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 06 Jun 2016 (Monday) 14:34
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

100-400 IS ii or 70-300

 
TeamSpeed
01010100 01010011
Avatar
36,177 posts
Gallery: 105 photos
Best ofs: 2
Likes: 5378
Joined May 2002
Location: Midwest
     
Jun 07, 2016 09:36 as a reply to  @ post 18031871 |  #16

The 100-400 MKI isn't the sharpest lens these days, even some of the STM EFS lenses beat it out. It is a fine lens for those bodies with less dense sensors, like the 1D3/1D4, 50D and below, or 5DII and below. The newer bodies will start to show that lens' age pretty quickly.

Between the 70-300L and 100-400 MKI, I would lean toward the 70-300. However if the budget allows, the 100-400 II would be a worth consideration.


Past Equipment | My Personal Gallery (external link) My Business Gallery (external link)
For Sale: Sigma USB Dock
For Sale: Ladies Thirty-One Camera Sling

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
promod
Senior Member
Avatar
502 posts
Gallery: 3 photos
Likes: 28
Joined Aug 2006
Location: baystate
     
Jun 07, 2016 18:28 |  #17

each lens has it's own quality. I purchased the mkll with the idea of selling the 70-300L. well that didn't happen. I like it WAYYY TOOOO much, so it's a keeper. both are excellent, I just need to decide how much reach I want and pick which one to use.........


"if you are tired of starting over , then don't QUIT "

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
thc1979
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Avatar
525 posts
Gallery: 13 photos
Likes: 181
Joined Jun 2014
Location: East of England
     
Jun 08, 2016 14:24 |  #18

Extenders is a good option. I do have one, but rarely use it and forget even which one it is. Looking online about them is confusing to say the least with regards to compatibility and usability!




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
thc1979
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Avatar
525 posts
Gallery: 13 photos
Likes: 181
Joined Jun 2014
Location: East of England
     
Jun 10, 2016 13:23 |  #19

I checked today and the extender I have is the x2 version ii. I tried it on my 5D3 with 70-200 2.8 is ii and at first it wouldn't autofocus at all, then I moved the focus ring and it sprang to life. Not sure how compatible it is with that lens, reviews and technical charts are bit confusing. They say autofocus needs f/5.6 min, does that mean I can't use a higher f-stop or does it just need that in the viewfinder? Also some reviews say image quality is degraded, canon say it doesn't affect iq at all.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Tom ­ Reichner
"I am a little creepy"
Avatar
13,421 posts
Gallery: 144 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 3666
Joined Dec 2008
Location: Omak, in north-central Washington state, USA
Post edited over 3 years ago by Tom Reichner.
     
Jun 11, 2016 11:23 as a reply to  @ post 18031365 |  #20

.
If I were in your shoes I would get the new version 2 100-400mm as soon as possible. I would have little/no interest in the 70-300mm L.

.


"Your" and "you're" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one.
"They're", "their", and "there" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one.
"Fare" and "fair" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one. The proper expression is "moot point", NOT "mute point".

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Lbsimon
...never exercised in my life
Avatar
2,681 posts
Gallery: 19 photos
Likes: 268
Joined Jan 2011
Location: Boston, MA
     
Jun 11, 2016 19:06 |  #21

Tom Reichner wrote in post #18036085 (external link)
.
If I were in your shoes I would get the new version 2 100-400mm as soon as possible. I would have little/no interest in the 70-300mm L.

.

I would second that.

Not sure I would buy a 100-400 if I already had the 70-300L, but if I were buying a new to me lens, I would have no interest in the 70-300.


5D Mark IV | 6D | S110
EF 17-40L | EF 24-105L (two) | EF 70-200L F4 IS | EF 100-400L II | EF 85 1.8 | EF 50 1.8 STM | Canon 1.4x III | Canon 1.4x II
Yongnuo 685 | Nissin Di622 M2 | Nissin Di422

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
thc1979
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Avatar
525 posts
Gallery: 13 photos
Likes: 181
Joined Jun 2014
Location: East of England
     
Jun 12, 2016 04:02 |  #22

Tom Reichner wrote in post #18036085 (external link)
.
If I were in your shoes I would get the new version 2 100-400mm as soon as possible. I would have little/no interest in the 70-300mm L.

