October 31, 2014, 02:26:38 AM

Author Topic: Canon EF 100-400 f/4-5.6L IS [CR2]  (Read 24197 times)

Lee Jay

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1164
    • View Profile
Re: Canon EF 100-400 f/4-5.6L IS [CR2]
« Reply #60 on: June 26, 2012, 11:49:30 AM »
I'd rather use my 70-200 and get ISO 800 and 1/30th in the same environment.

+1 on the use of 70-200. Which one?

I have both (f/4 IS and f/2.8 IS II) but I have the feeling that the f/4 version has a SUPER IS.

The 2.8 is larger, heavier and more difficult to hold (speeking for myself, other people think it's easier to keep steady a heavy lens).

My old 70-200/2.8L IS or my new 70-200/2.8L IS II.  The new one probably is a stop better in the IS department but the old one was already 2 or more stops better than the 100-400L.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Canon EF 100-400 f/4-5.6L IS [CR2]
« Reply #60 on: June 26, 2012, 11:49:30 AM »

bvukich

  • Spam Assassin
  • Administrator
  • 5D Mark III
  • *****
  • Posts: 733
    • View Profile
    • My (sparse) ZenFolio Site
Re: Canon EF 100-400 f/4-5.6L IS [CR2]
« Reply #61 on: June 26, 2012, 12:07:38 PM »
The 100-400 will round out my collection, I'll have the 8-16 zoom fisheye, 16-35 II, 24-105, 70-200/2.8 II and 100-400 II. If the latter plays well with TCs then even better. If canon comes out with a EF mount mirror less crop then I'll really be set.

That's funny, that's the exact lens kit strategy (minus primes) I'm working towards.  Heavily overlapping focal lengths, and alternate f2.8 & f4(obvious exception of the 100-400).  I'm also adding a few key budget primes 28/1.8, 50/1.4, 85/1.8 & 135/2L; as well as the 100/2.8L macro.

K-amps

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1526
  • Whatever looks great !
    • View Profile
Re: Canon EF 100-400 f/4-5.6L IS [CR2]
« Reply #62 on: June 26, 2012, 02:46:03 PM »
This had nothing to do with AF, it had to do with IS being pretty darned worthless on this lens, at least compared to more modern lenses.
Hmmm... Again not my experience. My daughter who is 5'3 hand shot the moon a couple of times on my 300D at 400mm and 1/60th. And the shots were sharp. Sorry you are not happy with yours.

I got about 50% at 1/60th and 300mm.  I get 90+% at 1/30th and 300mm on my 70-200 (with TCs).

Same boat as you. I get better keepers with 70-200mk.ii + 2x iii. The only area the 100-400 (my copy) beats the latter is contrast. I have mine AFMA'ed at +10 on the Tele and +3 on the wide end.

I got better keepers with my 70-300L, feel bad that I sold it.
EOS-5D Mk.iii 
Sigma 24-105mm F4 ART; EF 70-200 F/2.8L Mk.II; EF 85mm L F/1.2 Mk. II; EF 100mm L F/2.8 IS Macro, 50mm F/1.8ii;  TC's 2x Mk.iii; 1.4x Mk.iii

Radiating

  • Canon 6D
  • *****
  • Posts: 336
    • View Profile
Re: Canon EF 100-400 f/4-5.6L IS [CR2]
« Reply #63 on: June 26, 2012, 03:06:56 PM »
This had nothing to do with AF, it had to do with IS being pretty darned worthless on this lens, at least compared to more modern lenses.
Hmmm... Again not my experience. My daughter who is 5'3 hand shot the moon a couple of times on my 300D at 400mm and 1/60th. And the shots were sharp. Sorry you are not happy with yours.

I got about 50% at 1/60th and 300mm.  I get 90+% at 1/30th and 300mm on my 70-200 (with TCs).

That coresponds perfectly to the difference in the known abbilities of the IS system.

