Camera Labs

Hi All

I am back to my trusted and favourite site and asusual i need an advise from you all..

My current 70-200 F2.8L IS mk2 is not sufficient for bird shooting or wildlife and that is expected from me and i am not interested in going for extenders.. I am planning to buy 400mm F5.6L which i checked in forums and seen on youtube that this lens is worth the price.. Its L series lens and not expensive as well..

Now my question is , has anybody used this lens or give me your suggestions of any other lens which is worth considering..

Please bail me out

Cheers
Mano

_________________
Canon EOS 5D mk III|Canon EOS 7D | 70-200 F2.8 L IS II USM | 400 F5.6 L USM

Hi dilbarmano.
For bird shooting (as opposed to some wildlife) even 400mm probably won't be enough really. + starting at F5.6 begins to limit you for getting that clean, bright shot. (depending on conditions & location)

Serious shooters use 500 or 600mm WITH a TC.

I have a Nikon 300mm with 1.7TC (500mm) & it aint enough for lots of birding tbh. Depends on breed & again location of course.

Why not get yourself (borrow) a TC to try it out?
If you're serious about birding though, start saving for that 600mm!

Have you considered a Sigma?

_________________

Nikon D800E & D700 bodies + Nikon AF-S 80-400mm f4.5-5.6G ED VR, 50mm F1.4G, 16-35mm f/4G VR, 105 F2.8 VR macro, 70-300mm lenses. A couple of filters, Giotto tripod & ballhead. Lowepro Slingshot 302 AW

http://www.flickr.com/photos/oldcarlos/

Personally I think you should go the extender route. From reviews the 70-200 II is good enough to take a 2x and still produce excellent quality. So looking for a used Canon 2x is probably the best value route unless you want to spring for the more expensive new III version.

If you really want to get a 400mm lens, I'd suggest the 100-400L over the 400 prime. The 100-400L is good enough to use wide open at 400mm, plus you get IS which can help with shots in more challenging situations, and zoom as well for those times when the subject decides to get closer without having to mess around swapping lenses.

As a wildcard option, also consider the Sigma 120-300 f/2.8 OS. You will still need an extender to get to 400 and beyond.

_________________
Canon DSLRs: 7D, 5D2, 1D, 600D, 450D full spectrum, 300D IR mod
Lenses: EF 35/2, 50/1.8, 85/1.8, 135/2+SF, 28-80 V, 70-300L, 100-400L, TS-E 24/3.5L, MP-E 65, EF-S 15-85 IS
3rd party: Zeiss 2/50 makro, Samyang 8mm fisheye, Sigma 150 macro, 120-300 f/2.8 OS, Celestron 1325/13
Tinies: Sony HX9V.

@Carlos - Yeah to me any lens is fine as long as it is sharp , quick AF and budget.... the reason i want to go with 400mm is , its affordable and right now i cant even think of going to 500 or 600.. .. but trying out extender is something i can look at....

@Popo - i thought if used 2x on my 70-200 then even it becomes 5.6 and the quality reduces drastically.. i have seen some photos of 400mm 5.6 and they are amazing.. also i read that 100-400 is push pull mechanism and it needs some hands on training to get used to it ? also at 400 , 400F5.6 is quite sharp when compared to 100-400?

But as you said , if i go for prime , i cannot get the luxury of zoom in or zoom out... ..

Damn.. why is it so confusing whenever i think of buying lens??

_________________
Canon EOS 5D mk III|Canon EOS 7D | 70-200 F2.8 L IS II USM | 400 F5.6 L USM

Photozone earlier this year re-tested both the 400L and 100-400L on full frame which showed the centre resolution to be about the same between them, but the prime having an advantage in a full frame border/corner region.

http://www.photozone.de/canon_eos_ff/612-canon400f56ff
http://www.photozone.de/canon_eos_ff/60 ... 400f4556ff

They also have a much older test on crop sensor with the 350D where the difference is much smaller.

http://www.photozone.de/canon-eos/173-c ... rt--review
http://www.photozone.de/canon-eos/204-c ... rt--review

So in short the 400L might be a bit better optically, but it is rather marginal for the benefit of zoom and IS. The push-pull takes no time to get used to, although it is possible of course you don't like it.

Using a 2x on the 70-200 II will of course not be as good as using the lens at 200mm, but what you really want to know is if it is still good enough?

Resorting to The Digital Picture's lens comparator here is the 70-200 II at 400mm compared to the 100-400 at 400. You can of course change either lens to compare the 400L also.

_________________
Canon DSLRs: 7D, 5D2, 1D, 600D, 450D full spectrum, 300D IR mod
Lenses: EF 35/2, 50/1.8, 85/1.8, 135/2+SF, 28-80 V, 70-300L, 100-400L, TS-E 24/3.5L, MP-E 65, EF-S 15-85 IS
3rd party: Zeiss 2/50 makro, Samyang 8mm fisheye, Sigma 150 macro, 120-300 f/2.8 OS, Celestron 1325/13
Tinies: Sony HX9V.

