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 04 Apr 2012 (Wednesday) 07:50
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Help choosing a long telephoto

 
SilversurferC6
Member
Avatar
151 posts
Joined Oct 2008
     
Apr 04, 2012 07:50 |  #1

Good morning everyone,

I am finding that my Canon 70-200/2.8 L is just not long enough when shooting outdoors and wildlife (without risking my life :D). I have been considering the Canon 100-400/4.5-5.6 L IS USM or the SigmaOS 150-500/5-6.3 which I once used to own. The Sigma is quite a heavy lens and took decent quality shots.

Any help or suggestions would be very much appreciated.


Pierre (aka Sierra) Toronto, Canada
Current kit: Canon EOS 5D Mk III; Canon 50 F1.4; Canon L 16-35 F2.8;Canon L 24-105 F4; Canon L 100-400 F4.5-5.6; Metz Mecblitz 76 MZ5, and more stuff.
Mac Book Pro (I'm a Mac and you're a PC)
http://www.imaginefocu​s.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
Mk1Racer
Goldmember
Avatar
1,735 posts
Likes: 9
Joined Mar 2009
Location: Flagtown, NJ
     
Apr 04, 2012 07:56 |  #2

This probably should be in the lens forum, but have you tried using a 1.4x or a 2x TC? I know the general consensus is that a 100-400 has better IQ than a 70-200 f/2.8 + 2x TC, but w/ the newer versions, it's not as big a difference. Plus you get more flexibility. And there are always the long primes, but I don't know if you want to spend that much.


7D, BG-E7, BGE2x2 (both FS), 17-55 f/2.8 IS, 17-85 f/4-5.6 IS (FS), 50 f/1.8, 85 f/1.8, 70-200 f/2.8L IS Mk I, 70-300 f/4-5.6L, 550EX, Kenko Pro300 1.4xTC

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
gjl711
According to the lazy TF, My flatulence rates
Avatar
55,252 posts
Likes: 2298
Joined Aug 2006
Location: Deep in the heart of Texas
     
Apr 04, 2012 08:00 |  #3

Sigma advantage = longer reach, better OS
Canon 100-400 advantage = better IQ, a tad lighter, 1/3 stop more light.

There are a couple other differences I'm sure, but those are my big ones.

Another option would be to get the 400mm f/5.6 as you already have the 100-200 range covered. It's again a bit sharper than the 100-400, lighter, cheaper, and with these long zooms I find myself always at the long end anyway especially shooting wildlife or birds.


Not sure why, but call me JJ.
I used to hate math but then I realised decimals have a point.
.
::Flickr:: (external link)
::Gear::

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
KinoC
Senior Member
Avatar
524 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 14
Joined Jun 2009
Location: South Florida
     
Apr 04, 2012 08:03 |  #4

Check the 400F5.6L it's a very good lens and for the price it does an awesome job. The 100-400 you might be a little disapointed because you are used to 70-200 and the IQ is not as good. I have seen very good copies of 100-400 and they still they don't come close to the 400F5.6L... yes the 400F2.8L is better but then it cost a few times and you need a Tundra to carry this puppy around.


KC
1Dx |5D MII | 7D|16-35 MII|24-70 MII|70-200 MII

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Jon_Doh
Senior Member
Avatar
872 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 65
Joined Apr 2007
Location: Pyongyang, North Korea
     
Apr 04, 2012 08:36 |  #5

Canon 400 L prime plus 1.4 teleconverter is a great long reach lens. Also, the Sigma 150-500 OS is very reasonably priced. Up to 400mm it's comparable in IQ to the Canon 100-400, but gets a little soft toward 500. But it probably produces pictures comparable to what you would get using the Canon zoom with a teleconverter and it costs about a third less.


I use a Kodak Brownie

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Craign
Goldmember
Avatar
1,196 posts
Gallery: 17 photos
Likes: 77
Joined Mar 2010
Location: Kentucky
     
Apr 04, 2012 08:45 |  #6

Since this is in the camera forum, maybe get a 1.6 crop body and a 400mm lens.


Canon 7D Mark II w/Canon BG-E16 Battery Grip; Canon EOS 50D w/Canon Battery Grip; Canon SL1; Tokina 12mm - 24mm f/4 PRO DX II; Canon EF 24-105mm f/4L IS; Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS; Canon 70-300mm f/4-5.6L IS; Sigma 85mm f/1.4 EX DG HSM; Canon EF 300mm f/4L IS; Canon EF-S 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS STM; Canon Extender EF 1.4x II; Canon Extender EF 2x II; Canon Speedlite 430EX II Flash
Image Editing Okay

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
watt100
Cream of the Crop
14,021 posts
Likes: 29
Joined Jun 2008
     
Apr 04, 2012 08:50 |  #7

SilversurferC6 wrote in post #14207644 (external link)
Good morning everyone,

I am finding that my Canon 70-200/2.8 L is just not long enough when shooting outdoors and wildlife (without risking my life :D). I have been considering the Canon 100-400/4.5-5.6 L IS USM or the SigmaOS 150-500/5-6.3 which I once used to own. The Sigma is quite a heavy lens and took decent quality shots.

Any help or suggestions would be very much appreciated.

