100-400 or 400 f/5.6 for almost same $ - Which one to get?

Amazon Goldbox - 100-400 showed up for $1300. The 400L costs a bit under $1200. Which one should I get?

I'm looking for a 400mm lens to cover baseball. I was planning on the 100-400 but it is a bit pricey. I began considering the 400 f/5.6L. My understanding is the 400 focuses faster / better but the zoom would be far more versatile.

I shoot off a monopod so IS is not a requirement.

kinda depends on what you are going to shoot. Air Shows - the 100-400. Wild life the 400/5.6.

I would have to say, if you have somewhere to rent or borrow these lens from..... do it! Try before you buy! Depending where your going to be during the baseball games..... you might want the 100-400! I have heard of plenty of peeps that love the range of the lens!!!! The 400, your going to have to work with it! Move back, get closer or just to close!!!!!
Ask yourself some of these questions and find out which one might suit you better in the long run!


later,
angel m. leal jr.

have a good look in the archives at the images taken with both... check out in particular the background blur quality 'bokeh' - i find the 100-400 to have a slightly distracting blur effect - not overly annoying but if it were to be used for my favorite photos it would bug me...

(ps im thinking africa trip one day - although the versatility of the 100-400 would make it a certainty for that trip...)

just something to think about.. although i do think it would suit your situation more - being able to get in close and pull back to get wider images....

only thing better would be a 70-200 if you were always in close... or look at a 300 f4 maybe for a bit less range but a bit more speed and subject isolation....

gasrocks wrote in post #7878779
kinda depends on what you are going to shoot. Air Shows - the 100-400. Wild life the 400/5.6.

Does this still hold true if your shooting 2 bodies? I don't know what the OP has for equipment, but I am planning on shooting a long prime on one body and a medium range zoom on the other for airshows. I used to shoot alot of airshows and had the 100-400 and have sold it in favour of either a 300 or 400 prime on a (to be purchased shortly) second body, because I found I was always 300+ for almost anything aerial

OP here - I have a 1D II and a Rebel XSi but the XSi doesn't get much sports time at all. I've shot baseball with a 100-300 and it was too short. With a TC it was still short but workable. Reviewing my photos, I find I'm often at 300mm but not always. Some photos were taken between 120 and 250 mm.

In the end, price won out. I ordered the 100-400L for $1300 from Amazon. Darn that Goldbox. It caused me to buy a 70-200 f/2.8 IS and now the 100-400L. If I don't like the 100-400L I can return it and replace it with a 400 prime for $1200 (saving only $100).

I tried My 400 on football and for real close up shots it's great, but My 70-200 with the 1.4 extender works much better...You don't want to be restricted, you need a zoom..

n1as wrote in post #7879002
OP here - I have a 1D II and a Rebel XSi but the XSi doesn't get much sports time at all. I've shot baseball with a 100-300 and it was too short. With a TC it was still short but workable. Reviewing my photos, I find I'm often at 300mm but not always. Some photos were taken between 120 and 250 mm.

In the end, price won out. I ordered the 100-400L for $1300 from Amazon. Darn that Goldbox. It caused me to buy a 70-200 f/2.8 IS and now the 100-400L. If I don't like the 100-400L I can return it and replace it with a 400 prime for $1200 (saving only $100).

With the rebates I bought a 100-400 from B&H and it arrived today. There wasn't much light left when I got home but I managed to get a couple of shots and I was impressed. Can't wait to get out this weekend and see what it can do.

My normal sharpness test is to set it up on a tripod and take pics of a bookshelf across the room. The results were amazing and didn't seem to be degraded by my Kenko 1.4x TC.

I agree

Medic1 wrote in post #7878953
Does this still hold true if your shooting 2 bodies? I don't know what the OP has for equipment, but I am planning on shooting a long prime on one body and a medium range zoom on the other for airshows. I used to shoot a lot of airshows and had the 100-400 and have sold it in favour of either a 300 or 400 prime on a (to be purchased shortly) second body, because I found I was always 300+ for almost anything aerial

I shoot a long prime; either a 300mm f/4L IS or a 400mm f/5.6L (both of which I purchased used for about the price of a new 100-400mm) combined with a longish zoom (70-200mm f/4L IS) on a pair of 1.6x bodies.

If I am in a fairly stable location and can shoot from a tripod, I will often use three cameras with all three lenses along. One lens mounted on the tripod and a lens each in two holster bags.

I will almost always use the 400mm in a tripod or monopod (but sometimes use the fabricated shoulder mount I made - see images) and will mostly hand hold the 300mm but, will occasionally shoot it mounted. I will always shoot the 70-200mm f/4L IS hand held.

I do have a three camera tripod mounting bar (from AMVONA) which I can use on my Giottos MT8180 tripod with a Heavy Duty Manfrotto Fluid Pan Head. I can tape each camera's remote release to the handle and fire a single or multiple cameras. I place the camera with the longest lens in the center of the three camera bar and boresight the other two lenses at infinity.

Needless to say, this setup is extremely heavy and I don't use it with expectations of moving around. However on assignment in the Navy, I used a similar rig that was much larger and heavier with a Mitchell wooden tripod and large O'Connor fluid head. The crossbar held two 16mm Mitchell motion picture cameras with 400 foot magazines (one with a telephoto and the other with a normal angle lens) and one 70mm Hulcher still camera which held a 100 foot roll of 70mm film. I don't know how much the rig weighed because I never carried it. I set it up in pieces and chained the entire rig to the ship's deck with an aircraft hold down chain. I photographed submarine launched missiles from a destroyer platform with this rig...

I am looking forward to using my three camera rig to shoot the morning and evening fly-offs at the Bosque del Apache Wildlife Refuge, New Mexico in the Winter when there are thousands of wildfowl lifting off.

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

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

I think you made the right choice. I have the 400 and love it. I use it to shoot football and it works splendidly. I've tried the 400 for baseball and it just doesn't work as well. There are so many angles at the ball park. The 100-400 is much better suited for baseball in my opinion.

RPCrowe wrote in post #7880283
I will almost always use the 400mm in a tripod or monopod (but sometimes use the fabricated shoulder mount I made - see images) and will mostly hand hold the 300mm but, will occasionally shoot it mounted. I will always shoot the 70-200mm f/4L IS hand held.

. Ingenoius, even if it looks like you are carrying a mini cyclops . I however would have loved to capture the expression on people's faces when they see you with that contraption .

jerokaz wrote in post #7880359
...There are so many angles at the ball park. The 100-400 is much better suited for baseball in my opinion.

I also agree.

For high school and college baseball, the 100-400 is definitely more versatile (in my opinion) than the 400 prime I've also used. The 100-400 is my favorite baseball lens over any other lens I've used. As long as its day time with plenty of light, crisp stop-action pics with acceptable detail should not a problem. But its a different story as the daylight starts to dissapear unless your looking for mostly still pics. Make sure you have a different lens / strategy if you're also looking to capture action at night games.

I was also debating this
i went for the 400L as ive already got a 70-200 to cover the medium range, and i anyway would use the 100-400 only on 400
thats why i went for the prime, should be arriving at my doorstep next wednesday

I also couldn't decide between the two.... So I got them both. Guess what ? I now need more reach, so I'm looking for a 500mm F4

Btw, they are both great, either of them will give you excellent results. The zoom is much more versatile, and focuses much closer. The prime focuses much faster, and is a bit sharper wide open (if you have enough light and stable hands).