100-400mm f4.5-5.6L or 400mm 5.6?

FWIW I bought all of my Canon gear from Delta International in New York. They were previously only a Grey importer of the merchandise for Canon. No problem as typically they can offer a lower price and Canon USA services the merchandise under warranty with only a sales receipt. They also provide a MACK 3 year pro lens warranty no extra charge. In the unlikely event you get a bad copy you get a replacement the NEXT day at their expense no waiting. I rather like that option.......you might consider them (877)782-9840

If you go either lens, it is fine. As for mounting it on a tripod, I would strongly recommend you get also the Wimeberely Sidekick. No I don't work for this company but like many posters here, once you get it, you will be hooked (pun intended) like me. Very versatile to use. BTW, it works with all Acra-Swiss head and plates, but best with Wimberely plates. Well, that really costs. Did I mention also their flash brackets...

Remember, you lose AF once you add a TC. It is the limit of D30/D60/10D. Humm, I have to add this since I meet a birder who think there is a problem with his 10D and/or EF400mm f/5.6 L USM once he adds his 2x TC.


Griffin.

Griffin,

I plan to purchase the Canon TC II 1.4X. I have read that AF does not work below f8, but I have also read that this can be overcome by taping one or more of the contacts on the TC. I have also heard that it doesn't work well in low light conditions. Am I incorrect on these?

Murwille,

That sounds like you have done your research,...

No, you're not incorrect. You will most probably find out that with the 10D you will end up focusing manually most of the time with that combo. Manual focusing is not necessarily a bad thing, though.

My 10D doesn't like focusing with the 300mm f/4L and 2x Extender II, but it still makes a great manual-focus 600mm f/8L...

I bought the 400mm 5.6 on Friday after going to the link that Roger provided (thanks Roger). The 100-400mm was not really an option as I bought my 10D with a 70-200 4.0 L but the 100-400/D60 that a friend has is incredible and prompted my change to Canon a couple of weeks ago. We took bird pictures with our respective lenses yesterday, I'm keen to see how they come out.
Carl

I have taken close to a thousand images with my 10D and taped Canon 1.4TC and my 100/400 IS lens. Auto Focus works very well for me.

Example: This was just a grab shot as I saw the bird out of the corner of my eye.

http://homepage.mac.co​m/meckstein/post/peli4​.jpg

Another Example:

http://homepage.mac.co​m/meckstein/post/fligh​t.jpg

Do I love my 100-400L IS? Let the pictures speak:

http://racefamily.raci​nglines.com …une2003/TheRace​/index.htm

http://racefamily.raci​nglines.com …Portland/Friday​/index.htm

http://racefamily.raci​nglines.com …rtland/Saturday​/index.htm

Also note that every single one of these photos was shot large JPEG and were not processed whatsoever. This is exactly how they came directly out of the camera. I am post-processing these photos for re-display to correct white points and add some sharpness.

To say the least, I am extremely pleased with this lens and highly recommend it. It's a great value!

Jim, those are some great images!!!

RFMSports,

In the Portland Saturday race is that Tom Cruise? It looks like him and I remember reading somewhere that he races.

As usual great shots!!

NiL,

Jim (RFMSports),

I had seen some of your images as linked from the (Sony) Mavica Information Exchange. They represent, in my original post, some of the wonderful images I have seen made by the 100-400mm L. (BTW I changed my username - it was originally "murwille") There is no doubt now that I plan to buy this lens! My next task is to sell some stuff on e-bay! I have a Besseler 23CII XL with dichroic head, stablized power supply, 2 Nikon lenses, 35mm and slide holders - all in great condition. I also have an Oympus OM-4 with motor drive, Olympus flash and bounce with connecting cables, 50mm f 1.8 Zuico lens, and a Tamron 500mm SP f8 catadioptric lens + 2X TC with adaptall adapter for the OM-4 - again all in great condition. I'm thinking about waiting until fall to post them on e-bay with the theory more people will see these items after vacation time has ended. Does anyone have suggestions here?
I have another question and perhaps it belongs on a different thread - it does pertain to my "homework" on the 100-400mm though. I just got my 10D on Friday and worked 12 hours yesterday helping a friend build an observatory. I got a chance to transfer some pictures to my computer this morning and look at them there.
I think that some of the picture posts taken by the 100-400mm I was unimpressed with were due not to the lens and in some cases, not by the operator/photographer, but how they were resized/resampled for viewing on a website. Up until Friday I was shooting with a Sony Mavica FD97 2.1 MP camera. I am finding that pitcures viewed on my computer from that camera can appear to be sharper - although I know its really not. I quickly found out that my monitor setting of 800 x 600 was not going to cut it while viewing images with the 10D! I bumped it up to 1024 x 768 - that helped, but I found the next step up to be even better. (Higher resolutions above that might be even better, but my monitor is vintage 1995 and I didn't want to push it. My video card is much newer and quite powerful - that wouldn't be the limitation.)
My observation seems to be that in order to get the images resized to a size they can be seen in their entirety at say 800 x 600 or 1024 x 768, you lose some much in getting them there that they don't look that impressive any more. They don't seem that sharp. I am currently on a laptop with 1024 x 768 resolution and Jim's pitures looked great! Jim, how do you resize your photos for webpages and make them look so good? I want nice sharp photos as viewed on a webpage, but I don't want file sizes to get too big - unless I provide a separate link. I have Adobe Photoshop at my disposal, but haven't used it much. I'm much more comfortable with PaintShopPro 7.
Sorry for my rambling. This is a wonderful forum and I am enjoying the chance to learn from all of you.

Mark Urwiller

Niloligist: No that's not Tom Cruise. I think that's Oriel Servia your referring to.

rdonson: Thanks. The lens speaks for itself.

murwille: Thank you! I was so thrilled to see these photos for the first time myself. And honestly, those galleries above are some of the best photos I have shot in my life. They are definitely THE best sports shots I have produced to date.

And yes, granted the lens could be faster, but on a sunny day, which is what I shoot 99% of the time, the 4.5-5.6 is PLENTY fast enough for shooting even 200-plus mph cars and 0-80 in three-seconds sprint boats.

And yes, I did run into having to wait for the buffer to clear a couple of times (twice I think with the Champ Cars), but it was not a big deal and I didn't lose any once-in-a-lifetime shots over it.

As for the creation of the gallery, that was done with BreezeBrowser and it does actually provide some sharpening to the photos. But in both the boats and Champ Cars there was some periods of cloudiness and you see the gray cast over some of the pictures. I am in process of re-doing those photos.

Also, learn PhotoShop Pro. PSP7 can't do what PhotoShop can. Eventually you will using actions, etc. and they only work with PhotoShop. It's not really that hard once you get into it.

Ahh, I see you have got all the answers already!


Griffin.

This topic pumped me up so much.. I just ordered a 100-400 L lens today.

Some times these message boards can be dangerous...

Thanks for the great imput from you guys that own this Lens

Welcome to the club