100-400 L USM IS

ed rader wrote in post #5669042
not everyone.

there's a whole group of guys on this forum who are angry that the 100-400L has not been unseated by a third party lens that sells for half as much.

ironic that there is a group that wants to see canon fail on a canon forum but they are here ... .

surrender does not always mean giving up.

sometimes it means joining the winning side.

welcome !

ed rader

You gotta be one of the biggest fanboys out there for canon

Hey, I really like the 100-400mm as much as the next guy. But a Mark II wouldn't suck. Weathersealing and newer IS would rock. A brighter/fixed aperture is dreaming without it costing and weighing more, but any little bit wouldn't hurt. Optically it's got some variation but is entirely capable of fantastic results.

There's some competition out there, but if Canon revved this puppy to Mark II it would once again dominate the field, which it arguably still has a firm grasp on with the current version.

05Xrunner wrote in post #5669180
You gotta be one of the biggest fanboys out there for canon

No, I believe that would be me after everything Canon has done for me the past few weeks. Upgrading my 1D MKI to a MKIII.... I think I will be the biggest fanboy for life!

And for the record, I borrowed that lens from CPS, and damn... I wish I had the money for it. It's the best zoom I have ever used, period.

I love my 100-400L, it is what it is, could be better, but mine is making me happy

i just rented this.
its hot

The 1-4 is a proven winner.

I should add, I love mine 100-400. I don't use it as everyday lens, but whenever I use it, I get great results. My avataar is created with it, when i bought and took it for the first day trail.

still with the rented lens.
i am fairly new using that lens but i love it. it helps when there is more sun (than less). i went out shooting early friday morning and had to crank up the iso + lower shutter a little bit. that's the only drawback when its "darker." but this was like 7am on a foggy day with rain on the forecast. but once the sun creeped in, forget about it. the lens performed like a champion. i love this lens.

im really not too fond of the"push-pull" method though. awkward situation there. i hate that. otherwise i love it. i wish i had this lens and not just renting it for the weekend. i will definitely rent this again.

I don't get great results on cloudy days, but the lens shines when the sun is out.

I got this lens and the 70-200 in 1999. It has always been the "go to" telephoto lens when I need something unobtrusive and portable. I have considered letting it go, but can't seem to do so because it has truely has been a joy to own. I think it cost 1600.00 at the time.

I went to a raptor release last month. The place was loaded with photographers. At least 75% of them wetre shooting with the 100-400. This lens is a cash cow for Canon. Why would they mess around with it?

Larry Weinman wrote in post #5688572
I went to a raptor release last month. The place was loaded with photographers. At least 75% of them wetre shooting with the 100-400. This lens is a cash cow for Canon. Why would they mess around with it?

what is raptor release?

05Xrunner wrote in post #5667884
I dont know about that. I dont find this lens as mind blowing as I thought it was gonna be. I dont think it is sharper then my Bigma I sold for it. The IS is nice but those other 2 sigmas might be a better vaule

One of the few cons of L lenses is VALUE.

The 100-400L is however the best zoom I've ever used in it's focal length, period. The Bigma doesn't compare especially given the IS aspect which it doesn't even have. The new Sigma telezooms are nice but are proving to not live up to the expectations of matching or beating the 100-400L.

It's not an outstanding lens, if you don't consider a 400mm capable 4x zoom with IS anything much.

TeeTee wrote in post #5691745
One of the few cons of L lenses is VALUE.

The 100-400L is however the best zoom I've ever used in it's focal length, period. The Bigma doesn't compare especially given the IS aspect which it doesn't even have. The new Sigma telezooms are nice but are proving to not live up to the expectations of matching or beating the 100-400L.

It's not an outstanding lens, if you don't consider a 400mm capable 4x zoom with IS anything much.

I dont know. So far from what I have seen on IQ alone my old Bigma trumps the IQ of my new 100-400.

05Xrunner wrote in post #5691944
I dont know. So far from what I have seen on IQ alone my old Bigma trumps the IQ of my new 100-400.

So stop whining...sell your 100-400 (making someone happy) and re-buy the Bigma (apparently making you happy)