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 Photo Sharing & Visual Enjoyment Birds 
Thread started 13 Jun 2007 (Wednesday) 13:12
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

I think I need a push!

 
Costa ­ Del ­ Canon
Senior Member
Avatar
295 posts
Joined Mar 2007
Location: from Yorkshire, England now living in Spain
     
Jun 13, 2007 13:12 |  #1

I have a 70-300 is do, which I have been more than happy with for the past couple of years, however I am constantly frustrated with lack of reach, my lens won't take a TC, I shoot lots of wildlife, the clever money seems to be on the 100-400 and a TC, opinions please:confused: :confused: :confused:

Could you all post your best 100-400 shots.

I want superbly crisp results, another consideration is size and weight (not mine, the lens!)
As I'm female, I can't lug around anything too huge.
Please,please.please help.

Thanks

Lisa:) :) :)


Silence is Golden.....Duck Tape is Silver!

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
Reyno
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
7,037 posts
Joined Apr 2006
Location: Orlando, FL
     
Jun 13, 2007 13:55 |  #2

You can check my last 3 posts(5000th, Tricolored Heron, & Snowy and Stilt). All shots were taken with the 100-400 at various focals without TC and handheld. The lens is a tad heavier than the 400 but the IS feature makes it very ideal for handheld shots. Good luck Lisa.


Best regards - Reyno
http://www.flickr.com/​photos/reyno/ (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Costa ­ Del ­ Canon
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Avatar
295 posts
Joined Mar 2007
Location: from Yorkshire, England now living in Spain
     
Jun 13, 2007 14:20 |  #3

Reyno wrote in post #3371445 (external link)
You can check my last 3 posts(5000th, Tricolored Heron, & Snowy and Stilt). All shots were taken with the 100-400 at various focals without TC and handheld. The lens is a tad heavier than the 400 but the IS feature makes it very ideal for handheld shots. Good luck Lisa.

OH! That's it! Thank you, your shot is wonderful, that is a big tip in favour of the 100-400. Thanks:D :D :D


Silence is Golden.....Duck Tape is Silver!

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
beano
Goldmember
Avatar
4,168 posts
Likes: 7
Joined May 2006
Location: Berkshire. UK
     
Jun 13, 2007 17:31 |  #4

If you've already got the 70-300, i'd go for the 400mm 5.6. The quality should be slightly better with the prime, although that will always be debatable... And it's cheaper. The only drawback would be carrying 2 lenses.

Just so you know... 400mm isn't long enough either; in fact it's like money, you can never get enough! :D


Scott

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Costa ­ Del ­ Canon
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Avatar
295 posts
Joined Mar 2007
Location: from Yorkshire, England now living in Spain
     
Jun 15, 2007 09:50 |  #5

lol...Well thanks? I think? It has crossed my mind that should I get the 100-400 I could be making my 70-300DO redundent and it's a great little lens, I have been 100% happy with it, but I do want more reach and I want razor sharp images, it's the choice between the added versatility of a zoom against sharper images with a prime....urgh!!! I wish I had pots of money and huge muscles then I could buy and carry everything, and not have to tear my hair out trying to choose the best option!
(you have me thinking now!)
Thanks so much for taking the trouble to respond.


Silence is Golden.....Duck Tape is Silver!

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
pttenn
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
9,671 posts
Likes: 6
Joined Mar 2006
Location: Tennessee
     
Jun 15, 2007 10:16 as a reply to  @ beano's post |  #6

Just so you know... 400mm isn't long enough either; in fact it's like money, you can never get enough! :D[/QUOTE]

Amen to that. I am female, have the 400 and it is easy to carry and hand-hold. I've held the 100-400 and it seems a LOT heavier to me. I love the 400, have not regretted getting it at all. Lisa, I love your quote. :) :) :)
Karen


Canon 50D, 40D, Tokina 12-24,Canon 18-55,Canon 28-135 IS, Canon 50 1.8,Canon 75-300 5.6,
Canon 200 2.8 L, Canon 400 f/5.6 L, Bogen monopod and Sunpak Tripod with manfrotto Pistol ball grip.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sugarzebra
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
9,289 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 43
Joined Sep 2005
Location: Oshawa, Ontario
     
Jun 15, 2007 10:53 |  #7

Costa Del Canon wrote in post #3371255 (external link)
I want superbly crisp results, another consideration is size and weight (not mine, the lens!)
As I'm female, I can't lug around anything too huge.
Please,please.please help.