4thchicken

  • Power Shot G7X
  • **
  • Posts: 22
    • View Profile
Re: Canon EF 100-400 f/4-5.6L IS [CR2]
« Reply #64 on: June 27, 2012, 02:36:22 AM »
Provided IQ is close to excellent, for an amateur phtographer with wild-life ambitions what would be the alternative to spending more than 2k for a (highly speculative) mark II version of the Canon 100-400? Sigma 120-300 f/2,8 is too short in reach and @ f/5,6 not superior to the current Canon 100-400. The other serious alternatives are way too expensive. Unfortunately  :(

As someone who has been looking to get into this area and that has been eyeing off the sigma120-300/2.8 OS vs 100-400, I'm curious as to your comparison?

Outside of weight the sigma has looked better to me given the potential extra reach (420mm with 1.4X or 600mm with 2X TC)

Are you saying that sigma @ 300mm + 1.4 TC (effective 420mm, F4) is optically worse than the 100-400 @ 400mm? Even when the sigma is stopped to F5.6 equivalent?

Or is the comparison based on the sigma with a 2X TC? In which case 600mm = substantial reach advantage over 400mm...



psolberg

  • Canon 7D MK II
  • *****
  • Posts: 483
    • View Profile
Re: Canon EF 100-400 f/4-5.6L IS [CR2]
« Reply #65 on: June 27, 2012, 06:58:52 AM »
Quote
The lens isn’t for an immediate announcement, as we’re told they may be waiting for Nikon to announce the much needed replacement to their 80-400

lol that is ridiculous.

1) push/pull zooms are just in much need of replacement. probably more so. so it makes no sense to "wait" as if waiting fixes anything.

2) if canon waited for nikon to do anything, they would never release half their stuff.

TeenTog

  • Rebel T5i
  • ****
  • Posts: 126
    • View Profile
    • Teen Tog
Re: Canon EF 100-400 f/4-5.6L IS [CR2]
« Reply #66 on: June 28, 2012, 02:46:52 PM »
Yeah, I agree. I can't stand push/pull zooms, they are fairly difficult to use. One of the reasons  I haven't bought the 100-400 is because of it's push/pull. And what if it takes nikon a year to replace their 80-400?
Rebel T3, EF-S 10-18mm f/4.5-5.6 IS STM, EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6, EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6, EF 50mm f/1.8, 430EX II, Nikon EL 2, Assorted Nikkor primes

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Canon EF 100-400 f/4-5.6L IS [CR2]
« Reply #66 on: June 28, 2012, 02:46:52 PM »

Marsu42

  • Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 4839
  • ML-66d / 100L / 70-300L / 17-40L / 600rts
    • View Profile
    • 6D positive spec list
Re: Canon EF 100-400 f/4-5.6L IS [CR2]
« Reply #67 on: June 28, 2012, 05:09:08 PM »
Yeah, I agree. I can't stand push/pull zooms, they are fairly difficult to use.

I think it's difficult if you *have* to use it. With my 70-300L, I frequently find its easier just to grab the lens hood and pull or push, but that really depends on the situation. Of course you can only do this with extending zooms, not the 70-200's, and I'd only try do it with a quality build lens.

neuroanatomist

  • CR GEEK
  • ********
  • Posts: 14796
    • View Profile
Re: Canon EF 100-400 f/4-5.6L IS [CR2]
« Reply #68 on: June 28, 2012, 05:33:54 PM »
Yeah, I agree. I can't stand push/pull zooms, they are fairly difficult to use. One of the reasons  I haven't bought the 100-400 is because of it's push/pull.

So...what push/pull zoom lens have you used for a sufficient amount of time to determine that they're difficult to use?
EOS 1D X, EOS M, and lots of lenses
______________________________
Flickr | TDP Profile/Gear List

bdunbar79

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 2601
    • View Profile
Re: Canon EF 100-400 f/4-5.6L IS [CR2]
« Reply #69 on: June 28, 2012, 06:02:42 PM »
I actually don't mind it.  I love the 100-400L zoom lens.  I can keep my hand and arm in the same orientation and zoom in and out, vs. rotation of my hand and arm orientation while turning to zoom.  This way I can keep a close eye on my object out at 300-400mm when I'm fine adjusting.  So yeah, if you haven't used it, what's the problem?
2 x 1DX
Big Ten, GLIAC, NCAC

neuroanatomist

  • CR GEEK
  • ********
  • Posts: 14796
    • View Profile
Re: Canon EF 100-400 f/4-5.6L IS [CR2]
« Reply #70 on: June 28, 2012, 06:14:07 PM »
I actually don't mind it.  I love the 100-400L zoom lens.  I can keep my hand and arm in the same orientation and zoom in and out, vs. rotation of my hand and arm orientation while turning to zoom.  This way I can keep a close eye on my object out at 300-400mm when I'm fine adjusting.  So yeah, if you haven't used it, what's the problem?

