Canon 100-400

Peter10d

Peter10d

Messages
2,346
Name
Peter
Edit My Images
No
I am looking to purchase a general wildlife lens in the near future, and keep coming back to the Canon 100-400.
So what are the bad points about this lens that should maybe make me look at alternatives?
Has anyone used it on a 50d, or will I have to look at a body with faster AF to get the best from it?
 
ncf15 said:
Good versatile lens. Small enough to carry anywhere. Supposed to be not as sharp as the 400 5.6 but which doesn't have IS so probably needs tripod more often.
Almost all of these were taken handheld with the 100-400 and a 50d.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/54538464@N03/sets/7215762

Nick
Click to expand...

I've found my 100-400 to be great, not sure I'd say it was small, but then I saw your shot next to 500mm, it looks like a toy :)
 
Not the best thread for asking for bad points on the 100-400 as I have just got one lol !

I am pleased with it so far but then again I have not had a real chance to use it, this lens with my new funky 1d is IMO, a big unit and a fair weight to lug about all day but again, I have not yet tried it !!!
 
I am looking for the same thing for my 50D and am undecided between the Sigma 50-500mm OS and 100-400mm. I have the older non OS 50-500mm already but it's a bit on the slow side (and I am not a monopod/tripod fan) .... with OS it isn't any faster but should help in lower light. I get much sharper pics handheld with the Bigma on my K-5 with it's built in SR than with the D50.

Was also considering really splashing out and getting the Sigma 120-300mm OS but tbh I'm really quite a lazy photographer and would probably just leave it at home due to the weight.
 
I love my 100-400, I use it on my 50D and it works a treat.

I am sure i have not got the best out of mine yet but I do keep trying.

spike
 
I borrowed a 100-400 from a guy at the Waddington airshow for a couple of hours and was amazed by the quality of the results compared to the Tamron 28-300 I had been using. No good, I had just come into some money and was after a 100 f2.8 L macro so I stretched it a bit by selling the Tamron and got a 100-400 as well. That was in august and I'm still over the moon about it.
 
Good points:

- good image quality when used within it's limitations.
- solid construction
- nice range, and actually not that much distortion.

Bad points:

- Not really weather sealed
- You are going to either love or hate that push pull zooming action
- When zoomed to 400 is very long and very front heavy
- Not the fastest focusing lens around

Oh and there are rumours that there will be a replacement next year without the push pull zooming action
 
:wacky:ignore double post
 
Last edited:
Peter10d said:
Thanks for all the replies.
The general consensus seems to be it is a great lens.
The possibility of an updated version coming out makes me wonder if I should hold back and see:thinking:
Click to expand...

:LOL: and I have pondered for the last 18mths on the predicted replacement which has still not arrived but 200-400 built in extender was announced, so how long and if a replacement is announced is anyones guess ;)
 
I really enjoy my 100-400, not just for the birds but also for landscapes.

It's not the fastest (f5.6) at 400mm - it can hunt a bit in poor light on my 40D but much better on my 1D2

I quite like the push pull zoom although you need to make sure you're not closing it when wet.
 
I agree that the 100-400 L is a cracking general purpose wildlife lens. I have the itch for this lens for about 2 years before finally being able to afford one.

My flickr has the following shots taken with the 100-400, http://www.flickr.com/photos/mjkcanon/tags/canon100400lisusm/

Obviously there is faster and longer kit out there, but for the money you get a very good, versatile bit of kit.
 
I have a similar decision to make, a friend has the canon 400 f5.6 l and uses it to great effect for bird shots but i wondered if the 100-400 l has a greater variety of use?
 
I have used my 100-400 for birds so at the 400mm end nearly always, |I have used it for motorsport and whilst cars have been at the 100-300 range bikes have been at the 400mm end.

I think it gives alot of versatility and I do not think you will be disapointed in the slightest.

spike
 
FranchiseJuan said:
Good points:

- good image quality when used within it's limitations.
- solid construction
- nice range, and actually not that much distortion.

Bad points:

- Not really weather sealed
- You are going to either love or hate that push pull zooming action
- When zoomed to 400 is very long and very front heavy
- Not the fastest focusing lens around

Oh and there are rumours that there will be a replacement next year without the push pull zooming action
Click to expand...

Good summary. At LensesForHire, the 100-400 is our most popular lens BY FAR - we have about 30 copies if it - and for most people it is the go-to lens for wildlife.

But I wouldn't pay any notice to those rumours. There have been rumours of a replacement for ages. Sooner or later I guess they will replace it, so sooner or later someone will say a replacement is coming and (by luck rather than judgement) they'll be right. But 99% of all gear rumours are rubbish. In the last 3 years, no significant lens announcements have been predicted successfully. Not one.
 
