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 Sample Photo Archives Lens Sample Photo Archive 
Thread started 15 Dec 2014 (Monday) 18:59
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS II USM

 
EOS_Fan
Senior Member
258 posts
Gallery: 61 photos
Likes: 400
Joined Feb 2012
Location: Derbyshire, UK
     
Feb 18, 2018 04:17 |  #1951

LV Moose wrote in post #18566303 (external link)
Just received this lens a few days ago. I'm loving it. Much nicer than the Tamron 150-600
thumbnail
Hosted photo: posted by LV Moose in
./showthread.php?p=185​66303&i=i187381955
forum: Lens Sample Photo Archive

thumbnail
Hosted photo: posted by LV Moose in
./showthread.php?p=185​66303&i=i124603836
forum: Lens Sample Photo Archive

The hummingbird shot is an absolute stunner ;-)a


Flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
Sibil
Cream of the Crop
6,819 posts
Likes: 17653
Joined Jan 2009
Location: SoCal
     
Feb 18, 2018 08:12 |  #1952

LV Moose wrote in post #18566303 (external link)
Just received this lens a few days ago. I'm loving it. Much nicer than the Tamron 150-600

I wish I hadn't read that. I have been resisting it for the longest time, given that I already have the version 1, and the Tamron 150-600.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Vladdo
Senior Member
Avatar
304 posts
Gallery: 3 photos
Likes: 799
Joined Apr 2013
Location: Melbourne, AU
     
Feb 18, 2018 19:27 |  #1953

Sibil wrote in post #18566604 (external link)
I wish I hadn't read that. I have been resisting it for the longest time, given that I already have the version 1, and the Tamron 150-600.

Having owned a Canon 400/5.6, Tamron 150-600 (1st version), Sigma 150-600 Sports and now the 100-400 II, the 100-400 II is without doubt the best lens in that category, by far. Tamron was the worst, Sigma was good from 150-400mm but it's a big lens and is front heavy when extended, and the Canon is super sharp, very light but no IS really hurts it.

That said, the 100-400II is crazy sharp for a zoom, very fast AF, 4 stops of IS, is quite light and small and best of all, plays very, very nicely with a 1.4x extender, so you can get up to 560mm f8 and it still focuses sharp and quick.


My Website (external link) | My Facebook (external link) | My Books (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
LV ­ Moose
Moose gets blamed for everything.
Avatar
23,180 posts
Gallery: 185 photos
Best ofs: 4
Likes: 3611
Joined Dec 2008
     
Feb 18, 2018 20:01 |  #1954

Vladdo wrote in post #18567023 (external link)
...and best of all, plays very, very nicely with a 1.4x extender, so you can get up to 560mm f8 and it still focuses sharp and quick.

Probably depends on the extender. I may try the Canon 1.4X mk III down the road, but with the Kenko pro 300 DG 1.4X, it cost contrast, added CA, and wasn't as sharp as the naked lens cropped to the same field of view. I'm sure the Canon yields better results.


Moose

Gear... Flickr (external link)...Macro (external link)...Hummingbirds (external link)
Aircraft (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Vladdo
Senior Member
Avatar
304 posts
Gallery: 3 photos
Likes: 799
Joined Apr 2013
Location: Melbourne, AU
     
Feb 18, 2018 20:11 |  #1955

You can't really compare the same focal length with and without an extender. Of course, you're always going to lose light and AF speed. But for those moments when you do need that extra bit of reach, a high quality extender is much better than no extender at all. At some point I had a couple of Kenko extenders and they don't compare at all to the Canon versions. I've also had a 2x Sigma extender which was complete and utter rubbish. You're also short changing yourself if you go to all the expense of buying an expensive body and lens combo only to cheap out on an extender.

I used to hate extenders. However, I've recently bought a 500/4 and use a 2x extender on that, and a 1.4x extender on my 100-400 and it makes for a killer airshow kit.


