L Series lens help needed

I am hoping that some of you can give me some help / opinions on 3 L series lenses that I am looking at. I currently have got only budget price glass but am now wanting to make the step up to better quality and would appreciate some help. I do not profess to know very much about the L series other than they are white, expensive and produce lovely images LOL.

My main areas of photography are aviation, airshows, coastal, horses / horse shows and landscape. I do not claim to be either an expert or have great knowledge which is why I am turning to you guys for help.

I have been looking at the following lenses with view to purchasing a bit later in the year:

EF 70-200 f4L IS USM
EF 100-400 f4.5 - 5.6L IS USM
EF 70-300 f4 - 5.6L IS USM

considering the kinds of photography that I tend to do, please could any of you give me some advice as to which is the best of these three lenses. I appreciate the obvious difference, the length of the lenses, but any other opinions or thoughts would be much appreciated. I have seen the 100-400 refered to as 'The Dust Pump' so please could someone elaborate on that for me too!!

Any help that you can give me in making my choice would be much appreciated as I am now seeking much sharper images than I can get with my current budget lenses.

Many thanks

Hi, for airshows u ll need the 400mm end. For horses I think 70-200 is ok ( depending on the distance you shoot ), but I would say, once you r going to invest some $$ on this lens, go for the 2,8 to blur background more . For landscapes u ll need a far more wider.
But wait, when experts see ur post they wil give a far more trustworthy advise

The "Dust Pump".....
The 100-400 is a push/pull zoom lens and needs to draw air in as it extends rather the the fixed internal volume of a rotary action zoom lens.

It may be the best option for aviation/airshow shots although I personally don't like push/pull zooms. The 70-200 is an excellent zoom although maybe a little short (focal lengthwise) for smaller aircraft. I don't have any experience of the 70-300 but I'm sure it's also up to the job.

I'd also advise that you state which body they're to be used on as it'll have considerable effect on the focal length you're likely to need and any AF implications if you decide to add an extender (1.4x or 2x)

Bob

- Work out/find out what sort of focal lengths you'll need for the horse stuff. I've got no idea.
- Airshows I happily shoot ~400mm prime. Occasionally I'll want something shorter but I can live without. Up to you which way you go.
- You can shoot landscapes at any focal length, depends on the look and FoV you want/need.
- There are non-L and non-Canon options. What is your budget?

I tried the 100-400, hated that push pull. It's a good choice for what you want to shoot, but try one before you commit to owning it.

Blackjack1 wrote in post #13872654
My main areas of photography are aviation, airshows, coastal, horses / horse shows and landscape. I do not claim to be either an expert or have great knowledge which is why I am turning to you guys for help.

I have been looking at the following lenses with view to purchasing a bit later in the year:

EF 70-200 f4L IS USM
EF 100-400 f4.5 - 5.6L IS USM
EF 70-300 f4 - 5.6L IS USM

considering the kinds of photography that I tend to do, please could any of you give me some advice as to which is the best of these three lenses. I appreciate the obvious difference, the length of the lenses, but any other opinions or thoughts would be much appreciated. I have seen the 100-400 refered to as 'The Dust Pump' so please could someone elaborate on that for me too!!

I think the 100-400 may be the best choice for your intended subjects. I've heard the "dust pump" is an urban lens myth

100-400 will be most versatile for airshows/aviation and horses as well as certain landscapes.

The 100-400 wouldn't be a bad choice, I just never liked the push pull design or ergonomics of the lens, although it gives good results. Because of that (and because I already own the 400 5.6 prime which I'd IMO much better at 400mm than the "pump") I recently purchased the 70-300L. However prior to that I shot sports at used a 70-200 2.8L.

If I were you ideally I would have a 70-200 2.8 for the horses and 400 5.6 for air shows as well. I don't think the 70-200 F4 IS ( while a well regarded lens) would be the best choice for either of your intended activities.

The 100-400 is an excellent airshow lens if you can't afford the super-tele primes...

Bryan

Canon Bob wrote in post #13872702
The "Dust Pump".....
The 100-400 is a push/pull zoom lens and needs to draw air in as it extends rather the the fixed internal volume of a rotary action zoom lens.

This is a well over stated myth.
The 100-400 sucks no more dust than any other zoom lens.
Any lens that extends/contarcts, whether by push/pull or by rotating is going to suck air.
I've used my 100-400 in so many dusty environments - rallies, motocross, circuit racing, beach etc, etc, etc. and it sucks no more or no less dust than my 70-200/2.8 or any other lens I've used.

For aviation/airshows, you will want as much reach as you can get. I would not worry about the "dust pump" nickname though.

As far as the other two lenses, personally, I'd get the 70-200 f/2.8 II and a tc instead- but it's your money..

philwillmedia wrote in post #13877582
This is a well over stated myth.
The 100-400 sucks no more dust than any other zoom lens.
Any lens that extends/contarcts, whether by push/pull or by rotating is going to suck air.
I've used my 100-400 in so many dusty environments - rallies, motocross, circuit racing, beach etc, etc, etc. and it sucks no more or no less dust than my 70-200/2.8 or any other lens I've used.

Actually, I find that the 100-400L can move air at a much higher volume/rate than other zooms, just because of the push/pull. Any other lens that requires you to spin a ring will most likely move less air due to the slower change from one to the other. The 100-400 goes "instantly" from 100-400, if you are quick enough.

That might have some effect on dust, I have seen dusty 100-400Ls, and very clean copies too.

philwillmedia wrote in post #13877582
This is a well over stated myth.
The 100-400 sucks no more dust than any other zoom lens.
Any lens that extends/contarcts, whether by push/pull or by rotating is going to suck air.
I've used my 100-400 in so many dusty environments - rallies, motocross, circuit racing, beach etc, etc, etc. and it sucks no more or no less dust than my 70-200/2.8 or any other lens I've used.

Actually, I find that the 100-400L can move air at a much higher volume/rate than other zooms, just because of the push/pull. Any other lens that requires you to spin a ring will most likely move less air due to the slower change from one to the other. The 100-400 goes "instantly" from 100-400, if you are quick enough.

That might have some effect on dust, I have seen dusty 100-400Ls, and very clean copies too.

And that push/pull is nearly perfect for air shows, especially when they are flying overhead at fast rates, you just push/pull accordingly as they pass over with no turning of a zoom ring. After someone uses one for an extended period of time, they may find that they actually like it.

An updated version of the 100-400L has been forecast for years, however I am hearing from pro suppliers we might actually see it this year.

Canon rumors has a bit on it too...

http://www.canonrumors​.com …0-f4-5-6l-is-in-2012-cr2/

That said, the current version, though it first came out in 1998, is no slouch and I like mine a lot.

looked at the canon 100-400 for air shows but bought a sigma 150-500 and appreciate the reach
local shop let me use the canon and sigma on my 40d and at the same magnification, the sigma was as sharp though somewhat redder than the canon - or canon yellower than the sigma. the canon has better build of course but is also 2x the price for less reach. got great pix at dayton in 2011 too

the 70-200 f2.8lis with a tc will work too and stay canon based, w/o the tc 70mm does horses and landscapes well