Agreed - any 100-400 zoom is going to be a moderately heavy lens, ideally you want a hand cupped under the barrel for stability. The push/pull design on my 100-400L and 28-300L allows me to zoom while keeping my supporting hand in the optimal position the whole time.

But people do love to read and echo complaints with no direct experience - the 1D X threads are ample evidence of that.
EOS 1D X, EOS M, and lots of lenses
______________________________
Flickr | TDP Profile/Gear List

wickidwombat

  • Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 4526
    • View Profile
Re: Canon EF 100-400 f/4-5.6L IS [CR2]
« Reply #71 on: June 28, 2012, 06:20:20 PM »
Yeah, I agree. I can't stand push/pull zooms, they are fairly difficult to use. One of the reasons  I haven't bought the 100-400 is because of it's push/pull.

So...what push/pull zoom lens have you used for a sufficient amount of time to determine that they're difficult to use?

It doesnt take long to get used to push pulls, they are wierd at first but once you are used to them they are extremely fast for changing focal length.
APS-H Fanboy

neuroanatomist

  • CR GEEK
  • ********
  • Posts: 14796
    • View Profile
Re: Canon EF 100-400 f/4-5.6L IS [CR2]
« Reply #72 on: June 28, 2012, 06:28:56 PM »
It doesnt take long to get used to push pulls, they are wierd at first but once you are used to them they are extremely fast for changing focal length.

No, no, no...they're terrible and almost impossible to use.  I mean, I've never actually used one myself, but everyone on the Internet says so, it must be true.  Plus, they suck dust like a vacuum cleaner, I read that somewhere, too, so I know it's true as well (despite the fact that neither of my lenses have dust in them, and one of them is 'officially' weather sealed). 
EOS 1D X, EOS M, and lots of lenses
______________________________
Flickr | TDP Profile/Gear List

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Canon EF 100-400 f/4-5.6L IS [CR2]
« Reply #72 on: June 28, 2012, 06:28:56 PM »

wickidwombat

  • Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 4526
    • View Profile
Re: Canon EF 100-400 f/4-5.6L IS [CR2]
« Reply #73 on: June 28, 2012, 06:59:43 PM »
i had used my 28-300 in dust storms with a filter of course. never had a spec of dust inside.

probably one of my major complaints with the lens was the front section was a large part of the weight so at full zoom even on a 1D body it felt very front heavy this also makes it feel heavier than it really is.

My wife hated the lens because it was simply a combination that was too heavy for her to use (shes not very big) a 70-200 on a 5D is about her absolute limit for hand holding.

I think the 100-400 is a little lighter but essentially the same size and dimensions
APS-H Fanboy

Bob Howland

  • Canon 70D
  • ****
  • Posts: 267
    • View Profile
Re: Canon EF 100-400 f/4-5.6L IS [CR2]
« Reply #74 on: June 28, 2012, 09:31:31 PM »
Push-pull zoom lenses were invented for manual focus systems. In that application, they made perfect sense, since they allowed the photographer to both zoom and focus without repositioning his/her hand on the lens. I owned three in Canon FD, including the Vivitar 35-85 f/2.8. I also used extensively the Canon 80-200 f/4 FD L zoom lens which, as it happens, was a 2-ring zoom.

Guess what! With AF systems, most of us let the camera do the focusing most of the time. I currently own the 100-400 and a 2-ring 70-200 Sigma EX, plus three shorter zooms, all 2-ring. The 70-200 has been a workhorse for 12 years. The 100-400 had to be sent to Canon for repair after it stiffened up and ultimately froze at 400mm. I've never had problems with dust though. Count me among the people who badly wants the next-gen 100-400 to be 2-ring, with the zoom ring behind focus ring.
« Last Edit: June 28, 2012, 09:36:54 PM by Bob Howland »

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Canon EF 100-400 f/4-5.6L IS [CR2]
« Reply #74 on: June 28, 2012, 09:31:31 PM »