I chose the 100-400mm 4.5-5.6L IS USM, which I really use very often. The push pull zoom may be a bit different in terms of feeling but zooming is really fast using it

_________________
Canon EOS 500D + Canon EOS 5D Mark III + Canon EOS 33v
Canon EF 24-105mm 4L IS USM + EF 100-400mm 4.5-5.6L IS USM + EF 100mm 2.8L Macro IS USM + Sigma 12-24mm 4.5-5.6 EX DG HSM + Canon Speedlite 580 EX II + Nissin Speedlite Di 466

Hi dilbarmano,the Canon 100-400mm is a great lense,its easy to use,a bit heavy.And if you don't have enough money for the 500mm-600mm lenses,remember wildlife photography is not just about the millimeters,from my experience it is better to invest 200-300 pounds in camouflage equipment,such as ghilly suit(cheap and extremely useful) and camouflage tent.Here are some links if you are interested


http://www.ghilliesuitclothing.com/
http://www.ameristep.com/blinds/doghouse.html

And remerber,if your shots are not good enough,its probably because you are not close enough Good look !

_________________
http://www.flickr.com/photos/stoencha/

Canon 1D mk2
Canon 5D
Canon 24-105mm f/4
Canon 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 IS

For what it's worth, I owned the 100-400L for a while and I LOVED the push-pull zoom. It was completely comfortable for such a large lens. It took less than a day to get used to it.

Also, the difference in cost between an extender and either the 100-400L or 400L is enormous. Why not at least rent an extender (or go to a local shop) to try it out and see if it's good enough for your needs?

_________________
Body: Canon Rebel XS, Canon EOS 7D
Lenses: Sigma 17-70mm f2.8-4.0 OS HSM DC Macro, Canon EF-S 18-55mm f3.5-5.6 IS II, Canon EF 50mm f1.8 II, Canon EF-S 10-22mm f3.5-4.5 USM, Canon EF 85mm f1.8 II USM

Hi dilbarmano, How far away are your subjects you wish to photograph?

The reason I ask is that I see you already have a 75-300.

If you plan on photographing birds then I suggest you consider reading this link, also read the comments section as it addresses your camera, too.

http://www.birdsasart-blog.com/2011/11/ ... iiii-lens/

I have been thinking about the 400L in the past. But since I have learned to appreciate IS I find it hard to commit to one.

The 100-400L would be my choice, purely for IS and the flexibility of zoom, I just wished they upgraded the IS and refreshed the lens. I really wanted a weathersealed lens.

A friend has a 40D ( 10MP )with the 100-400L and its a great package for bird photography, but due the the bigger sensor in the 7D I get similar results from cropping the images from my 70-300L. Well except for dof.

The IS is much better in the 70-300L and its weathersealed, I have got the 1.4 kenko extender. Its pretty useful up to 270 *1.4 and then it hunts a bit.

_________________
Canon Powershot S95, Canon 6D,7D, 24-70 2.8 Tamron VC, Canon 15-85, Canon 85 1.8, Sigma 30 1.4, 50mm 1.8, Canon 100 2.8L Macro, Canon 70-300L +Kenko 1.4 Pro 300DGX, Canon 430EX II and RS 4 Classic

Well - there are rumors: http://www.canonrumors.com/2011/11/cano ... onish-cr2/
Slightly more light at 100mm, probably slightly sharper, weather sealed, better IS.
If that lens will come in the future it would be even nicer in almost every aspect than the "old" version existing at the moment (but it might be noticably more expensive). I can't complain about the IS in the 100-400 I have - after reading about its age I thought I would feel it's worse. But sometimes I have the feeling it's stronger than the new IS in the 100mm 2.8L Macro IS USM. I got some acceptable shots at 1/30 sec at 400mm. Handheld.
Even if the new version is sharper it can't be very much - the sharpness of the 100-400mm is very nice and so I see no benefit in the 400mm 5.6 - just the 400mm F4 DO might be interesting using it with a 1.4x extender but looking at the price... The only thing I'm really missing on my lens is the weather sealing. That vacuum cleaner is about the opposit of it


Well... it's not a bigger sensor but a higher resolution.

_________________
Canon EOS 500D + Canon EOS 5D Mark III + Canon EOS 33v
Canon EF 24-105mm 4L IS USM + EF 100-400mm 4.5-5.6L IS USM + EF 100mm 2.8L Macro IS USM + Sigma 12-24mm 4.5-5.6 EX DG HSM + Canon Speedlite 580 EX II + Nissin Speedlite Di 466

higher resolution, is what I was thinking, that didn`t come out right... thanks for that.

I have taken shots with the 70-300L at 1/5 at 300. Not consistently or reliably, but the IS is very good. It also works well with the extender.

Wow if that canonrumor link turns out to be true, I would be interested. It looks like a bigger version of the 70-300L, which starts at F4.
The bigger 200-400 with extender would be nice, but its out of my price range.

_________________
Canon Powershot S95, Canon 6D,7D, 24-70 2.8 Tamron VC, Canon 15-85, Canon 85 1.8, Sigma 30 1.4, 50mm 1.8, Canon 100 2.8L Macro, Canon 70-300L +Kenko 1.4 Pro 300DGX, Canon 430EX II and RS 4 Classic