EF 100-400mm f/4.5- 5.6L IS USM

[doktorstamp]

Re: EF 100-400mm f/4.5- 5.6L IS USM

I have had one now from around 2004 or so. Extremely flexible, and had no problems using the push/pull. There were reported problems of dust ingress, but my thinking on this is that a few lenses got through the system that weren't up to standard. I have never had any problems with mine, though I recommend a tripod if using an extender.

Most of the quibbles about this lens as others have said are made in comparison to a prime, in its turn it has greater flexibility than any prime. Go for it.

regards

Nigel

[Neilly]

Re: EF 100-400mm f/4.5- 5.6L IS USM

Hi,

I use the 100-400mm with a 50D & its a superb lens. Backend of last year I went to a model fly-in with a mate who was using a Nikon D300 + 300mm f2.8 lens. The pictures we both ended up with were very similar in quality, in fact you wouldn't be able to tell which camera had taken them - when you compare the price of the two camera set ups - I think Canon wins.

The push pull action you'll soon get used to because it feels very natural - also makes for very quick change in focal length. I've heard all these stories about dust etc getting in - I think this must be down to abusing the lens. I have one of the very first Tamron 60-300mm zoom lens, which must be nearly 30 years old (it finally retired with the AE-1P two years ago) & that is still clean inside & never been refurbished etc. So, I think you can take the dust getting in with a pinch of salt

Great lens - it won't disappoint you! I've posted the picture below several times - it shows how good the lens is - a small fast moving model must be one of the hardest things for the lens to keep up with (I just know someone will come up with something even more difficult:tongue: )



TTFN,
Neil

[colin C]

Re: EF 100-400mm f/4.5- 5.6L IS USM

It does lead one to wonder how many "equipment complainers" actually own and use the kit?

Colin

[Neilly]

Re: EF 100-400mm f/4.5- 5.6L IS USM

Hi Colin,

That makes at least two of us

TTFN,
Neil

[Millie]

Re: EF 100-400mm f/4.5- 5.6L IS USM

(I just know someone will come up with something even more difficult ).

OK then, Pipistrelle bats; without lamping them !?

Millie

[colin C]

Re: EF 100-400mm f/4.5- 5.6L IS USM

OK then, Pipistrelle bats; without lamping them !?

Millie

I find a cricket bat works quite well .................. Owzat!

Colin

[Millie]

Re: EF 100-400mm f/4.5- 5.6L IS USM

I find a cricket bat works quite well .................. Owzat!

I'd feel safer with a tennis raquet.............Avantage.. Millie

[MX5]

Re: EF 100-400mm f/4.5- 5.6L IS USM

Whilst I read reviews (such as the quality ones from DPReview) ... I take them with a chunk of salt. Same goes for car reviews etc. But if we assume there are few complaints because of 'bad Karma' ... I think the majority are down to setting too high an expectation ... like the 100-400 is going to be equal to the 400/2.8 ... or just bad technique. Thus while the 100-400 is a good lens (I've had mine for over 3 years) ... it's like all telephotos in that you have to take care. The IS will not allow you to take pin sharp pictures hand holding in a gale at the 400 end with just 1/30 set. It might help a little. I was told when I bought it ... to spend time getting to know it ... firstly without turning the IS on. So as ever know the limitations of kit and know were it will excel.

BUT try one ... rent one ... and see for yourself ... then buy it ;-) Very nice lens thats always in my main backpack.

[scarletti]

Re: EF 100-400mm f/4.5- 5.6L IS USM

I've had one for about 6 years now, and it's good, but...
I also have a 70-300 IS USM, and, while the extra 100mm of reach is nice, I'm hard pushed to tell the difference between them in terms of image quality.

I originally assumed it was the fact that my 300D just couldn't get the best out of it, but having recently upgraded to a 50D, and having spent nearly £300 on a full service and recalibration of the lens by Fixation, I'm still underwhelmed.

Maybe I just have a bad example of the 100-400 (it is a very early one), or a particularly good example of the 70-300.
Then again, it may just be user incompetence.

[Millie]

Re: EF 100-400mm f/4.5- 5.6L IS USM

The body your're using will have an impact to some degree, especially at narrower apertures, just thought I'd throw that into the mix.

Millie

[karen]

Re: EF 100-400mm f/4.5- 5.6L IS USM

The body your're using will have an impact to some degree, especially at narrower apertures, just thought I'd throw that into the mix.

In what way Millie? I ask as I have a 50d and I am just looking to invest in a 400mm.

[Millie]

Re: EF 100-400mm f/4.5- 5.6L IS USM

Hiya Karen,
I feel a bit silly mentioning it, it’s easier to get and maintain focus in some conditions with bodies like the cropped 1d bodies, and the 7D.
Then you’d expect that for the extra money. I used it on a 40D it was generally OK, cept sometimes I could only get focus with the centre focus point .
I'm sure that can happen regardless of body.

Millie

[johnp]

Re: EF 100-400mm f/4.5- 5.6L IS USM

Hi All
I bought my 100-400 about 4 years ago and have never once regretted it. My first ever shots with it were standing on the bank of the Forth, photographing the girders at the top of the Forth Bridge (rail) at 400mm. It was very windy but you can not only count the rivets, you can examine the rust patterns on them! A few minutes later I was in Culross photographing the village. A tub of tulips caught my eye so I stood well back, zoomed to 400mm and got superb separation between the sharp flower I focused on and nice soft flowers in front and behind.

FWIW we went on "the holiday of a lifetime" a couple of years ago using round-the-world tickets. My kit was a 40D with vertical grip, Sigma 10-20, Canon 24-105L IS and Canon 100-400L IS. What a brilliant kit! Covers all eventualities and fits into a small backpack. Just don't ask about the weight!

John

[Canon-Fodder!]

Re: EF 100-400mm f/4.5- 5.6L IS USM

My kit was a 40D with vertical grip, Sigma 10-20, Canon 24-105L IS and Canon 100-400L IS. What a brilliant kit!

Hi John;

Welcome to the forum...

I couldn't agree with you more! That just about sums up my long-haul travelling kit to a T... (but without the grip; saves weight, and never seen the need for one...).

If I want to save a little weight, or I know I won't need the reach of the 100-400, then I swap it out for the 70-200 f/4 + 1.4x.

But, to the main point of the thread; huge support for the 100-400!

[Neilly]

Re: EF 100-400mm f/4.5- 5.6L IS USM

Hi Scarletti,

I can't believe you can't tell the difference between the 70-300mm & the 100-400mm L lens. I originally used the 70-300mm with a 450D - a good set up. However, when I got more into taking pictures of small model aircraft I soon realised the limitations of the 70-300mm & bought a 100-400mm L lens. The improvement was vast & very noticable. The number of good pictures to those in soft focus or worse got much better, but not quite as much as I'd hope for. Buying a 50D was the next decision & one I've not regretted. The 50D + 100-400mm L lens combination is very good & one which I'd recommend to anyone.

I'm just wondering what sort of pictures you're taking. You do know that you can set up the lens within you're camera to get its focusing where you want it. Something I've not had to do, so I don't know how easy it is to do.

TTFN,
Neil