HELP w/Lens choice

gdaddygdaddy Registered Users Posts: 26 Big grins
edited February 5, 2009 in Technique
I am taking an Alaska cruise beginning June 6th.
I have Canon 5d and a 24-105mm F4 L is/usm to take.
I want to know which one of these other two to also take,
I don't want to have to take 3 or 4 lenses if just 2 will cover it.
1. Canon 300mm F4 L is/usm prime, OR
2. Canon 100-400mm F/4.5-5.6 L is/usm zoom.
Thanks
gdaddy

Comments

  • Candid ArtsCandid Arts Registered Users Posts: 1,685 Major grins
    edited February 5, 2009
    They are both great lenses, the 300mm prime being a better lens at 300mm than the 100-400 will, but the 100-400 gives you more range in what you can shoot (at the cost of variable aperture). In your other post you mentioned you have a 1.4x teleconverter as well correct? So now your 300mm is also an effective 420mm f/5.6 (and sharper at 420 5.6 than the 100-400 will be at 400 f/5.6 also...)

    BUT...with the 100-400 you get that range from 100-300 covered too, which can be a nice thing to have. Personally, I bring all my lenses everywhere. Why you ask? Because I bought each one for a reason. Each one does one thing or another that another lens in my arsenal doesn't do. If you don't take it, what's the point of buying it.

    That's just my .02. I know people on here have differing opinions.
    Candid Arts Photography | Portland Oregon | Fine Art
    OneTwoFiftieth | Portland, Oregon | Modern Portraiture

    My Equipment:
    Bodies: Canon 50D, Canon EOS 1
    Lenses: Canon 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5, Canon 24-105mm f/4L IS, Canon 50mm f/1.4, Canon 100mm f/2.8 Macro, Canon MP-E 65mm f/2.8
    Lighting: Canon 580EXII, Canon 420 EX, 12" Reflector, Pocket Wizard Plus II (3), AB800 (3), Large Softbox
    Stability: Manfrotto 190CXPRO3 Tripod, Manfrotto 488RC4 Ball Head, Manfrotto 679B Monopod
  • gdaddygdaddy Registered Users Posts: 26 Big grins
    edited February 5, 2009
    Candid Arts wrote:
    They are both great lenses, the 300mm prime being a better lens at 300mm than the 100-400 will, but the 100-400 gives you more range in what you can shoot (at the cost of variable aperture). In your other post you mentioned you have a 1.4x teleconverter as well correct? So now your 300mm is also an effective 420mm f/5.6 (and sharper at 420 5.6 than the 100-400 will be at 400 f/5.6 also...)

    BUT...with the 100-400 you get that range from 100-300 covered too, which can be a nice thing to have. Personally, I bring all my lenses everywhere. Why you ask? Because I bought each one for a reason. Each one does one thing or another that another lens in my arsenal doesn't do. If you don't take it, what's the point of buying it.

    That's just my .02. I know people on here have differing opinions.

    Hello,
    Thanks for that input. I don't own the 100-400, just the 300 but I have been offered one on loan. So I was asking about it. Your comments about sharpness between the two helps. Having never been on this cruise before, I have questions about the 300 being a prime and the usefulness of it.
    Also, I have never flown before and am concerned about all my gear fitting in the size required for carry ons. I did not want to put my gear in the checked bags in the cargo hold.
    Thanks,
    gdaddy
  • JzazziJzazzi Registered Users Posts: 111 Major grins
    edited February 5, 2009
    Depends on the subject your are shooting. Having not been on this cruise before though, might be hard to predict your shots ahead of time. What do you want the extra reach for? Anything in daylight or mild twilight will be fine with the 100-400mm with the smaller aperture. But if you are trying to capture things darker then you can make use of the f/4.0 on the 300mm to use as much light as possible. Both have IS so that's great, and the weight and size are similar too. Consider other things too: do you have tripod rings for one or the other, filters, padded cases and whatnot?

    -J
Sign In or Register to comment.