.

Do you think it would end up replacing my 70-200 though?




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
TeamSpeed
01010100 01010011
Avatar
36,177 posts
Gallery: 105 photos
Best ofs: 2
Likes: 5378
Joined May 2002
Location: Midwest
     
Jun 12, 2016 06:59 |  #23

The 70-200 II serves a different purpose than the 100-400. I would not consider one to be a replacement of the other.


Past Equipment | My Personal Gallery (external link) My Business Gallery (external link)
For Sale: Sigma USB Dock
For Sale: Ladies Thirty-One Camera Sling

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
BigCol
Member
124 posts
Gallery: 56 photos
Likes: 91
Joined Dec 2008
Location: Melbourne, Australia
     
Jun 12, 2016 08:10 |  #24

thc1979 wrote in post #18035279 (external link)
I checked today and the extender I have is the x2 version ii. I tried it on my 5D3 with 70-200 2.8 is ii and at first it wouldn't autofocus at all, then I moved the focus ring and it sprang to life. Not sure how compatible it is with that lens, reviews and technical charts are bit confusing. They say autofocus needs f/5.6 min, does that mean I can't use a higher f-stop or does it just need that in the viewfinder? Also some reviews say image quality is degraded, canon say it doesn't affect iq at all.

If that extender is Canon brand then it is compatible with your 70-200 and bodies listed in your signature. Extenders do reduce image quality - 2x more than 1.4x. The Canon 2x version ii extender is "ok" but not outstanding, but what it will do is allow you to determine if an extender will suffice for your needs. If it does you could replace the version ii with the much better version iii extender for better results. If not, you're back to your initial post of working out which lens to buy...

thc1979 wrote in post #18036736 (external link)
Do you think it would end up replacing my 70-200 though?

I agree that they are 2 tools for different uses, but the 100-400ii might somewhat replace the 70-200 depending on what you shoot. I think of the 70-200ii as my indoor / portrait lens, and the 100-400ii for outdoors / travel. Even in situations where I'm shooting motorsports / aviation using sub-200mm I still prefer my results with the 100-400 ii (unless available light is absolutely miserable).

Best case scenario is having both lenses - if you need f2.8 then you have the 70-200 - if you want reach you have the 100-400.


Col - flickr (external link)
---------------
5DMKIII | Canon EF 24-105mm f4L | Canon EF 50mm f1.4 | Canon EF 70-200mm f2.8L II | Canon EF 100-400mm f4.5-5.6L IS II | Canon 1.4x TC MK II

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
wizzells
Member
63 posts
Gallery: 41 photos
Likes: 179
Joined Feb 2012
     
Jun 12, 2016 20:50 |  #25

I haven't used the 70-300L, but I have used the 100-400 II, and it is a great lens.

I currently have a Sigma 150-600C, which I got a smokin' deal on. There are things about it that aren't as good as the 100-400 II, namely the autofocus speed and accuracy which are awesome on the 100-400 II. That would be my pick if I had the budget.


My flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Charlie
Guess What! I'm Pregnant!
15,822 posts
Gallery: 8 photos
Likes: 5830
Joined Sep 2007
     
Jun 13, 2016 09:24 |  #26

if you can deal with the weight and size, then 100-400.

I went from sony 70-400 to 70-300. Nearly half the weight in savings, which was pretty significant. Huge size savings made a big difference as well. I can already tell with one outing, I will bring the 70-300 to a crap more outings than the 70-400.