Canon 100-400 is good for wildlife and outdoor things, I use to own the Canon 400mm 5.6 prime and switched to the 100-400 - almost as sharp and much more versatile. The sigma 150-500 is not as sharp
http://www.the-digital-picture.com …omp=0&FLIComp=7​&APIComp=1 (external link)




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
riverdog1
Senior Member
335 posts
Joined Oct 2010
Location: East Central IL
     
Apr 04, 2012 09:05 as a reply to  @ watt100's post |  #8

I did just the opposite, I had the 100-400 for a while and found I was using it near 400
most of the time and bought the 400 5.6 eventually selling the zoom. I've had the 400
about 8 years now.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
gjl711
According to the lazy TF, My flatulence rates
Avatar
55,252 posts
Likes: 2298
Joined Aug 2006
Location: Deep in the heart of Texas
     
Apr 04, 2012 09:36 |  #9

riverdog1 wrote in post #14207933 (external link)
I did just the opposite, I had the 100-400 for a while and found I was using it near 400
most of the time and bought the 400 5.6 eventually selling the zoom. I've had the 400
about 8 years now.

I'm thinking about going the same way. I am almost always at 400mm.


Not sure why, but call me JJ.
I used to hate math but then I realised decimals have a point.
.
::Flickr:: (external link)
::Gear::

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Snydremark
my very own Lightrules moment
18,481 posts
Gallery: 47 photos
Likes: 1519
Joined Mar 2009
Location: Issaquah, WA USA
     
Apr 04, 2012 09:47 |  #10

I prefer the 100-400 for my wildlife/bird shooting; I find that I use it below 400mm *just* often enough that I think I'd be unhappy with the prime, and I really just cannot imagine shooting over 200mm without IS. In my area, we have little enough light that maintaining high enough shutter speeds to avoid shake at those lengths is difficult enough WITH IS active.


- 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
GorgeShooter
Goldmember
Avatar
1,422 posts
Joined Mar 2009
Location: Oregon
     
Apr 04, 2012 10:27 |  #11

I have the 100-400.

What I don't like about it:
Too slow
Push-pull zoom (awkward and not smooth)
No AF with a TC attached (1.4 or 2)
AF ring on push-pull barrel. Awkward when zoomed out.
Push-pull sucks in dust


1DX | 5D MkII (gripped)
16-35 f/2.8L | 24-70 f/2.8L | 24-105 f/4L IS | 70-200 f/4L IS | 100-400 f/4.5-5.6L IS | 24 f/3.5L TS-E | 45 f/2.8 TS-E | 40 f/2.8 Pancake | 15 f/2.8 Fisheye | Tokina 100 f/2.8 Macro | Canon 1.4x TC | 580 EX II | 430 EX II | Manfrotto 055CXPRO4 | Kirk BH-1
:: Smugmug :: (external link) | :: Photography BLOG :: (external link) | :: Workshops and Classes (external link) ::

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Higgs ­ Boson
Goldmember
1,958 posts
Likes: 4
Joined Jan 2011
Location: Texas Hill Country
     
Apr 04, 2012 13:03 |  #12

I am going to add the 2xIII to my lineup in the next month and then a 500L2 after that....I am certain there will be two other lens purchases before the 500L2 though.....

The 2x will take me to 400 with the 70-200 and then I'll have 500 and 1000 in addition...Too bad the 500L is no longer availble because the 500L2 is $$$$..... I better try selling a picture to justify this.


A9 | A7R3 | 25 | 55 | 85 | 90 | 135

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
SilversurferC6
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
Avatar
151 posts
Joined Oct 2008
     
Apr 04, 2012 14:31 |  #13

Some great advice! Now you've got me thinking prime. I didn't post in the lens forum as I just upgraded to 5DIII and wanted your inputs for which I am very grateful.


Pierre (aka Sierra) Toronto, Canada
Current kit: Canon EOS 5D Mk III; Canon 50 F1.4; Canon L 16-35 F2.8;Canon L 24-105 F4; Canon L 100-400 F4.5-5.6; Metz Mecblitz 76 MZ5, and more stuff.
Mac Book Pro (I'm a Mac and you're a PC)
http://www.imaginefocu​s.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
GorgeShooter
Goldmember
Avatar
1,422 posts
Joined Mar 2009
Location: Oregon
     
Apr 04, 2012 15:43 |  #14

The setup I'd like to have is the 300 f/2.8L and a 1.4x and 2x TC. Then I'd have 300 f/2.8, 420 f/4, and 600 f/5.6 (on a full frame). AF would be maintained and I'd have a very sharp lens.


1DX | 5D MkII (gripped)
16-35 f/2.8L | 24-70 f/2.8L | 24-105 f/4L IS | 70-200 f/4L IS | 100-400 f/4.5-5.6L IS | 24 f/3.5L TS-E | 45 f/2.8 TS-E | 40 f/2.8 Pancake | 15 f/2.8 Fisheye | Tokina 100 f/2.8 Macro | Canon 1.4x TC | 580 EX II | 430 EX II | Manfrotto 055CXPRO4 | Kirk BH-1
:: Smugmug :: (external link) | :: Photography BLOG :: (external link) | :: Workshops and Classes (external link) ::

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
SilversurferC6
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
Avatar
151 posts
Joined Oct 2008
     
Apr 04, 2012 17:04 |  #15

GorgeShooter wrote in post #14209836 (external link)
The setup I'd like to have is the 300 f/2.8L and a 1.4x and 2x TC. Then I'd have 300 f/2.8, 420 f/4, and 600 f/5.6 (on a full frame). AF would be maintained and I'd have a very sharp lens.

Hmm, interesting. I have thought of a 2x (latest version) to supplement my 70-200


Pierre (aka Sierra) Toronto, Canada
Current kit: Canon EOS 5D Mk III; Canon 50 F1.4; Canon L 16-35 F2.8;Canon L 24-105 F4; Canon L 100-400 F4.5-5.6; Metz Mecblitz 76 MZ5, and more stuff.
Mac Book Pro (I'm a Mac and you're a PC)
http://www.imaginefocu​s.com (external link)

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

1,630 views & 0 likes for this thread
Help choosing a long telephoto
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 DdsT
2207 guests, 349 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.