100-400mm Canon L info

I am going to get rid of my Sigma collection (They work, but I want the faster aperature and the clarity of the Canon L) I just want input on what people think about the Canon 100-400 f/4.5-5.6 L IS. Does it still react quickly and let in a lot of light? I shoot alot of wildlife and would use a 2x converter, if so can I use automatic focus or only manual. I usually use manual for all of my sports, but with a monster lens it is tough getting way out there are still getting a crisp photo. I guess that is where the IS hopefully will come in and eliminate the shake even with a tri-pod. I just want the 100-400 for my wildlife and outdoor sports then hopefully get a 70 or 80-200mm 2.8 IS for indoor sports.
I guess I basically want to know if those who own the 100-400 are happy, even on hazing dull days and bright blarring sun shots. It needs to be a lens for all elements.
Thanks for your input,
JR92.

I don't know much about the 100-400 L IS (I would like to though!) but on my 28-135 IS it suggests that if the lens is mounted on a tripod that you turn the IS off. It seems to get a bit upset trying to sort out the shake when there isn't any shake to sort out ..... ?

I have a 100-400 L IS on order but have been using a 70-200 L IS with a 2x converter. The images are really good, with the 2X converter it is best o stop down to f8 or smaller. The IS means that you will rarely need a tripod.

The 28-135 IS gives slightly better color but does not zoom in on thhhose criturs as well as the 70-200. I have dumped my sigma and Tamron lenses and am much happier wth the Canon lenses.

Phil Hall

santa Ynez CA

Thanks Guys; I am really looking forward to the 70 or 80-200mm IS, but for the criters I will be shooting pictures of I need the monster lens, too bad I can't afford it though. I will have to settle for the Canon 100-400mm IS. I am heading up to Wyoming (Jackson) next month (I live in remote N. Calif.) to take pictures of huge bull elk, buffalo, eagles, wolves and hopefully a grizzly that is not hibernating, and a select herd of mule bucks. I have is a nice Sigma 50-500 6.3-8 with a Sigma 2x converter. It works great on a well lit day, but January up in Wyoming may prevent me from any well lit days. Just have to cross my fingers. I have a guide so the pitcure taking will be good, hell it better he is alomost as much as a new lens.
Thanks for the input again,
JR92

I have the 100-400. Steve is right that the IS should be turned off when tripod mounted; that's not true of the 70-200IS, which can work out for itself that it's on a tripod.

I have just bought the 1.4x converter, but haven't shot much with it yet on the 100-400. (It works great on the 70-200). The 2x converter will cost you 2 stops, this means that the AF will not work on the longer lens. You have to go manual, or use the tape over the contacts trick, which I've never tried. It's supposed to work, but will cause a lot of hunting. It's also reported that the 2x will degrade the image significantly more than the 1.4x.

I'm very happy with the 100-400. The push-pull zoom takes a bit of getting used to. Set the switch for longer focusing helps speed of focus, but on the D30 that's still nothing to write home about (as we all knw ).

If you check the Rye Harbor galleries (2) and the Seabird gallery from this page http://www.pixelpixel.​org/galleries.htm, there are mostly shots with this lens.

Regards,

The tape trick does work with the 1.4x and the 100-400, provided that the subject and light are reasonably contrasty. I've used it a fair bit and haven't been disappointed. I have found that manually focussing first and using the AF to get the final "tweak" tends to reduce the hunting - I suppose it's because the camera hasn't got to do so much work to get focus as it has if the focus is completely out to start with.
I can't speak for the 2x, though. I don't have the Canon one, and my third-party 2x doesn't tell the camera that it is present - so the AF does try without the tape trick, although it's not as successful as the 1.4x with the tape, which isn't surprising given the extra stop of light loss.

KRs
Chris

I am a little confused. You say you want the canon lense for better light. You have a Sigma, whitch is faster than the canon, 4-6.3. We all hear that the canon is a better lens. The IS is a good thing, so I am told. I think I would be looking at the new Sigma. Comes with IS and zooms out to 800mm, drop a 1.4 on that baby. Just my opinion. Michael.

I have taken pictures with my camera on the same settings with my Sigma 50-500 and my friends Canon 100-400 IS while shooting the same subject and the light is terribly different. I have also tried it in a basketball gym with a Sigma 28-300 and a Canon L 70-200 and the difference went to benefit Canon once again. Despite the aperature being different it is in my best intrest to go with Canon. Believe me if I could get away with Sigma I would, but in the business of selling -lighter photos of crucial subjects play a major role.

The Sigma 80-400 OS lens looks nice, but it is not available yet. Also this is Sigmas first stabilized lens. I want to see some tests first, if this really work. Also it must be much cheaper then the Canon to be interesting.

Just bought one how is it haven't tried it really yet.

"Let in LOTS of light"? No...at 400mm, you have a max aperture of f/5.6 and that doesn't give you a lot to work with if you're trying to keep your shutter speeds up appropriately (1/400+), without upping your ISO.

That being said, the 100-400 is by FAR my favorite lens in my bag and gets WELL used. It will work with a 2x TC, but manual focus only (reliably);

The IS system on this lens helps some, but is quite old and only rated at around 2 stops or so. It's nicer than not having it, but could use an update.

As for fast reaction, it was easily capable of catching this guy:

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com/​photos/snydremark/4704​941515/

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com/​photos/snydremark/4689​643607/

I,too, love my 100-400 the best--it is my walk-around lens here in the Yukon because of bird and wildlife opportunities. If I could only have one lens, this would be it...

Julius

You'll have to go back to 2003 and tell the OP - it's the last time he posted...

DAMMIT!! Trolled by thread resurrection again

I think this is the oldest thread revival I've seen.