Pls, share your shots 100-400 IS lens

CookieS

Yeah this is mostly for the canon shooter. sorry i go both ways:huh

Im thinking of getting this lens to accompany my new 30D , I have the 70-200 non IS, and i have the 80-200 and the 80-400 VR for the Nikon, and i really use it ( the VR) alot. even though its not the sharpest tack in the box, it has its moment, ( good light) so Im wondering If the canon model will be similar, shoot it in the sun and watch out for any shadow areas, and wide open??? would love to se some examples. Thanks

Also( nilon folks ) i would like something to attach to my monopod, ( that i never use) that lets me turn the camera, and NOT the mono head?? i have a quick release, but my tripod foot doesnt move on the Nikon. I have to picit the head .....very combersome. see why I never use it.

Rohirrim

I don't have any shots with the 100-400 any more because I sold it. I'd recommend considering the 400mm 5.6. Much sharper, lighter.

Osprey Whisperer

Rohirrim wrote:

I don't have any shots with the 100-400 any more because I sold it. I'd recommend considering the 400mm 5.6. Much sharper, lighter.

I second Steve's advice. It also works much better with a teleconverter if you plan on using one. The zoom is convenient, obviously..but that 400mm prime is sooooo sharp and the image quality can't be beat. The 400mm is also so light it's a great lens for any fast action, like birds in flight.

If you do like the IS....then the 100-400mm will work..as the 400mm DOES NOT have IS. If you are shooting outdoors, it's just a luxury IMO. Thanks to Canon's great high ISO capabilities....just boost ISO to compensate.

Harryb

You can find some lens nfo and pics here http://dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=39768

livinginoz

i have a couple, was using a tripod at the time.





hand held

CookieS

I wont be shooting birds, horses and horse sports action, so the zoom for me is more useful , otherwise id go 300 f2.8??but too heavy. I dont use the 400 focal lenght all that much , but now and again.

So are you saying the 100-400 isnt that great a lens????

gus

CookieS wrote:

So are you saying the 100-400 isnt that great a lens????

What they are saying is that its a nice lens but by comparison to the prime at 400mm (only way to compare them) it takes a 2nd place by a considerable distance.

Buy a lens for the right reason...ie buy it for what it can for YOU. From the sounds of your post you dont want a perm 400 thus the 100-400 is great for you.

I often use my 400 prime as a walk around lens...its just how you photograph stuff, quite individual.

Maestro

See this thread. BTW, the lens did not seem cumbersome in the slightest and I am not a big person. The IS portion of the this lens is what really makes this lens great besides of course its versatility. You only need to make sure that it is a bright sunny day with minimal cloud cover. The others are correct. I have heard that the 400mm prime is sharper but for me, I really wanted the IS.

http://www.digitalgrin.com/showthread.php?p=446718#post446718

Andy

Paul Bowen loves this lens. His photos don't say what lens, but I know for a fact that he uses it nearly on every shoot.

http://www.photoworkshop.com/canon/explorers/paul_bowen/bowen.html

CookieS

wow ,Thanks Andy those look nice, the 4 on the opening page, i could not see any others, but they speak well for it.

windoze

the 100-400 L is a very good lens if you buy it for the right reasons. Its not as sharp as the 400 f/5.6 and is indeed a little soft at 400. the sigma 50-500 is practically as good as the canon and it costs considerable less and can go to 500 mm. if you buy the 100-400 you will also hear and wonder should i have waited if a new model with a new IS is becoming available.
all said, the 100-400 is a great lens given enough light, this baby often needs ISO 800 , The push pull design is another matter .... i like the canon 100-400 L and if i had extra $$ i would pick one up for my ZOO TRIPS.


troy

ebwest

Never tried the 400, what I wanted to do suited the 100-400 better. Since I've never tried the 400, I can't speak to it's sharpness, BUT, I can't really see how it could be much sharper. The below isn't at 400 but there are several at the link below the picture that are at 400.





http://ebinfl.smugmug.com/gallery/2259111

I'm no expert and I've only had it a few weeks, but I'm really happy with this lens. As far as the push-pull zoom, it took me about 5 minutes to adjust to it. Be comfortable with the thought that, either way, you'll like whatever lens you choose between the 2 of them.