My Website (external link) | My Facebook (external link) | My Books (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
LV ­ Moose
Moose gets blamed for everything.
Avatar
23,180 posts
Gallery: 185 photos
Best ofs: 4
Likes: 3611
Joined Dec 2008
     
Feb 18, 2018 20:49 |  #1956

Vladdo wrote in post #18567051 (external link)
You're also short changing yourself if you go to all the expense of buying an expensive body and lens combo only to cheap out on an extender.

Agreed. I've had the Kenko for several years; I didn't buy it to go with this lens. Using a poor quality extender is like using poor quality filters. My point was, as far as playing well with extenders, it depends on the extender. I've heard nothing but good things about the Canon mk III.


Moose

Gear... Flickr (external link)...Macro (external link)...Hummingbirds (external link)
Aircraft (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Eulenspiegel
Member
Avatar
213 posts
Gallery: 132 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 913
Joined Jan 2014
Location: Germany
Post edited 4 months ago by Eulenspiegel.
     
Feb 19, 2018 10:39 |  #1957

Goldfinch having lunch

IMAGE: https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4697/40316558232_449f3f6852_b.jpg
IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/24qC​U9Y  (external link)
Goldfinch having lunch (external link) by Eulenspiegel (external link), auf Flickr

Visit me on Flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
LV ­ Moose
Moose gets blamed for everything.
Avatar
23,180 posts
Gallery: 185 photos
Best ofs: 4
Likes: 3611
Joined Dec 2008
Post edited 4 months ago by LV Moose.
     
Feb 22, 2018 01:24 |  #1958

First non-hummer bird shots with this lens. Kinda short to be a birding lens on a full-frame, except for maybe back-yard stuff.

Dark-eyed Junkos, I think.

IMAGE: https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4723/26543911738_4b54a318c5_c.jpg
IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/GrAu​bE  (external link) DW0A4127_1024X.jpg (external link) by Moose (external link), on Flickr

IMAGE: https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4741/38603879170_e0478484ef_c.jpg
IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/21Ph​YkC  (external link) DW0A4121_1024X.jpg (external link) by Moose (external link), on Flickr

First moon shot also. The Tamron was good for this to about 520mm. Haven't compared images with the Canon at 400. I have a feeling the end results are pretty close; having to crop the Canon a tad more, so loosing some of the the advantage of being sharper.

IMAGE: https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4748/40370475432_9b897da88d_c.jpg
IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/24vp​eRS  (external link) DW0A4147_1024X.jpg (external link) by Moose (external link), on Flickr

Moose

Gear... Flickr (external link)...Macro (external link)...Hummingbirds (external link)
Aircraft (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
LV ­ Moose
Moose gets blamed for everything.
Avatar
23,180 posts
Gallery: 185 photos
Best ofs: 4
Likes: 3611
Joined Dec 2008
Post edited 4 months ago by LV Moose.
     
Feb 23, 2018 01:07 |  #1959

Ok. Sorry to post again so soon, but this lens continues to slay me. Here's an F-16 I shot today, and an extreme crop (rotated so it's easier to read) showing the maintenance crew's names on the panel just behind the air intake:
SrA Jesus Abejar and A1C Aaron Stevens. That's just crazy to me.

IMAGE: https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4676/26562575308_a072d033f6_o.jpg
IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/Gtf9​dm  (external link) DW0A4241_1024X.jpg (external link) by Moose (external link), on Flickr

IMAGE: https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4719/39537691825_ab09bd8216_z.jpg
IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/23eP​1iP  (external link) DW0A4241_1024Xcrop.jpg (external link) by Moose (external link), on Flickr

Moose

Gear... Flickr (external link)...Macro (external link)...Hummingbirds (external link)
Aircraft (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
jwcdds
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
14,589 posts
Gallery: 1625 photos
Best ofs: 5
Likes: 4375
Joined Aug 2004
Location: Santa Monica, CA
     
