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 15 Dec 2012 (Saturday) 18:00
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

100-400 discussion

 
MikeWa
Senior Member
Avatar
879 posts
Gallery: 89 photos
Likes: 235
Joined Apr 2012
Location: Seattle Washington
     
Dec 16, 2012 13:36 |  #31

ed rader wrote in post #15371788 (external link)
how is the 100-400L anymore of a "light hog" than any other f4.5 - f5.6 lens? this is thread sure contains alot of bull**** :D

I don't know if it is more of a hog or less than some other lenses but at 400mm f5.6 it is on the upper edge of the auto focus of the 7D. So available light becomes an issue for auto focus speed. That said I love my 100-400 and I use it extensively.
Mike

400mm f6.3 1/1250 ISO200


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


Mike...G9; 7D; 7D Mark II; EF-S 10-22mm; EF-S 18-135mm IS STM; EF 28-300mm F3.5-5.6L; EF 70-300mm IS USM; EF 70-200mm F2.8L IS-II; EF 100-400mm f4.5-5.6L IS; EXT 1.4-II & 2.0-III; The more I learn the less I know.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
dochollidayda
Goldmember
1,129 posts
Gallery: 40 photos
Likes: 2076
Joined Aug 2012
     
Dec 16, 2012 13:45 |  #32

MikeWa wrote in post #15373717 (external link)
I don't know if it is more of a hog or less than some other lenses but at 400mm f5.6 it is on the upper edge of the auto focus of the 7D. So available light becomes an issue for auto focus speed. That said I love my 100-400 and I use it extensively.
Mike

400mm f6.3 1/1250 ISO200

HOSTED PHOTO DISPLAY FAILED: ATTACH id 628400 does not exist. ]

Is that a 100% crop? If its not, that seems really bad. The pic is very dull and seems to be out of focus. I have been thinking of this lens but these kind of examples scare me.


flickr (external link) | 500px (external link) | Instagram (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
BrandonSi
Nevermind.. I'm silly.
Avatar
5,306 posts
Gallery: 62 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 144
Joined Sep 2004
Location: Chicago
     
Dec 16, 2012 14:09 |  #33

dochollidayda wrote in post #15373751 (external link)
Is that a 100% crop? If its not, that seems really bad. The pic is very dull and seems to be out of focus. I have been thinking of this lens but these kind of examples scare me.

Looks like it just missed focus to me. In my experience, the 100-400L is very sharp, even wide open at 400mm.


[ www (external link)· flickr (external link)]

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Scott ­ M
Goldmember
3,222 posts
Gallery: 78 photos
Likes: 311
Joined May 2008
Location: Michigan
     
Dec 16, 2012 14:14 |  #34

How, lot's of strange comments in this thread regarding the 100-400L. I own both the 70-200 f/4 IS and 100-400L, and they are very different lenses for very different purposes (at least for me). Anyone who thinks there is not a big difference between 200mm and 400mm obviously doesn't shoot with a longer telephoto much. I find 400mm the minimum focal length essential for serious wildlife shooting, and the 100-400L provides excellent value with it's combination of versatility, image quality and auto focus performance.

While f/5.6 has some limitations, with the high ISO performance of today's newer camera bodies it is becoming less of an issue. With the 7D, I can push ISO to 6400 and still get acceptable results with proper exposure and a little noise reduction in post. With the 5D3, ISO 12,800 is not an issue.

The 100-400L gives me sharp results when shooting wide open at 400mm. I do need to keep my shutter speed up when shooting handheld, but that limitation is a decent trade off for the image quality. Besides, I will quite often use a monopod when using a tripod is either inconvenient or not allowed (such as at the zoo).


Photo Gallery (external link)
Gear List

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
drzenitram
Senior Member
824 posts
Joined Aug 2012
     
Dec 16, 2012 14:21 |  #35

Yeahh, so I definitely don't have experience shooting longer telephotos, but you guys are making me want to. The 100-400 seems like the best bet for buying a longer telephoto. I doubt the 300 f4 IS is long enough in most situations. Then again, I could be wrong again. 300 doesn't seem much longer than 200.

