L buying spree

There's a fourth plus with the 100-400II, the IS.
I don't remember when Canon IS improved by a very significant amount, but the 100-400II has the much improved IS.

As far as dust pump though, at least my lens is one. The small DOF in this photo means just a fraction of what's inside can be seen.

Discalmer: I don't consider this a problem and it does not keep me up at night.

Photo from Choderboy's gallery.
Image hosted by forum (1003622)

Tom Reichner wrote in post #19252567
.
I also find the version 1 of the 100-400mm zoom to be much better than the version 1.

For three main reasons:

1: . . The optics are just so much better. . The glass in the version 2 resolves fine detail much better than the version 1. Even wide open, zoomed all the way in to 400mm, it is tack sharp. . In fact, at f5.6 and 400mm, it resolves find detail better than the v1 did at 300mm and stopped down to f8. . It is just completely sharp at every aperture and at every point from 100mm to 400mm and everywhere in between. . These sharper optics not only mean better image quality overall, but also mean that you don't have to stop down to get sharper results, and also it means that the v2 is much more usable with the tele-extenders (more usable meaning higher image quality).

2: . . The autofocus is simply faster to find and lock on to moving subjects. . I realize that we're only talking about a fraction of a second faster, but when you are shooting fast action like sports and birds in flight, a split second faster autofocus can make all the difference in the world.

3: . . MUCH closer minimum focus distance, resulting in much higher magnification rates for close-up work. It isn't like a true macro, but it is starting to get rather close ... at least compared to the v1. . I can use my v2 for butterflies and lizards and abstract detail / texture shots that I just couldn't use my v1 for.

.

I agree with all those points, and I will add another advantage of the V2 over the original -- a much improved image stabilization system. FYI, I have owned both versions.

Scott M wrote in post #19253817
I agree with all those points, and I will add another advantage of the V2 over the original -- a much improved image stabilization system. FYI, I have owned both versions.

.
Yes, I agree that the improved IS is a big advantage over the v1.

Because of the great IS in this and other lenses, we no longer have to "keep the shutter speed up" when shooting wildlife with long telephoto lenses. . That is a thing of the past. . If a critter is still, you can shoot at 400mm handheld at 1/30th of a second, and get tack sharp photos.


.

So I sold some of my old Nikon gear and manage to scrape enough cash to buy the newer version of the 100-400. So now my collection is complete.

Thanks for all the input on how the newer version is much better than the old one.

Congratulations! Have fun with it!

ToyotaGlock wrote in post #19256005
.
So I sold some of my old Nikon gear and manage to scrape enough cash to buy the newer version of the 100-400. So now my collection is complete.

Thanks for all the input on how the newer version is much better than the old one.
.

.
Wow! . That's great!

The cool thing about choosing that lens is that you will be able to use it for things that you can't use your existing lenses for - it will be unique and open up new and different types of opportunities for you.


.

Excellent choice. Going 100-400 adds another dimension to your photography and that particular lens is superb. It also plays very very well with the 1.4x iii.