Thanks

Lisa:) :) :)

Hi Lisa,
The 100-400 is a great lens (as you can see from the posts on the bird forum), however if sharpness and lighter weight is a factor, you should seriously look at the 400 f/5.6. No zoom, no IS, but very sharp and very fast auto focus. Its also considered one of the best lenses for birds in flight. I really like mine.


Scott

Website & Blog (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
beano
Goldmember
Avatar
4,168 posts
Likes: 7
Joined May 2006
Location: Berkshire. UK
     
Jun 15, 2007 12:01 |  #8

pttenn wrote in post #3382264 (external link)
I am female, have the 400 and it is easy to carry and hand-hold.

Now i feel completely immasculated (if that's a word!?! lol!)... I can't hand hold the 400! :o I might get away with it at 1/2000, but i wouldn't bet my life on it lol!


Scott

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Costa ­ Del ­ Canon
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Avatar
295 posts
Joined Mar 2007
Location: from Yorkshire, England now living in Spain
     
Jun 16, 2007 18:45 |  #9

sugarzebra wrote in post #3382426 (external link)
Hi Lisa,
The 100-400 is a great lens (as you can see from the posts on the bird forum), however if sharpness and lighter weight is a factor, you should seriously look at the 400 f/5.6. No zoom, no IS, but very sharp and very fast auto focus. Its also considered one of the best lenses for birds in flight. I really like mine.

Thank You so much for your advice, i think I will go with the 400 as I do want scary sharp images!:)


Silence is Golden.....Duck Tape is Silver!

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Costa ­ Del ­ Canon
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Avatar
295 posts
Joined Mar 2007
Location: from Yorkshire, England now living in Spain
     
Jun 16, 2007 18:48 |  #10

beano wrote in post #3382723 (external link)
Now i feel completely immasculated (if that's a word!?! lol!)... I can't hand hold the 400! :o I might get away with it at 1/2000, but i wouldn't bet my life on it lol!

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: I came oh! So close to a smutty comment then! LOL


Silence is Golden.....Duck Tape is Silver!

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Keith ­ R
Goldmember
2,856 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Aug 2006
Location: Blyth, Northumberland, NE England
     
Jun 16, 2007 19:14 |  #11

Lisa,

you might like to peruse these threads:

https://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthre​ad.php?t=296547
https://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthre​ad.php?t=334045

I'm in both of those threads (which I mention just so that you know I can back up what I'm saying with pictorial evidence).

Simply put, I routinely use the 100-400 and Kenko 1.4x (560mm of focal length) handheld, and I can't speak highly enough about the image quality of that lens.

Ignore any nonsense about the 100-400 not being capable of real sharpness - it's just not true.

This might whet your appetite:

IMAGE NOT FOUND
IMAGE IS A REDIRECT OR MISSING!
HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO


Yes, I was quite close to this lapwing - this is as near as dammit 100%, but it's still handheld at 560mm.

Now then, I'm not a big fella, and at 46 (closer to 47, actually) I'm not exactly in the first flush of youth. But I'm passably fit for my age, and I think nothing of 6 or more hours at a time with my 30D, grip, 100-400mm and TC around my neck, and a rucksack full of photographic bits and pieces, food and drink on my back.

I'll also point out that the IS in this lens will often more than make up for the sharpness "advantage" the prime is supposed to have. This is at 1/320, which is waaaay lower than the 1/896 (1/FL * 1.6) that current wisdom says you need to handhold a FL of 560mm on a 1.6 crop camera...



  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
beano
Goldmember
Avatar
4,168 posts
Likes: 7
Joined May 2006
Location: Berkshire. UK
     
Jun 17, 2007 06:08 |  #12

Costa Del Canon wrote in post #3388934 (external link)
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: I came oh! So close to a smutty comment then! LOL

I thought you were being smutty for a moment there! :lol:

Are you any closer to knowing what lens to go for? I must admit, i'm wondering how the 400 will do if i ever get round to a Safari, or conservation trip, as i have nothing between the 50mm and 400mm range!?!