I'm not much into taking pictures of birds, but it would be cool to capture other wildlife, candids, and sports with a lens like this.


| Bodies - 5D Mark II, T2i | Lenses - Helios 44-2, Sigma 35mm 1.4, Sigma 85 1.4, Sigma 70-200 2.8 OS, Tamron SP AF 1.4x TC | Lights - 430ex ii x2, Random 3rd party strobes

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
JeffreyG
"my bits and pieces are all hard"
Avatar
15,539 posts
Gallery: 42 photos
Likes: 608
Joined Jan 2007
Location: Detroit, MI
     
Dec 16, 2012 14:24 |  #36

drzenitram wrote in post #15373876 (external link)
Yeahh, so I definitely don't have experience shooting longer telephotos, but you guys are making me want to. The 100-400 seems like the best bet for buying a longer telephoto. I doubt the 300 f4 IS is long enough in most situations. Then again, I could be wrong again. 300 doesn't seem much longer than 200.

I'm not much into taking pictures of birds, but it would be cool to capture other wildlife, candids, and sports with a lens like this.

Before I bought the 100-400L, I had a 300/4L IS and a 1.4X teleconverter. That combination gives 300/4 and 420/5.6.

Having owned both, I'd get the 100-400. The zoom is optically a good performer and the zoom range just makes the lens so much more usable over a very long prime like the 300.


My personal stuff:http://www.flickr.com/​photos/jngirbach/sets/ (external link)
I use a Canon 5DIII and a Sony A7rIII

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
drzenitram
Senior Member
824 posts
Joined Aug 2012
     
Dec 16, 2012 14:28 |  #37

If canon made a 400 f4 for the same price as the 100-400 f4.5-5.6 I would almost definitely go for the 400 because I love primes and would like being able to slap on a 1.4x teleconverter without losing AF, but with the closest 400 prime being 5.6 also, it seems like a no-brainer to go with the zoom.


| Bodies - 5D Mark II, T2i | Lenses - Helios 44-2, Sigma 35mm 1.4, Sigma 85 1.4, Sigma 70-200 2.8 OS, Tamron SP AF 1.4x TC | Lights - 430ex ii x2, Random 3rd party strobes

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Whitepalm
Member
48 posts
Joined Oct 2009
Location: AK
     
Dec 16, 2012 14:49 |  #38

Buy the 100-400. Given your age/financial situation I think you'll appreciate the range for a long time. Use a tripod as much as possible.


www.explorealaskaphoto​.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ed ­ rader
"I am not the final word"
Avatar
23,235 posts
Gallery: 4 photos
Likes: 500
Joined May 2005
Location: silicon valley
     
Dec 16, 2012 14:55 |  #39

Ando27 wrote in post #15372214 (external link)
As long as your aware of the 100-400 short comings its great bang for the buck lens.

As for the comments from "@#****** Raider",...about it being a light hog,..& it being f4.5 / f5.6 .....perhaps you want to try one on an overcast afternoon...

As long as you do everything to get as much light fir the 100-400 its great , but overcast & low light makes it very hard work... a great lens in good light..

perhaps you should peruse my wildlife photographs particularly africa and alaska. plenty of low light shots.

iso 1600, f5.6, 1/200s

IMAGE: http://erader.zenfolio.com/img/s1/v6/p15387591-4.jpg

iso 1600, f5.6, 1/640s

IMAGE: http://erader.zenfolio.com/img/s11/v3/p474248942-4.jpg

http://instagram.com/e​draderphotography/ (external link)
5D4, 80d, 16-35L F4 IS, 24-70L II, 70-200L F4 IS II, 100-400L II, sigma 15 FE, sigma 14 f1.8 art, tc 1.4 III, 430exII, gitzo 3542L + markins Q20, gitzo GT 1545T + markins Q3T, gitzo GM4562

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Scott ­ M
Goldmember
3,222 posts
Gallery: 78 photos
Likes: 311
Joined May 2008
Location: Michigan
     
Dec 16, 2012 15:02 |  #40

^^^ Don't you know you cannot take that shot, Ed? It's low light, and you were using a 100-400L! ;)