Feb 24, 2018 00:28 |  #1960

IMAGE: https://photos.smugmug.com/Photography/Astrophotography/i-Q6z6SsV/0/e8ae3bbe/X2/20180223-Canon%20EOS%207D%20Mark%20II-7D2_0176-X2.jpg

Julian
Gear/Feedbacks | SmugMug (external link) | Flickr (external link) | Blog (external link) | Instagram (external link) | YouTube (external link)
My Reviews | "The Mighty One" (external link) | "EF 85mm f/1.4 L IS Review" (external link)
Founding member and President of the BOGUS Photo Club (Blatantly-Over-Geared & Under-Skilled)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
wiebe2015
Mostly Lurking
17 posts
Gallery: 5 photos
Likes: 103
Joined Jan 2015
     
Mar 10, 2018 01:09 |  #1961

Putter


HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mjk-photo
Member
Avatar
177 posts
Likes: 828
Joined Nov 2011
Location: Germany
     
Mar 17, 2018 08:56 |  #1962

Canon EOS 7D MkII + EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS II USM @ 100mm F/11


HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.


mjk|PHOTO
MICHAEL J. KOCHNISS
TIME FOR NATURE
http://www.mjk-photo.de (external link)
http://500px.com/mjk-photo (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
markesc
Goldmember
1,070 posts
Gallery: 211 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 6220
Joined Feb 2014
     
Mar 18, 2018 13:11 |  #1963

Sibil wrote in post #18566604 (external link)
I wish I hadn't read that. I have been resisting it for the longest time, given that I already have the version 1, and the Tamron 150-600.

I had the Tamron, it's fine for perched/predictable situations, especially moonrises/long distance landscape compression.... but, I found the IS to be rather unpredictable, had the firmware updated, not much change. I then found out that somehow it would do better with the IS off, but I prefer IS on while trying to get BIF, so I sold it and went to the 100-400 II, which, is insanely sharp and pairs excellently on a crop sensor if you need extra reach.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
markesc
Goldmember
1,070 posts
Gallery: 211 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 6220
Joined Feb 2014
     
Mar 18, 2018 13:16 |  #1964

Vladdo wrote in post #18567023 (external link)
Having owned a Canon 400/5.6, Tamron 150-600 (1st version), Sigma 150-600 Sports and now the 100-400 II, the 100-400 II is without doubt the best lens in that category, by far. Tamron was the worst, Sigma was good from 150-400mm but it's a big lens and is front heavy when extended, and the Canon is super sharp, very light but no IS really hurts it.

That said, the 100-400II is crazy sharp for a zoom, very fast AF, 4 stops of IS, is quite light and small and best of all, plays very, very nicely with a 1.4x extender, so you can get up to 560mm f8 and it still focuses sharp and quick.

I rented an older sigma I think 150-500, same thing, with the front heavy issue, only worked good if you were shooting from the car where you can rest it on the door frame. Oddly, it actually did better than the Tamron on those hell mary shots, but ultimatly, the 100-400 II is just well engineered. At this point I've learned to trust Canon, and there just are no shortcuts sadly.

100-400 II will work great on crop/full frame.

If ya wanna go full frame, then ya really need a 500-600 F4 as I did try a full frame 5div+1.4xIII for BIF for over year / 72,000 shots, and sadly, F8 just doens't cut it in most cases where backround / composition count. Yes, I did nail a few lucky ones here n there, but I'm doing much better having gone back to a 70d and bare lens combo. Cannot wait for Canon to get us a 7dIII!!!!!




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
markesc
Goldmember
1,070 posts
Gallery: 211 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 6220
Joined Feb 2014
     
Mar 18, 2018 13:17 |  #1965


HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.


HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.




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

700,515 views & 6,513 likes for this thread
EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS II USM
FORUMS Sample Photo Archives Lens Sample Photo Archive 
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 pabxabudhabi
399 guests, 262 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 6430, that happened on Dec 03, 2017

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.