*EDIT* Here's a link to a recent shot with the 400+1.4TC. There are better examples out there (i'm still learning hehe), but it gives you an idea...

https://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthre​ad.php?t=331646


Scott

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Costa ­ Del ­ Canon
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Avatar
295 posts
Joined Mar 2007
Location: from Yorkshire, England now living in Spain
     
Jun 18, 2007 14:51 |  #13

Keith R wrote in post #3389032 (external link)
Lisa,

you might like to peruse these threads:

https://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthre​ad.php?t=296547
https://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthre​ad.php?t=334045

I'm in both of those threads (which I mention just so that you know I can back up what I'm saying with pictorial evidence).

Simply put, I routinely use the 100-400 and Kenko 1.4x (560mm of focal length) handheld, and I can't speak highly enough about the image quality of that lens.

Ignore any nonsense about the 100-400 not being capable of real sharpness - it's just not true.

This might whet your appetite:

IMAGE NOT FOUND
HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO


Yes, I was quite close to this lapwing - this is as near as dammit 100%, but it's still handheld at 560mm.

Now then, I'm not a big fella, and at 46 (closer to 47, actually) I'm not exactly in the first flush of youth. But I'm passably fit for my age, and I think nothing of 6 or more hours at a time with my 30D, grip, 100-400mm and TC around my neck, and a rucksack full of photographic bits and pieces, food and drink on my back.

I'll also point out that the IS in this lens will often more than make up for the sharpness "advantage" the prime is supposed to have. This is at 1/320, which is waaaay lower than the 1/896 (1/FL * 1.6) that current wisdom says you need to handhold a FL of 560mm on a 1.6 crop camera...

OH! Kieth, that was SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO nice of you to go to all that troubles, B**ger it, I´ll buy both lenses! The above shot os 100% wonderful. You have really put my mind at rest re 100-400mm as the sharpness was issue, next question how heavy is this lens? I also keep reading that every so often canon turn out a soft version, surley they are a rarity? THANK YOU THANK YOU THANK YOU
Going to check the links you posted now.
Kind regards
Lisa


Silence is Golden.....Duck Tape is Silver!

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Costa ­ Del ­ Canon
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Avatar
295 posts
Joined Mar 2007
Location: from Yorkshire, England now living in Spain
     
Jun 19, 2007 14:43 |  #14

:lol: :lol:

beano wrote in post #3390883 (external link)
I thought you were being smutty for a moment there! :lol:

Are you any closer to knowing what lens to go for? I must admit, i'm wondering how the 400 will do if i ever get round to a Safari, or conservation trip, as i have nothing between the 50mm and 400mm range!?!

*EDIT* Here's a link to a recent shot with the 400+1.4TC. There are better examples out there (i'm still learning hehe), but it gives you an idea...

https://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthre​ad.php?t=331646

Hi Scott, I am see sawing between the 100-400 and the 400, I think what I'll do is ask my local (in UK) shop to get both in so I can try b4 I buy. I could go all hi tec in my choice and toss a coin, if so should I use a 2p or a 5p for the toss!!!!!!!!:lol: :lol:


Silence is Golden.....Duck Tape is Silver!

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Costa ­ Del ­ Canon
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Avatar
295 posts
Joined Mar 2007
Location: from Yorkshire, England now living in Spain
     
Jun 19, 2007 15:01 |  #15

beano wrote in post #3390883 (external link)
I thought you were being smutty for a moment there! :lol:

Are you any closer to knowing what lens to go for? I must admit, i'm wondering how the 400 will do if i ever get round to a Safari, or conservation trip, as i have nothing between the 50mm and 400mm range!?!

*EDIT* Here's a link to a recent shot with the 400+1.4TC. There are better examples out there (i'm still learning hehe), but it gives you an idea...

https://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthre​ad.php?t=331646

A big thank you to everyone who has taken the trouble to comment, I think I will go for the 400mm as it's lighter and I'm advised sharper, (but I do like having zoom) lol! I don't return to the UK till mid July, which is when I'll buy the lens. In the meantime I will "Carry on Dithering" THANKS AGAIN, and please keep your comments on the 100-400 and the 400mm coming. D day end of July!:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:


Silence is Golden.....Duck Tape is Silver!

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

2,254 views & 0 likes for this thread
I think I need a push!
FORUMS Photo Sharing & Visual Enjoyment Birds 
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 PhotoManiacs
311 guests, 195 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.