Photo Gallery (external link)
Gear List

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Nightdiver13
Unabashed nerd!
Avatar
2,272 posts
Likes: 38
Joined May 2010
Location: Bigfoot Country
     
Dec 16, 2012 15:10 |  #41

BrandonSi wrote in post #15372816 (external link)
IMAGE NOT FOUND
HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/png' | Redirected to error image by ZENFOLIO PROTECTED

Awesome shot Brandon!

h14nha wrote in post #15372890 (external link)
It's a great lens to have at your disposal. Lightweight ( for a 400mm ), sharp and with such a long range very versatile. It's about as good as it gets for the money. Here's the only portrait I could find with it at the moment..........

And also a stunner! My kinda portrait.

ed rader wrote in post #15373998 (external link)
QUOTED IMAGE

Awesome again. Was this in the wild Ed?


Neil

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ed ­ rader
"I am not the final word"
Avatar
23,235 posts
Gallery: 4 photos
Likes: 500
Joined May 2005
Location: silicon valley
     
Dec 16, 2012 15:37 |  #42

Nightdiver13 wrote in post #15374045 (external link)
Awesome shot Brandon!


And also a stunner! My kinda portrait.


Awesome again. Was this in the wild Ed?

yes. we were at kuliak bay in Katmai NP. this is me......

IMAGE: http://erader.zenfolio.com/img/s3/v8/p789201882-5.jpg

here is mother and cub slipping between me and the photographer who took the last picture of me.....

IMAGE: http://erader.zenfolio.com/img/s11/v3/p739549214-5.jpg

http://instagram.com/e​draderphotography/ (external link)
5D4, 80d, 16-35L F4 IS, 24-70L II, 70-200L F4 IS II, 100-400L II, sigma 15 FE, sigma 14 f1.8 art, tc 1.4 III, 430exII, gitzo 3542L + markins Q20, gitzo GT 1545T + markins Q3T, gitzo GM4562

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ed ­ rader
"I am not the final word"
Avatar
23,235 posts
Gallery: 4 photos
Likes: 500
Joined May 2005
Location: silicon valley
     
Dec 16, 2012 15:43 as a reply to  @ ed rader's post |  #43

here i am again (standing). my rule is to keep at least two people between me and the bears ;).

IMAGE: http://erader.zenfolio.com/img/s1/v5/p503099095-5.jpg

http://instagram.com/e​draderphotography/ (external link)
5D4, 80d, 16-35L F4 IS, 24-70L II, 70-200L F4 IS II, 100-400L II, sigma 15 FE, sigma 14 f1.8 art, tc 1.4 III, 430exII, gitzo 3542L + markins Q20, gitzo GT 1545T + markins Q3T, gitzo GM4562

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Nightdiver13
Unabashed nerd!
Avatar
2,272 posts
Likes: 38
Joined May 2010
Location: Bigfoot Country
     
Dec 16, 2012 15:45 |  #44

ed rader wrote in post #15374155 (external link)
here i am again (standing). my rule is to keep at least two people between me and the bears ;).

:lol: Like that saying... You only have to be faster than the slowest guy, right?

That's some pretty close contact you've got going on there. I'd be freaked out to be that close. Is there something going on in their annual cycle that makes them less interested in you?


Neil

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
JeffreyG
"my bits and pieces are all hard"
Avatar
15,539 posts
Gallery: 42 photos
Likes: 608
Joined Jan 2007
Location: Detroit, MI
     
Dec 16, 2012 15:58 |  #45

Nightdiver13 wrote in post #15374167 (external link)
:lol: Like that saying... You only have to be faster than the slowest guy, right?

That's some pretty close contact you've got going on there. I'd be freaked out to be that close. Is there something going on in their annual cycle that makes them less interested in you?

They were probably feeding on photographers all morning and are full now.


My personal stuff:http://www.flickr.com/​photos/jngirbach/sets/ (external link)
I use a Canon 5DIII and a Sony A7rIII

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

9,004 views & 0 likes for this thread
100-400 discussion
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 Nartholemue
951 guests, 263 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.