I tried the 100-400 from a friend but found I always had it pretty much up at the 400mm end and found the push/pull zooming a pain. I wasn't that impressed with the image sharpness either, although most owners seem to be happy. In the end I bought the 400L F5.6 prime and it was simply superb. Absolutely pin sharp and never missed the zoom function as I always want greater focal length anyway, just can't afford a 500mm! (y)

Gareth
 
People saying about the 400 F5.6 being sharper, well, thats a given since its a prime against a zoom really.

Not used one, but this is going to be a definate purchase next year
 
Peter10d said:
Has anyone used it on a 50d, or will I have to look at a body with faster AF to get the best from it?
Click to expand...

I'm using the 100-400 on my 5DII, which doesn't have the fastest of AF that are out there and I'm very happy with it. I bought it used and it does have quite a lot of dust already inside (due to the push/pull zoom that works like a pump for dust) but you cannot see anything on the pictures.
It is sharp enough to get good crops so that I don't miss the crop-factor another camera would bring me.

that image below was taken with the 100-400 and cropped.

http://meruby.aminus3.com/image/2010-09-25.html

eva
 
meruby said:
it does have quite a lot of dust already inside (due to the push/pull zoom that works like a pump for dust)
Click to expand...

It's a myth that the push-pull zoom pumps in dust any more than a twist zoom would. You've still got to move the same amount of air in and out of the lens.
 
hollis_f said:
It's a myth that the push-pull zoom pumps in dust any more than a twist zoom would. You've still got to move the same amount of air in and out of the lens.
Click to expand...

Seems that I've just learned something today. I always thought it would be worse with the push-zoom than with other lenses.
(y)

eva
 
There are always rummor that a new model of any lens is just around the conner, but 99% are false and even with the true ones it takes along time from anouncment to being on the shelf.

The 200-400, and new version of the 500 & 600 all anounced by Canon early this year, and now Canon have said all on hold, with no release date in the pipe line.


100-400 not 100% weather sealed, well neither is your 50D so that's not an issue.

As somebody said above it's the push/pull zoom that you'll either HATE or get on with ( I doubt anyone loves it :) )
 
hollis_f said:
It's a myth that the push-pull zoom pumps in dust any more than a twist zoom would. You've still got to move the same amount of air in and out of the lens.
Click to expand...

Not if it's an internal zoom like to 70-200 range :) , but yes if it's a lens extending zoom total correct.
 
acetone said:
As somebody said above it's the push/pull zoom that you'll either HATE or get on with ( I doubt anyone loves it :) )
Click to expand...
Au contraire, some people do love it. (I'm one of them.) The zoom mechanism allows you to frame a shot far more rapidly than with a 'conventional' lens, and there are some times when that's very valuable indeed.
 
Well contrary to my post above (number 6) I spotted a 400mm f5.6 on Ebay a couple of days ago and it arrived today.

Just done a couple of test shots wide open as the light was fading and it is sharp as a knife right from the word go. Need to do a bit more testing but it looks very positive indeed.
 
Mike.P said:
Well contrary to my post above (number 6) I spotted a 400mm f5.6 on Ebay a couple of days ago and it arrived today.

Just done a couple of test shots wide open as the light was fading and it is sharp as a knife right from the word go. Need to do a bit more testing but it looks very positive indeed.
Click to expand...

If you've got a nice sharp one, you won't be disappointed. They are a superb lens for the 400mm length you get and not really any more combersome than the 300mm F4. (y)

I sold mine earlier this year and wish I hadn't now! :bonk:

What did you pay for it if you don't mind me asking?

Gareth
 
acetone said:
As somebody said above it's the push/pull zoom that you'll either HATE or get on with ( I doubt anyone loves it :) )
Click to expand...


loved it much better than a twist zoom for the focal length.
 
The 100-400 was the first quality lens I bought for my 40D, I've since upgraded to a 7D and this lens is great. I like the push pull zoom function, I find it quicker and easier to use. The things to watch out for are the twist friction ring, when using the lens have the friction ring undone so it is free to move in and out. When you have finished your shot twist the friction ring and lock the lens back in at 100mm or when you go to pack the camera away the lens can slide from 100 out to 400mm and you have what I describe as lens bounce!

Other things to be aware of, don't use filters on the front as this has a big impact on the quality of the shot. If you want to protect the glass always use the lens hood provided. The other thing is that this lens needs good light, on the 50D you will want at least 1/600at 400mm focal length and if you are in poor light that will mean shooting at f5.6 and high iso. Always choose a faster shutter speed even if it means setting a high iso value, the 50D will cope fine at 1600 iso. For best sharpness stop down to f7.1 if you can.

