-=Top 10=- Recommended wildlife Zooms

cannot kill a zombie thread

StarBlazer wrote in post #14730083
Since 2009 the choice has changed a fair amount. Sig 120-300 OS, Ef 70-300L etc. Is there a chance the legendary 100-400 could lose it's crown?

It did for me- I have a Sigma 120-300 OS instead of a Canon 100-400L.

BRAINNNNSS

70-300L for me. Perfect. And oh so sharp.

DreDaze wrote in post #14731137
also maybe the 200-500f2.8, which didn't make the list...

LOL

Not too many people have $28,000 to spend on a lens. Entire setups, even good ones, cost less. I would love, to own one though, however I would have to be pretty rich, to even consider it over a 7D, 600mm prime, really good tripod, filters etc. Which would come in for less!

I'd like to see the sales data on that lens. I've always wondered how many of those they have actually sold. I also wonder why they priced it so darn high. They could have priced it for less and been a MAJOR competitor.

Please include EF 70-300 L F/4-5.6 also . It is a very good wildlife photography lens.

Jai.

Is shooting in a large zoo (San Diego) considered wildlife shooting? Or, does it have to be in the field?

this is an old list. maybe we can start a new poll - my vote goes to 70-300L

Crimzon wrote in post #14828312
LOL

Not too many people have $28,000 to spend on a lens. Entire setups, even good ones, cost less. I would love, to own one though, however I would have to be pretty rich, to even consider it over a 7D, 600mm prime, really good tripod, filters etc. Which would come in for less!

I'd like to see the sales data on that lens. I've always wondered how many of those they have actually sold. I also wonder why they priced it so darn high. They could have priced it for less and been a MAJOR competitor.

yeah...i'd like to see just one person own this thing...but still it'd have to be pretty sweet i'd assume...i remember seeing one on ebay for $12,000...talk about a depreciating in value for resale

TSmith8779 wrote in post #14830844
Is shooting in a large zoo (San Diego) considered wildlife shooting? Or, does it have to be in the field?

there's nothing wild about a zoo...

This is a really old list and the new 100-400 and Sigma 150-600 and even in the running, and they really should be .

Bsmooth wrote in post #17901788
This is a really old list and the new 100-400 and Sigma 150-600 and even in the running, and they really should be .

start a new one then...this thread is 11 years old...most of the lenses listed are discontinued, most of the lenses around today weren't even a twinkle in lens developers eye at the time

Agreed

Yah, I think adding new lenses at this point would be a disservice to them and nothing could catch the existing lead. A new poll would have totally different results.

That said, I've not done any of these in a long while. when we first did these there was a lot of interest, but the most recent ones (still many years old though) did not seem to gain much interest and got much fewer votes.

Jake I think the 100-400 MK I would probably still take a lead in a new poll, even though there are several lenses that now beat it available. After all the MK II version, and the Sigma 150-600's may be better for those currently buying a lens, but they didn't make the old lens bad by any strength of the imagination. And after over twenty years at the top of the telephoto zoom tree, there are a heck of a lot of very satisfied users out there. One of my all time favorite photos was shot with the 100-400 MK I, on my old 300D and in MF mode too, since the AF was broken.

Still I wouldn't now swap my Sigma 150-600 C for a 100-400 (either version) as the extra 200mm of reach are really important to me, and I cannot afford to move to an f/8 AF capable body.

Alan

5d3 does great on 100-400 original with 1.4 TC, but for extra reach, 150 600 zooms are much better

New poll here;

https://photography-on-the.net …/showthread.php​?t=1456102