I rented the 100-400 for Softball

Yesterday, I rented the 100-400 to shoot Santa Barbara City College v. Ventura College softball with my 40D. I was a bit worried about the lens being 'soft', so I wanted to see for myself. I rented from Sammy's. The lens I got was heavily used and abused. I found that the lens is fairly sharp wide open, but at 300-400 mm needs speeds in excess of 1/800. I found the 4.0-5.6 limiting, but not a complete deterrant. This lens did make me miss my 2.8! Overall, for bright sunny days, this lens does well, produces fairly sharp images, and is lighter than my 70-200 2.8 IS. I had IS on the whole time, and it gulped down 1 battery after one game of shooting! It focuses fairly quickly, but not as quickly as my 70-200 2.8 IS. My usual keeper rate with the 70-200 2.8 IS is about 90%. With the 100-400, the keeper rate dropped to approximately 75% - partly because I needed faster shutter speeds and got camera shake, and partly because the focus either missed or wasn't fast enough. The push pull is a pain, and I didn't like it. However, I would imagine that once you get used to it, it wouldn't be so bad.

My partner also rented the Nikon 200-400 4.0 for his Nikon 2Dx. Granted, the Nikon 200-400 is $5,000 whereas the Canon 100-400 is about $1,500. However, that lens is TACK SHARP and fast! Being that I shoot mostly outdoor sports during the day, that would probably be my lens of choice.

An image shot by the 100-400 with my 40D (ISO 200, F 5.6, 1/800, 250mm):

i have been thinking of picking one up for the very same reason! there is a team from the local cigar shop that plays at night, and they want me to see if i can make them looks like rock stars.

i don't suppose you would have any night shots?

Keep in mind you need to feed the 100-400L a lot of light to get good results at the long end.

santabarbarapix wrote in post #5148324
Yesterday, I rented the 100-400 to shoot Santa Barbara City College v. Ventura College softball with my 40D. I was a bit worried about the lens being 'soft', so I wanted to see for myself. I rented from Sammy's. The lens I got was heavily used and abused. I found that the lens is fairly sharp wide open, but at 300-400 mm needs speeds in excess of 1/800. I found the 4.0-5.6 limiting, but not a complete deterrant. This lens did make me miss my 2.8! Overall, for bright sunny days, this lens does well, produces fairly sharp images, and is lighter than my 70-200 2.8 IS. I had IS on the whole time, and it gulped down 1 battery after one game of shooting! It focuses fairly quickly, but not as quickly as my 70-200 2.8 IS. My usual keeper rate with the 70-200 2.8 IS is about 90%. With the 100-400, the keeper rate dropped to approximately 75% - partly because I needed faster shutter speeds and got camera shake, and partly because the focus either missed or wasn't fast enough. The push pull is a pain, and I didn't like it. However, I would imagine that once you get used to it, it wouldn't be so bad.

My partner also rented the Nikon 200-400 4.0 for his Nikon 2Dx. Granted, the Nikon 200-400 is $5,000 whereas the Canon 100-400 is about $1,500. However, that lens is TACK SHARP and fast! Being that I shoot mostly outdoor sports during the day, that would probably be my lens of choice.

An image shot by the 100-400 with my 40D (ISO 200, F 5.6, 1/800, 250mm):

great picture but if you need 1/800s to steady the lens @ 300mm - 400mm it's not the len's fault !

i can easily handhold mine at a quarter of that speed if necessary.

ed rader

santabarbarapix wrote in post #5148324
The push pull is a pain, and I didn't like it. However, I would imagine that once you get used to it, it wouldn't be so bad.

I rented a 100-400 for a few weeks and kind of felt the same way. I just didn't love the way it worked enough to drop the $1400 on it. I keep hoping that Canon will update it. I got some nice images and it was reasonably sharp, I just couldn't get used to the push pull action.

santabarbarapix wrote in post #5148324
My partner also rented the Nikon 200-400 4.0 for his Nikon 2Dx. Granted, the Nikon 200-400 is $5,000 whereas the Canon 100-400 is about $1,500. However, that lens is TACK SHARP and fast!

I think this is the lens that I really wish Canon would make! Although, maybe at half the price.

timnosenzo wrote in post #5148577
I rented a 100-400 for a few weeks and kind of felt the same way. I just didn't love the way it worked enough to drop the $1400 on it. I keep hoping that Canon will update it. I got some nice images and it was reasonably sharp, I just couldn't get used to the push pull action.


