Rumors > Lenses
waiting for a new 100-400mm lens
smirkypants:
I wholeheartedly agree with Neuro on the dust issue. As long as someone doesn't use the phrase "dust-pump" I promise to remain calm. I've taken my 100-400 to hell and back and there's no dust in it. I've shot in a dust storm pumping like mad. Nada. No dust.
I don't necessarily agree with Neuro on the image quality issue. I find it rather dodgy, especially on the long end. Also, the lens needs a LOT of light. This is purely my experience so, you know, who knows if it's generalizable, but I did an experiment with my 100-400 and a 70-200+2x converter. I set both to auto ISO and shot the same thing, and generally the 100-400 shot at a higher ISO, usually 1/3 stop but sometimes 2/3, even though both were 5.6.
Of course who the hell knows what was really going on. There are a lot of possible variables and I'm not a tech guy as much as an art guy.
keithfullermusic:
I have a 50D and the 100-400, so I can offer some insight.
First, I had to micro adjust mine +6, and that made a huge difference right off the bat. Still, it is soft wide open at the 400 range. But, if you put it at f/7.1-9 it is sharp as a mother sticker. This means you need light - there is no way around it. When I am using it I immediately set my f stop to 8 and my ISO to 400. Then I see where my shutter is and go from there.
On the 50D ISO 400 looks just as good as 100, I'm usually able to get a fast enough shot with those settings and they look absolutely great.
In terms of dust, I have none. I bought mine used from lensrentals.com so I don't know about it's previous use, but you can bet it took some intense situations before it got to me. I've take mine to the beach during a frickin wind storm and have had no problems.
I don't get why people think that push pull means dust vacuum. Any lens that moves forward and backward will push and pull air. The sealing is what makes the difference.
Anyway, if you have a bunch of cash and want to wait a year or so then sure, wait. No doubt the new one will be nicer. But for $1,300 you can get the current one used and I promise you will love that thing. You can always sell it and get the new one when it comes out. You might lose a couple hundred, but that's much cheaper than renting it for a year. You might also realize that you don't want the new one because the current one is a great lens already.
Mt Spokane Photography:
--- Quote from: leecheeyee on April 29, 2012, 01:23:11 PM ---Now, I am traveling in Nigeria. The wet day is easy to destroy your luxurious lens. If nothing happens, it would ok. But nobody can guarantee no accident happen. For example, when you go out from an indoor cold environment, into a warm wet outdoor area, you would find your lens covers foggy. It would probably be wrecked without water-sealed.
--- End quote ---
In that case, there is no interchangable lens camera that will work. None of them are vapor tight, so water vapor gets in them all. Yet, photographers by the thousands seem to have no issue.
dturano:
I have been searching for a used 100-400mm, i can get one at a local camera shop for $1200. Im hoping to find one a little cheaper.
I have seen some great sample images with the 100-400mm, on FF I feel the extra 100mm over the 300mm will make a difference in reach.
Is worth getting this brand new for what im looking to spend on a used 100-400mm? The 120-400mm F4.5-5.6 DG APO OS HSM by sigma, im not looking to start a comp thread or get bashed for asking if the sigma is the same, just wondering if anybody has any experience using both lens and can either help me wait for the 100-400mm used i hope to find or get a new sigma.
Thanks.
dturano:
I have been checking some reviews on the sigma lens, not looking good, i hear its not worth the price, and found most reviews were people like me hoping to get better results but would yearn for the better contrast and image quality from the canon 100-400mm.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version