MotoGP and 100-400 Mk II

[ElmerFudd]

Hi!

I was searching the internet for examples of its use for bike racing before I bought the new 100-400. I couldn't find much, so I'm putting some of my shots here for you and maybe someone else to see. I got the lens one week before the MotoGP GP of Czech Republic which was held at Brno circuit this past weekend. I must say I'm impressed. I didn't expect such quality and professional look from the images. The lens is incredibly sharp wide open. I think I've closed it down just a couple of times when I wanted more DOF. It's wonderful for portraits as well as it blurs the background really nicely even at f5.6.

When you see many of them in the hands of proffesionals who shoot the whole season, you know it's good. I'm lucky to attend one race per season and this lens is much more than I hoped for. I don't need anything better (not that I can afford it)!

Regards!

 

[Boromir883]

Hi Peter,
great shots

Did you own the 100-400 Mk I ? If so, how would you describe diffrences in perfomance, shooting motorsports?
I hate IQ of my 100-400 Mk I on 7D and love it on the 1Dx

best wishes
Günter

 

[Click]

Great series. Well done Peter.

 

[ElmerFudd]

Did you own the 100-400 Mk I ? If so, how would you describe diffrences in perfomance, shooting motorsports?
I hate IQ of my 100-400 Mk I on 7D and love it on the 1Dx

Yes, I did. There is no comparison at all. I guess my copy was not one of the best Mk Is. I used it on 50D and 5D Mk III and it was better on FF, but Mk II is in its own league. Short MFD makes it very useful for other uses when there are other things to shoot than motorsports .

 

[Boromir883]

Did you own the 100-400 Mk I ? If so, how would you describe diffrences in perfomance, shooting motorsports?
I hate IQ of my 100-400 Mk I on 7D and love it on the 1Dx

Yes, I did. There is no comparison at all. I guess my copy was not one of the best Mk Is. I used it on 50D and 5D Mk III and it was better on FF, but Mk II is in its own league. Short MFD makes it very useful for other uses when there are other things to shoot than motorsports .

i am looking for an upgrade for my old 100-400mm.
In some cases my 400mm/2,8 IS is to bulky to carry around.
The Sigma 150-600mm Sports is heavy too, and i had the feeling, the AF - of that lens, i could use for a short time - was to slow for fast action.

 

[ElmerFudd]

Did you own the 100-400 Mk I ? If so, how would you describe diffrences in perfomance, shooting motorsports?
I hate IQ of my 100-400 Mk I on 7D and love it on the 1Dx

Yes, I did. There is no comparison at all. I guess my copy was not one of the best Mk Is. I used it on 50D and 5D Mk III and it was better on FF, but Mk II is in its own league. Short MFD makes it very useful for other uses when there are other things to shoot than motorsports .

i am looking for an upgrade for my old 100-400mm.
In some cases my 400mm/2,8 IS is to bulky to carry around.
The Sigma 150-600mm Sports is heavy too, and i had the feeling, the AF - of that lens, i could use for a short time - was to slow for fast action.

I was surprised to see it in the hands of pro shooters. Of course they still had a 300 f2.8 or something bigger on the other camera but I never saw Mk I being used by the pros. I don't know about the 200-400 but this is really good and comparatively cheap . The AF works really well (used it on 5D mk III) and the colors and contrast are great.

 

[FEBS]

I was surprised to see it in the hands of pro shooters. Of course they still had a 300 f2.8 or something bigger on the other camera but I never saw Mk I being used by the pros. I don't know about the 200-400 but this is really good and comparatively cheap . The AF works really well (used it on 5D mk III) and the colors and contrast are great.

I have both the 100-400II and the 200-400. To be honest, the use of my 200-400 is decreased a lot. For portability, that 100-400II is really great. When in the outside hiking, I mostly have my 1Dx with 16-35 f4, 24-70II and the 100-400II and a 1.4x extender. Handholding, the 100-400II is a great lens, even with the 1.4 extender on FF. For hiking once again the 100-400II has it advantage. What is the use of my 200-400 now? After buying the 600II really zero. I'm not convinced if I do want to keep that lens. There is almost one stop difference between the 100-400II and the 200-400, for the latter one. That can be important for sudden situations. The IQ of both lenses is great. Almost the same happened by Nikon with the new 80-400 which also performs extreme well and the 200-400 over there is also under pressure of this 80-400 lens.

 

[arthurbikemad]

Did you own the 100-400 Mk I ? If so, how would you describe diffrences in perfomance, shooting motorsports?
I hate IQ of my 100-400 Mk I on 7D and love it on the 1Dx

Yes, I did. There is no comparison at all. I guess my copy was not one of the best Mk Is. I used it on 50D and 5D Mk III and it was better on FF, but Mk II is in its own league. Short MFD makes it very useful for other uses when there are other things to shoot than motorsports .

i am looking for an upgrade for my old 100-400mm.
In some cases my 400mm/2,8 IS is to bulky to carry around.
The Sigma 150-600mm Sports is heavy too, and i had the feeling, the AF - of that lens, i could use for a short time - was to slow for fast action.

I was surprised to see it in the hands of pro shooters. Of course they still had a 300 f2.8 or something bigger on the other camera but I never saw Mk I being used by the pros. I don't know about the 200-400 but this is really good and comparatively cheap . The AF works really well (used it on 5D mk III) and the colors and contrast are great.

Interestingly on the park ferm interviews a guy in the background was using a 100-400mk1, he was pushing and pulling the zoom and I though to myself, he needs a Mk2...haha

(I guess you mean the mk1 100-400)