100-400 with IS or 400 5.6 without IS??

mileslong24 wrote in post #13985801
While I get where you going, alot of people interested in those lenses would only care about wide open. As much as I would like to stop down, most of the time if you're going for BIF or something you will be wide open. When needing to keep my shutter up I could care less how sharp my lens is at f8 if I will be at 5.6 90% of the time, which is what alot of people shooting birds and sports will be. Unless you're shooting a 1D or something that you can crank ISO way up for, on my crop body (T3i) I'm almost always at 5.6.

both these lenses aren't really considered fast so i think light is going to be needed for either...and if you're going for high shutter speeds for BIF the one stop(2/3 in the sigma) difference isn't really that huge, especially considering the high ISO capabilities of the current bodies...if i had a t3i, i'd rather shoot the sigma at f8, ISO 1600 1/1000 than f6.3 ISO 1000 1/1000...

but my sigma lives at f8

PACO11 wrote in post #13985938
Of note is that the 400 5.6 is a lovely feeling lens mounted weight and balance-wise. Wish it was f/4 at times though, especially in dreary ireland!!!

I think i we all do, but with f/4..it woudn't be light and well-balanced anymore.... though i could live with that!

PACO11 wrote in post #13985938
Of note is that the 400 5.6 is a lovely feeling lens mounted weight and balance-wise. Wish it was f/4 at times though, especially in dreary ireland!!!


Here's a heavy crop (about 90%) of the 400mm 5.6L

Alligators in Ireland?

watt100 wrote in post #13986385
Alligators in Ireland?

lol! that was taken in Costa Rica i'm afraid, Saint Patrick must have driven crocs out while he was driving the snakes out of ireland haha!