100-400L vs 400 f/5.6 ??

Lester Wareham wrote in post #2162789
Another option is the 300 f4L IS + 1.4X, very usable and also with good close focus but the 400mm prime will have better AF than the 300 with the TC I would think.

I have this combo a 300mm and a 1.4x and like it very much. It offers me essentially a 300 f4 when I need speed and a 420mm f5.6 with IS. I cant understand why for the life of me anyone would buy the 400mm f5.6 that doesnt have IS and is slow, for the money it costs even at a cheap place like B&H the 100-400 IS or a 300mm f4 IS + 1.4x TC is a much better deal.

I suppose I am not alone in this thinking as rarely do I ever see anyone talk about this lens nor do I believe there is even a 400mm f5.6 Archive thread. I do however very rarely see one for sale on FM with usually a offer to trade for the 300mm IS f4 lens or sell for $900 US.

cjm wrote in post #2175689
I have this combo a 300mm and a 1.4x and like it very much. It offers me essentially a 300 f4 when I need speed and a 420mm f5.6 with IS. I cant understand why for the life of me anyone would buy the 400mm f5.6 that doesnt have IS and is slow, for the money it costs even at a cheap place like B&H the 100-400 IS or a 300mm f4 IS + 1.4x TC is a much better deal.

I suppose I am not alone in this thinking as rarely do I ever see anyone talk about this lens nor do I believe there is even a 400mm f5.6 Archive thread. I do however very rarely see one for sale on FM with usually a offer to trade for the 300mm IS f4 lens or sell for $900 US.

Nothing against the 300f4 IS, but the 400 5.6 is razor sharp. The AF is faster compared to a 300f4 with a 1.4x.
It hand holds easy, it's balances nice. People buy this when they are at a search for reach, and tracking birds in flight.

--edit--just to add.
Birding and exclusivly birds, go for the 400 prime.
Anything else. The zoom. Someone observent said you only have the kit zoom. A 100-400 will compliment this with versatiltiy. And even though the prime is noticably better in IQ and AF, the zoom is no slow slug.
I have seen plenty of birders with both.
The prime vs. zoom is an ongoing fight with a lot of internal battles during the decision making.
But yours seems easy. You have a huge gap in focal range...almost a no-brainer....the zoom seems like the answer.
I rent the 100-400 for motorsports, and I love it. And it's still by an 'L' by any way you measure it.

Keith R wrote in post #2174222
I reckon that any failure to get decent flight shots from the 100-400mm is more down to the user, really.

The following is a picture of a (ruddy) turnstone - an 8 inch long bird that flies along in a blur of wings at about 30 mph and far more with a stiff tailwind, as this one had.

It's a fairly pap picture, I admit - the light wasn't great - but it's sharp enough and in focus, I'd say?

400mm, handheld, IS setting 1, focus limiter set to 6.5m.

Hi Keith, great pic BTW! No one is saying the 100-400 isn't capable of getting some cracking in flight shots. It most certainly is! I've got plenty of in flight shots that I'm very happy with from this lens, but the fact is that my keeper ratio with the zoom is significantly lower than it is with the prime. Same photographer, same technique, same camera, same settings. This difference is entirely down to the faster AF of the prime IMHO.

cjm wrote in post #2175689
I have this combo a 300mm and a 1.4x and like it very much. It offers me essentially a 300 f4 when I need speed and a 420mm f5.6 with IS. I cant understand why for the life of me anyone would buy the 400mm f5.6 that doesnt have IS and is slow, for the money it costs even at a cheap place like B&H the 100-400 IS or a 300mm f4 IS + 1.4x TC is a much better deal.

I suppose I am not alone in this thinking as rarely do I ever see anyone talk about this lens nor do I believe there is even a 400mm f5.6 Archive thread. I do however very rarely see one for sale on FM with usually a offer to trade for the 300mm IS f4 lens or sell for $900 US.

I'm glad your combo works well for you but have you actually used either the 100-400 or the 400 5.6? In my experience the 300 f4 IS + 1.4x TC is not as sharp nor as quick AF-wise as either the zoom or the 400 prime. Yes the bare 300 is sharp and quick to AF but the TC hurts it enough to make a difference. That's why I have both the 100-400 and the 400 prime but the 300 f4 has no place in my bag. If you want some 400 5.6 discussion, drop in to any birding forum - it's probably the most talked about birding lens there is!

nitsch wrote in post #2176303
If you want some 400 5.6 discussion, drop in to any birding forum - it's probably the most talked about birding lens there is!

Seriously? What is with the lack of IS on this lens? From images and even seeing it in person it looks like a 300mm IS f4 with a TC built into it.

Not sure about the rest that have used a 300mm with 1.4 TC on it but I have found it pretty much the same AF speed and razor tack sharp. Not a birder or anything like that but I have taken images of birds, squrills and other fast moving animals and they all seem to turn out.

I bought the 300 over the 100-400 because I wasnt too much a fan of it when I tried it out in the store. Then again, talk to me next spring and I might just have one. Never know.

I would like to address the question about the Bigma lens. I used to own the Bigma and now own the Canon 100-400. The Bigma is not a bad lens for the money but I don't feel it matches up to the Canon in any way. The focusing is slow in all but the brightest light.
The AF tends to hunt more then any telephoto I have used when confronted with a busy background. It has no IS and is pretty much tripod dependent. It is over a pound heavier then the Canon and difficult to hand hold. The Canon has better image quality, focuses better, the IS makes all then difference in a lens of this length. It is easily handheld. In regard to Teleconverters, I was never able to get decent IQ when using a Siigma 1.4 TC. There were occasional shots but nothing consistant. The Canon does much better in this regard. Both lenses lose AF with a TC but the Canon retains IS.