 2X teleconverter... perhaps you already know it will effect AF when used on an f4 lens. I also find the loss of IQ to be too great with a 2X on a zoom. 1.4X is pretty darned good, though. And modern 2X work quite well on many prime teles.

Shooting sports for many years, I couldn't disagree more with some comments that IS is of no importance for sports shooters. There are quite a few thousand other pros using it, too, who will strongly disagree. Every other camera manufacturer has had to scramble to catch up with Canon's IS lenses... Which utterly dominated every major sports event for years where their only real advantage was IS. Now that others are offering VR, OS, VC etc., Canon lenses are no longer as dominant.

Sure. Non-IS sports shooting certainly is "doable"... We all survived somehow for many years without it, after all. Just plan to predominently go for one style of sports shot... Frozen action done with a high shutter speed. Actually, IS can help with those too, and is useful for a variety of other kinds of shots... panning, dragging the shutter to get deliberate subject blur, etc. In the end, I'd much, much rather have IS and not need it, than not have it when I do need it.

There is acutally no reason to ever turn off IS on many of the lenses, unless you are trying to save a small amount of battery power. Even if you are going for a panned, blurred background, you actually can leave turned on but should use the correct single-axis mode.

There are a few lenses where you should manually turn it off when the lens is on a tripod, locked down: 100-400, 300/4, 28-135 are several of these and there are some more. It's not necessary to turn off even on a tripod with any of the 70-200, 300/2.8, 400/2.8, etc.... These lenses sense "lack of movement" and turn it off themselves when not needed.


Alan Myers (external link) "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) - ZENFOLIO (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sebr
Goldmember
Avatar
4,628 posts
Likes: 9
Joined Jan 2007
Location: Sweden/France
     
Jun 14, 2011 11:39 |  #14

I would also recommend you to check the 70-300L. I have very limited experience with the 100-400, but I believe this lens is sharper and it has the latest IS. It is also relatively small.


Sebastien
5D mkIII ; 17-40L ; 24-105L ; 70-200L II ; 70-300L ; 35L ; Σ85/1.4 ; 135L ; 100macro ; Kenko 1.4x ; 2x mkIII ; 580EXII
M5 ; M1 ; 11-22 ; 18-150 ; 22/2.0 ; EF adapter; Manfrotto LED
Benron Tripod; ThinkTank, Lowepro and Crumpler bags; Fjällräven backpack

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Scott ­ M
Goldmember
3,272 posts
Gallery: 83 photos
Likes: 364
Joined May 2008
Location: Michigan
     
Jun 14, 2011 11:55 |  #15

I own both lenses you are considering. The 70-200L is used for general telephoto and sports, while I use the 100-400L mostly for wildlife. Overall, the 70-200 is the better lens, as it is smaller/lighter, with better image quality, auto focus performance and image stabilization. However, it lacks the reach I need at times for wildlife, even with a 1.4x TC.

The 100-400L is no slouch, though. It does require a little more attention to technique to get sharp photos, due to the longer focal length, weight and older IS. You need to keep your shutter speed up -- I try to be at 1/1000sec or faster, when lighting allows. Also, a monopod helps when using a tripod is not practical.

If you will be going to Glacier N.P., you will want as much focal length as possible for wildlife there. Even the 70-300L may not be enough. This is the reason I added the 100-400L to my kit last year to complement the 70-200L. We will be traveling to Yellowstone this year, and during my last trip there I had the 70-300 IS (non-L), and still wanted more reach. I would love a 500mm prime, but those lenses are too expensive for my budget.


Photo Gallery (external link)
Gear List

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

1,854 views & 0 likes for this thread
Which TeleZoom
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 m.nobles
766 guests, 177 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.