Upgrade 35-350 to 100-400??

andyjayh

andyjayh

Messages
487
Name
Andy
Edit My Images
Yes
I have owned my Canon 35-350 for some times now and it's a great lens but I am wondering if I will get more from the 100-400?

Most of the time the 35-350 is bang on and it is really good for just taking the ones lens for all occasions. However I wonder if the IS will help a little on fast moving objects. One of my other hobbies is radio control airplanes and hence I do take a few pictures of these. They can be tricky to expose against the sky but also they can be tricky to get the focus spot on with such a long and heavy lens. Will the IS of the 100-400 help here?

Any thoughts appreciated.

Andy
 
andyjayh said:
I have owned my Canon 35-350 for some times now and it's a great lens but I am wondering if I will get more from the 100-400?

Most of the time the 35-350 is bang on and it is really good for just taking the ones lens for all occasions. However I wonder if the IS will help a little on fast moving objects. One of my other hobbies is radio control airplanes and hence I do take a few pictures of these. They can be tricky to expose against the sky but also they can be tricky to get the focus spot on with such a long and heavy lens. Will the IS of the 100-400 help here?

Any thoughts appreciated.

Andy
Click to expand...

I don't think IS will be a great benefit but the focus speed of the 100-400 will be considerably better.

Bob
 
If you like the 35-350, you might want to consider its modern incarnation which is the 28-300L IS.

In terms of size and weight there's very little difference between the 100-400 and the 28-300. If you have concerns about getting the focus spot on the aircraft using a heavy lens, I don't think either of these will have an advantage over the other.

The 100-400 is a great lens, but I guess which would be best for you depends on whether you'd like to have the normal/wide-ish focal lengths available in the same package.

As for getting the exposure right for model aircraft, it sounds to me like that's a classic situation where shooting in Manual would be appropriate. Just dial in the exposure before the plane is launched, and you don't have to worry about the sky confusing the camera's meter.
 
The 100-400 is a great lens for sure but the IS will not be of any use shooting fast moving objects shutter speed is the key to that not IS if you do as recommended shoot in manual make sure you set an appropriate shutter speed first at 350mm you should be no lower than 1/350 hand held anyway but as it's model aircraft you are shooting it may need to be even faster maybe even 1/500 to 1/800 then it's a matter of setting the ISO to get you an aperture both lenses are f5.6 wide open so I don't think you will gain anything really.

Bill
 
Thanks for your advice guys.

Had a look at the 28-300 but the range is more important with the aircraft/motorsport/wildlife type of shooting I do. I also thought the 28-300 was a lot heavier then either the 35-350 or 100-400? Memory may be letting me down here :LOL:

I thought the IS might help as it is very hard to hold the lens still whilst fully extended for a period of time. So you are dealing with a slight movement of the lens all the time. These models are not moving fast all the time, for example;

Capiche.JPG


Capiche2.jpg


Tom_Yak.JPG


Thanks for the tips on exposure and focus speed though. These subjects are a real mixed bag to capture from fast moving to almost stationary, with bright sky to nice landscape backgrounds.

Andy
 
I never found much difference in terms of the focussing speed of the 35-350 v 100-400. Both are good in good light, both pretty much suck for sports/action in low light. The only advantage of the 100-400 is IS, but be aware this is 1st generation IS, ie doesn't help much and isn't tripod aware. Personally I would save your money for something else unless there is something about the 35-350 you don't like. Just my 2p.
 
I have the 100-400 and tend to use it for set shoots, safari parks etc are where it shines but beware it needs alot of light. I find I normally leave it at home unless I have something specific in mind for it, conversely if I head to Longleat etc I leave it on the body full time.
 
Alistair said:
I never found much difference in terms of the focussing speed of the 35-350 v 100-400. Both are good in good light, both pretty much suck for sports/action in low light. The only advantage of the 100-400 is IS, but be aware this is 1st generation IS, ie doesn't help much and isn't tripod aware. Personally I would save your money for something else unless there is something about the 35-350 you don't like. Just my 2p.
Click to expand...

Hmm, but what else is there? I wish Canon would upgrade the lens but that's been rumoured for years :( I am happy with the 35-350 but I just want more :D The only way I can see is a prime but I just prefer the convenience of a zoom really.

Any suggestions?
 
On second thoughts perhaps I am barking up the wrong tree.

I had some really bad shots at the weekend. I tried a polarising filter on the 35-350 as I was shooting at midday in bright sun and I thought it would take the harshness off. However I think it to much light out and slowed the shutter speed too much. I was very disappointed and immediately started looking for new lenses.

So in the cold light of day I think I should be looking at my technique more rather then my equipment :bonk: Save myself some money and practise more :D

Thanks for all your advice.
 
Andy, I think you made a good decision, most of the time it really is about improving technique and getting the most from your gear. The 100-400 is a great lens but I just didn't think it was worth the upgrade to what you already have.

If you are suffering shake through slow shutter speeds why not consider a monopod. Always easy to keep around you in your bag and if you are shooting in one place for a while, much easier and quicker to setup than a tripod.

I just bought the Gitzo GM3550 carbon monopod. It folds up small and is oh so stable even with a 7Kg of camera and lens on it. A bit pricey at £180 but well worth it.
 
Cheers Alistair, took me a while but I realised that the equipment I have is very good and I just need to improve my use of that equipment :D

Already have a Manfrotto monopod but although good for motor sport, it's not ideal for overhead stuff. The models I shoot change from overhead to inches of the floor very often.

One point that I hadn't really thought about enough is keeping the shutter speed above the lens focal length plus a bit more for the 1.6x crop of the sensor. So I really ought to be using at least 500 as a shutter speed at full extension.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top