Food for thought


Sony A7riii/A9 - FE 12-24/4 - FE 24-240 - CV 21/3.5 - FE 28/2 - FE 35/2.8 - FE 50/1.8 - FE 85/1.8 - EF 135/1.8 Art - F 600/5.6 - CZ 100-300 - Astro Rok 14/2.8 - Tamron 28-75/2.8 RXD, 70-200/2.8 VC

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Tom ­ Reichner
"I am a little creepy"
Avatar
13,421 posts
Gallery: 144 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 3666
Joined Dec 2008
Location: Omak, in north-central Washington state, USA
     
Jun 13, 2016 10:07 |  #27

thc1979 wrote in post #18036736 (external link)
Do you think it would end up replacing my 70-200 though?

Neither the 70-300 or the 100-400 would be a good replacement for your 70-200 f2.8.
Why? Well, as Team Speed said in post #23, they are different lenses.
The 70-200 is an f2.8 lens, and the others are f5.6 lenses, so really they are completely different in terms of what subject matter you would shoot with them, when you would use them, and what kind of images you are looking to create when you use them. Different tools for different purposes.

.


"Your" and "you're" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one.
"They're", "their", and "there" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one.
"Fare" and "fair" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one. The proper expression is "moot point", NOT "mute point".

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Tom ­ Reichner
"I am a little creepy"
Avatar
13,421 posts
Gallery: 144 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 3666
Joined Dec 2008
Location: Omak, in north-central Washington state, USA
     
Jun 13, 2016 10:13 |  #28

.

Charlie wrote in post #18037850 (external link)
I went from sony 70-400 to 70-300.

So you used the 70-400? Wow! I have been ever curious about that lens, and would love to know what you thought of it. Was it really sharp wide open at 400mm? How was the autofocus? Just as fast as Canon L glass? Just as accurate? Any insights you can provide from firsthand experience with this lens would be very helpful.

Charlie wrote in post #18037850 (external link)
I will bring the 70-300 to a crap more outings than the 70-400.

I don't understand what "a crap more outings" means. Does it mean the same thing as "a lot more outings"? Could you clarify?

.


"Your" and "you're" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one.
"They're", "their", and "there" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one.
"Fare" and "fair" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one. The proper expression is "moot point", NOT "mute point".

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
TeamSpeed
01010100 01010011
Avatar
36,177 posts
Gallery: 105 photos
Best ofs: 2
Likes: 5378
Joined May 2002
Location: Midwest
Post edited over 3 years ago by TeamSpeed. (4 edits in all)
     
Jun 13, 2016 10:27 as a reply to  @ Charlie's post |  #29

Rough weights just to give some idea:
70-300L - 37oz
70-200 II 2.8L - 48oz
100-400 II - 58oz
Siggy 150-600 - 68oz

I shoot with ones in bold, so I probably wouldn't notice the weight on the 2 lenses being discussed in this thread.

I would be interested in a good Canon IQ 70-400mm, but at or lower than the 100-400II price. :)


Past Equipment | My Personal Gallery (external link) My Business Gallery (external link)
For Sale: Sigma USB Dock
For Sale: Ladies Thirty-One Camera Sling

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Tom ­ Reichner
"I am a little creepy"
Avatar
13,421 posts
Gallery: 144 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 3666
Joined Dec 2008
Location: Omak, in north-central Washington state, USA
Post edited over 3 years ago by Tom Reichner.
     
Jun 13, 2016 10:35 |  #30

TeamSpeed wrote in post #18037900 (external link)
Rough weights just to give some idea:
70-300L - 37oz
70-200 II 2.8L - 48oz
100-400 II - 58oz
Siggy 150-600 - 68oz

I shoot with ones in bold, so I probably wouldn't notice the weight on the 2 lenses being discussed in this thread.

I would be interested in a good IQ 70-400mm. :)

I know what you mean by not noticing the weight. The lenses I use most are measured in pounds, not ounces. If you went by ounces, they're both over 200 of them. So I don't notice the weight of any of the little lenses we are discussing in this thread. The lenses we're talking about here don't even weigh as much as a gallon of milk!

.


"Your" and "you're" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one.
"They're", "their", and "there" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one.
"Fare" and "fair" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one. The proper expression is "moot point", NOT "mute point".

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

13,578 views & 8 likes for this thread
100-400 IS ii or 70-300
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 xDeeKayx
956 guests, 298 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.