I think this is the lens that I really wish Canon would make! Although, maybe at half the price.

the 200-400 nikkor also weighs 7 lbs. the 100-400L weighs three pounds .

ed rader

nicksan wrote in post #5148523
Keep in mind you need to feed the 100-400L a lot of light to get good results at the long end.

just like with any other lens, you have to maintain the correct shutter speed. i think that this gets repeated so often that many people believe that the 100-400L is "different" when really it isn't.

ed rader

I guess I am still going through my "learning curve" then b/c I find that I my keeper rate declines a lot with this lens. As you stated, there is nothing wrong with the lens and my copy is nice and sharp.

However there are times when this lens leave me scratching my head. Using fast enough shutter speed, holding it steady, subject not moving, yet I see motion blur...must be me...but it seems like it's less forgiving at least for me.

On my 1D MKIII, wide open @400mm I should be able easily hand hold this lens with 1/800 SS, especially with the 2 stop IS and non-moving subject...but there are times when it just doesn't translate into great results. I've got plenty of blurry shots (for example, shots of a tiger/lion walking slowly, etc.) with SS faster than 1/1000 that leaves me scratching my head!

70-200 f2.8 IS is real easy...keeper rate is high.

Again, it's probably me. I don't use this lens as much as you do Ed, so I have a lot to learn!

ed rader wrote in post #5148632
just like with any other lens, you have to maintain the correct shutter speed. i think that this gets repeated so often that many people believe that the 100-400L is "different" when really it isn't.

ed rader

santabarbarapix wrote in post #5148324
I found that the lens is fairly sharp wide open, but at 300-400 mm needs speeds in excess of 1/800.

My usual keeper rate with the 70-200 2.8 IS is about 90%. With the 100-400, the keeper rate dropped to approximately 75% - partly because I needed faster shutter speeds and got camera shake,

An image shot by the 100-400 with my 40D (ISO 200, F 5.6, 1/800, 250mm)

If you were missing shots because the shutter speed was less that 1/800 (which I can't imagine that being the problem for most shots), why didn't you increase your ISO? The 40D can easily handle ISO settings at least double that.

Bob R

POTN rule number 1. Never make any criticism, implied or otherwise, of the EF 100-400L

I just got mine about a month ago. My first UW date code lens. Took it to an air show this past weekend and absolutely fell in love with it! Its a keeper!

nicksan wrote in post #5148809
I guess I am still going through my "learning curve" then b/c I find that I my keeper rate declines a lot with this lens. As you stated, there is nothing wrong with the lens and my copy is nice and sharp.

However there are times when this lens leave me scratching my head. Using fast enough shutter speed, holding it steady, subject not moving, yet I see motion blur...must be me...but it seems like it's less forgiving at least for me.

On my 1D MKIII, wide open @400mm I should be able easily hand hold this lens with 1/800 SS, especially with the 2 stop IS and non-moving subject...but there are times when it just doesn't translate into great results. I've got plenty of blurry shots (for example, shots of a tiger/lion walking slowly, etc.) with SS faster than 1/1000 that leaves me scratching my head!

70-200 f2.8 IS is real easy...keeper rate is high.

Again, it's probably me. I don't use this lens as much as you do Ed, so I have a lot to learn!

Turn the IS off if you are getting speeds that fast. My guess is that the IS needs a little more babysitting/time to spin up and stabilize. For slowly moving things, mode 2 might not properly detect the lateral motion and you might actually be fighting the IS.

I've never had the lens but my 70-300IS needed more time to stabilize than my 70-200/2.8IS.

Not softball, but I watched the photogs working the last Detroit Red Wings game I went to and they were all shooting the 100-400 with wireless strobes up in the rafters. They tended to shoot from the corner glass when the action was in their end.

About the blur, allow the lens to settle, before you try to focus after zoomming. It's a great lens, but like any other lens, you have to get used to it.

JeffreyG wrote in post #5150003
Not softball, but I watched the photogs working the last Detroit Red Wings game I went to and they were all shooting the 100-400 with wireless strobes up in the rafters. They tended to shoot from the corner glass when the action was in their end.

I love my 100-400L. And "GO WINGS"!!!
Mike