Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS USM - AKA The Dust Pump

Sydor25 wrote in post #12408342

Nice SF shot.

Wish_Star, your moon shot is not bad for handheld, but put your combo on a decent tripod and you'll have a much more impressive shot.

~100% crop, ISO 400, MKIII, hand-held (by my wife)

I took my 100-400mm out again today but it was a little rainy and dark cloud cover all day. I found out real fast my lens was not that sharp in these conditions.

I don't see anything wrong with the sharpness of the lens, but you have to be more careful with the risk of camera shake and with the placement of the focus plane (for example the owl's tail is sharper than its face).

The lens is fine, just in bad weather conditions its hard for me to get real sharp pictures, for a number of reasons.

peteg1 wrote in post #12409673
The lens is fine, just in bad weather conditions its hard for me to get real sharp pictures, for a number of reasons.

Haze is underrated, IMO, as a cause of 'soft' or 'flat' results -- High humidity, rain, even wind kicking up dust in Yellowstone all have a big impact.

Man these guys move fast:

IMO the biggest problem is wind, not low light. When there's no wind I can handhold my 100-400 down to very slow shutter speeds, but when it's windy I find it unusable even on a tripod.

This is the lamest thread I have ever clicked on... I didn't need to see these shots...

Ugggghhh.. $1,600 down the drain and waiting for it to show up on Wednesday. Glad I didn't buy the 400 5.6 L, because honestly, the shots I've seen from newer 100-400s look really damn sharp and the addition of zooming and IS for $300 was a no-brainer! The colors and clarity of some of these shots is just astounding.

Hey, when I get my copy, what designates the manufacturing date so I can make sure it is a newer one? Bought it from B&H, so I assume it would be the latest stock possible?

Damn you guys and your stupid crazy awesome pictures...

The letter after "U" on the mount designates the year. Mine is UY****** which is a 2010, UZ****** would be 2011 etc. etc. AFAIK

Tight crops from 50-60 ft on an overcast day.

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

Not a bad people lens either.

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

outback wrote in post #12412197
Not a bad people lens either.

Is this full of noise or is it me???

Canon_Lover wrote in post #12411676
Hey, when I get my copy, what designates the manufacturing date so I can make sure it is a newer one? Bought it from B&H, so I assume it would be the latest stock possible

Canon Lens Date Codes - http://www.the-digital-picture.com …ses/Canon-Lens-Aging.aspx