One thing I found is if you shoot something at 100mm then slide straight out to 400mm the autofocus will struggle to work. You quickly learn to give the focus ring a small twist and then it will lock easily. I bought mine second hand a few years back and I still love it. It is the perfect wildlife lens and my go to lens for the zoo. A prime 400mm f5.6 will be slightly sharper but I like to shoot things closer than 400mm. I've heard stories about a 100-400 replacement but that's it stories, no sign of one, just go for it and have fun.
 
acetone said:
As somebody said above it's the push/pull zoom that you'll either HATE or get on with ( I doubt anyone loves it :) )
Click to expand...

Another one who loves it. It's far more logical way of zooming and I wish my other zooms were push pull rather than twist action
 
Hello To All.
This is my first post.
I had to comment on this lens.I shoot mainly birds and wildlife.I have used this lens hand held the past 4 yrs and it is fantastic.Sharp as a tack.I have since started using a tripod in the last couple of months and the sharpnest is scary sharp even using 1/1000s speed.The difference is amazing.I have taken shots as close as 6ft.If i would have brought the 400mm prime i would have missed that shot of a Muskrat that decided to come next to me to eat.I use all foucal lengths all the time. I just love the push/pull so easy to zoom in and out,very quick i wish all lens had it.After 4 yrs.of use there is no trace of dust inside of the lens(None).Until i can afford a 500mm lens this is it.Get one.You will love it!

Fred
Oh,As far as a replacement lens goes,I have heard here in the states the 200-400 would be anywhere from USD 3000- $5000.00.GBP-1911.00 - 3185.00Not for me anytime soon.
 
Fred Boreale said:
Oh,As far as a replacement lens goes,I have heard here in the states the 200-400 would be anywhere from USD 3000- $5000.00.GBP-1911.00 - 3185.00Not for me anytime soon.
Click to expand...

Welcome to TP, Fred. Unfortunately I'm going to have to disagree violently with your first ever post. The Nikon 200-400mm f/4 is £5000 in the shops here. The Canon will have the built-in Extender which I can see adding £500 to the price. Plus if it's been treated to the same weight-loss programme as the other Canon super-teles, it will be a lot lighter than the Nikon, and that's worth paying for too.

Bottom line: I reckon it will launch at £8000 or more, and in the long run it will *eventually* drift down to about £5500-£6000.

(Fred: In the US, the Nikon is currently $7000. So I reckon the Canon will launch at $11000 and end up around $8000-$8500.)
 
Last edited:
Another 100-400Lover :love:

I used to own a Sigma 170-500mm which at half the price of the 100-400 did a reasonable job but the 100-400 is just in a different league!

This lens totally transformed my cricket/rugby shots and whilst I know a tele-prime would give me better results, I'd rather have the compromise on cost & flexibility ;)
 
Yet another lover of 100-400, great lens nice and light to trunk around all day with. Produces good quality images in good light. Taken a lot of stick in the past but as you can see with most of the posts on here, its a great lens.

Used mine with a 20d and 7d.
 
As far as the push/pull zoom goes I was born for it. To me it seems the easiest, most natural way of zooming a lens ever. I find it so much easier tracking while zooming with it instead of the twisting action which tends to make the lens move away from where you are focusing (for me anyway). I tried a Sigma 50-500 non OS and a 150-500 OS before I decided to get the 100-400 and I'm happy with it every time I use it, even in low(ish) light. The IQ I get is outstanding on both my 7D and 5DMkII.
 
I think the main thing to consider is whether you think you'll need to go below the 400mm for your wildlife. If you think you're going to be close enough to the wildlife for this, then you will need to go for the 100-400. If you think most will be shot from distance, then go for the 400mm prime. Simple. (y)

Gareth
 
StewartR said:
Welcome to TP, Fred. Unfortunately I'm going to have to disagree violently with your first ever post. The Nikon 200-400mm f/4 is £5000 in the shops here. The Canon will have the built-in Extender which I can see adding £500 to the price. Plus if it's been treated to the same weight-loss programme as the other Canon super-teles, it will be a lot lighter than the Nikon, and that's worth paying for too.

Bottom line: I reckon it will launch at £8000 or more, and in the long run it will *eventually* drift down to about £5500-£6000.

(Fred: In the US, the Nikon is currently $7000. So I reckon the Canon will launch at $11000 and end up around $8000-$8500.)
Click to expand...

Hi Stewart,
Thanks for the welcome,You might be right.As good as my 100-400 is There is no way i would pay that much for a 400mm lens.I would fine a used 500mm for less then that or even a new one(When ever they decide to release it)For $10,000-$11,000.

Fred
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top