mushy

I recently bought the 100-400 IS for osprey shots and though on my 20D it may not be the fastest focusing lens around it still did pretty good in my opinion. with a 2x Tamron as well it's a little hit and miss on the focus (only manual) but everynow and then they'd come out spot on.





this is with the 2x attached and a slight sharpen in post


and a sports shot as well taken at 100mm whereas all the others would have been at full or close to full zoom


It is kinda heavy but its versatility suits me to a tee:D
good luck with your decision

moose135

I've been shooting with this lens for about a year & a half, first on a 300D and now a new 30D. I shoot a lot of aviation subjects, and I am very happy with it. Some don't like the push-pull zoom, but I shot with an old Yashica for years with a push-pull, so I prefer it.

At 340mm


400mm


200mm


400mm

Maestro

moose135 wrote:

I've been shooting with this lens for about a year & a half, first on a 300D and now a new 30D. I shoot a lot of aviation subjects, and I am very happy with it. Some don't like the push-pull zoom, but I shot with an old Yashica for years with a push-pull, so I prefer it.

At 340mm


400mm


200mm


400mm

Nice Tomcat! My dad was a naval pilot for years during the Viet Nam era.

moose135

Maestro wrote:

Nice Tomcat! My dad was a naval pilot for years during the Viet Nam era.

Thanks, that was taken back in June, during what was to be the last visit by the Tomcat back home to Long Island. In October, I got to shoot the last-ever USN F-14 landing when she returned to Long Island to be retired.

Rohirrim

CookieS wrote:

I wont be shooting birds, horses and horse sports action, so the zoom for me is more useful , otherwise id go 300 f2.8??but too heavy. I dont use the 400 focal lenght all that much , but now and again.

So are you saying the 100-400 isnt that great a lens????

The 100-400 is a good lens, but it depends on what your needs are. This argument has been "argued" many times but what it boils down to is your own personal needs. For Nature and Wildlife the 400 5.6 is a better lens (IMHO). Generally speaking you need the longest focal length you can for Wildlife and the 400 prime is signficantly better than the 100-400 at 400mm.

If you need the versatilty of the zoom then the 100-400 will fit your needs better.

CookieS

I really liked this shot, http://ebinfl.smugmug.com/gallery/2259111/2, they are all real nice though. well first the new 30D then the new lens. i think Ill be happy with the 100-400 as long as i make sure i get a nice sharp model. after carrying around 2 cameras one 20Dwith the 70-200 2.8 and the D2hs with 80-400 VR, i should be pretty prepared for it. testing will be key. i really appreciate this groups help and honesty in such matters.

windoze

CookieS wrote:

I really liked this shot, http://ebinfl.smugmug.com/gallery/2259111/2, they are all real nice though. well first the new 30D then the new lens. i think Ill be happy with the 100-400 as long as i make sure i get a nice sharp model. after carrying around 2 cameras one 20Dwith the 70-200 2.8 and the D2hs with 80-400 VR, i should be pretty prepared for it. testing will be key. i really appreciate this groups help and honesty in such matters.

ya know there is always talk about "bad" copies but i gotta tell ya ive owned that lens 4 times and i never had or have seen a bad copy of that lens....
im sure they exist but IMHO each lens has a learning curve and so does this one. For me it was being at f/8 and making sure to bump the ISO when needed..... anyway good luck and now you got me thinking about maybe a 5th copy........
whats the best price youve found?

troy

evil eggplant

All with the 100-400L
I love this lens.

100-400L @ 400mm with Extender 1.4



the rest are @ 400mm about f/7.1


400mm with 1.4X

kdog

The 100-400L and the 400 F5.6 are different tools for different purposes. If you need zoom, or want to shoot hand-held in low light, then the 400 won't do the job for you at all.

Now as a tele-zoom with IS, I think the 100-400 cannot be beat. It takes excellent portraits and the IS works wonders in low light. Here is zoo shot taken at 1/50s at 120mm.


The 400 F5.6 simply could not have gotten that shot.

Here are a couple of other shots taken with the 100-400 at 400mm.




There are hundreds of other wildlife shots taken with the 100-400, mostly at 400mm which can be seen in my gallery.

Another thing the 100-400 is great at is panoramas, believe it or not. Check out this thread for an example.

Good luck in whatever lens you choose. But for your purposes, I believe you'll be very happy with this lens.

Regards,
-joel