Comparing my 100-400 to my 500 f4 IS

I finally found time to do a shoot-out between my 100-400 IS and 500 f4 L IS...

My verdict? I was pleasantly surprised with the performance of the zoom at 400 mm wide open.

http://birdphotoph.pro​boards107.com …display&thread=​1197867182

Regards,

Romy

liquidstone wrote in post #4518640
I finally found time to do a shoot-out between my 100-400 IS and 500 f4 L IS...

My verdict? I was pleasantly surprised with the performance of the zoom at 400 mm wide open.

http://birdphotoph.pro​boards107.com …display&thread=​1197867182

Regards,

Romy

thanx Romy. i'm really loving my 100-400L .

ed rader

Do you have samples that weren't sharpened....just pure RAW's?

Mike55 wrote in post #4518659
Do you have samples that weren't sharpened....just pure RAW's?

Yes, I shot RAW + JPEG, but only posted the unprocessed in-camera JPEGs to save time.

Romy

ed rader wrote in post #4518658
thanx Romy. i'm really loving my 100-400L .

ed rader

I know the feeling very well, Ed.... a prime-sharp zoom with IS if you get a good copy.

Romy

Nice put-together here, Romy. I basically agree with you about the 1-4IS; it can really be a gem. Both you and I have consistently stated that the 1-4IS is about as good as the 400 f5.6 (at least with your latest copy), given a good, properly functioning unit.

I still think, regardless of the evidence you or I post, that prejudices die hard, and that because it's a zoom, it cannot match the 400 f5.6, let alone the 500 f4. That is, people will always be uncomfortable saying the zoom is even in the same class as the primes.

But as I've always tried to do...ya' post what ya' find and let the chips fall where they may.

Good job.

Thx for the info. How many copies did you guys have to go through to get a good one?

I'm curious if anyone out there has unsharpened RAW crops that compare a 100-400@400 with one of Canon's primes (300IS,400,500IS).

Mike55 wrote in post #4518815
Thx for the info. How many copies did you guys have to go through to get a good one?

I'm curious if anyone out there has unsharpened RAW crops that compare a 100-400@400 with one of Canon's primes (300IS,400,500IS).

My first 100-400 is so-so, the second one is a gem (this is the zoom used in the test).

If you can PM me your email, I'll try to send two RAW files (hope my yahoo email can handle the 12MB 40D RAWs):

1. 500 f4 IS at f/5.6
2. 100-400 at 400 mm, f/5.6

Romy

liquidstone wrote in post #4518640
I finally found time to do a shoot-out between my 100-400 IS and 500 f4 L IS...

My verdict? I was pleasantly surprised with the performance of the zoom at 400 mm wide open.

http://birdphotoph.pro​boards107.com …display&thread=​1197867182

Regards,

Romy

I GET MINE BACK FROM CANON TOMORROW HOPE IT NO LONGER BACK FOCUSES??? And is close to as sharp as your 100-400.....

LightRules wrote in post #4518798
Nice put-together here, Romy. I basically agree with you about the 1-4IS; it can really be a gem. Both you and I have consistently stated that the 1-4IS is about as good as the 400 f5.6 (at least with your latest copy), given a good, properly functioning unit.

I still think, regardless of the evidence you or I post, that prejudices die hard, and that because it's a zoom, it cannot match the 400 f5.6, let alone the 500 f4. That is, people will always be uncomfortable saying the zoom is even in the same class as the primes.

But as I've always tried to do...ya' post what ya' find and let the chips fall where they may.

Good job.

Amen to that, Jojo and thanks!

Romy

Mike55 wrote in post #4518815
Thx for the info. How many copies did you guys have to go through to get a good one?

I'm curious if anyone out there has unsharpened RAW crops that compare a 100-400@400 with one of Canon's primes (300IS,400,500IS).

Just sent you the two RAW files, Mike. Looking forward to your comments.

Romy