Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 L IS USM - Good lens for aviation?

FlyTVR

FlyTVR

Messages
4,234
Edit My Images
No
Afternoon all.

At the moment, the longest lens I have is the Canon 70-200mm F2.8 IS2. But, a few times a year, I find myself wanting a lens for aviation shots e.g. RIAT. I'd love to spend £1000s, but just can't justify the dosh for what will really be a hobby lens.

So, how about the Canon 100-400mm. Fit for purpose? I'd be using it with a 5D3.

If I was to pick one up second hand, what sort of money would I be looking at?

Cheers.

Dav
 
The 100-400 is a popular choice but in my humble opinion the 400 f5.6 prime gives you better image quality at a more affordable price. You do lose the flexibility and is but I've found I require distance much more than not and haven't really felt the benefit of IS.. Then again I shoot cars not planes :) I wouldn't rule out the higher end options from sigma either with the 100-300 f4 and 120-300 2.8 within this budget (used for the latter)
 
Alternatively a 2x converter will give you F5.6 at the long end of your 70/200 and you'll still have IS. From experiments I've done with a 70/200 F4 & 2x its not hugely different from a 400 5.6 if its just occasional hobby use you're after. 5D3 will take high Iso so you'll get a decent image using f4 (f8 equivalent) or F5.6 on the zoom and adecent shutter speed to boot.

Matt
 
MatBin said:
Alternatively a 2x converter will give you F5.6 at the long end of your 70/200 and you'll still have IS. From experiments I've done with a 70/200 F4 & 2x its not hugely different from a 400 5.6 if its just occasional hobby use you're after. 5D3 will take high Iso so you'll get a decent image using f4 (f8 equivalent) or F5.6 on the zoom and adecent shutter speed to boot.

Matt
Click to expand...
You might be lucky, but on my 70-200 2.8 2 even a 1.4x has a noticeable impact on AF accuracy and does degrade IQ slightly on the 5d 3.

Unless you are significantly stretched budget wise I'd recommend a 2x tc only as a last resort, just my personal opinion
 
Graphix501 said:
You might be lucky, but on my 70-200 2.8 2 even a 1.4x has a noticeable impact on AF accuracy and does degrade IQ slightly on the 5d 3.

Unless you are significantly stretched budget wise I'd recommend a 2x tc only as a last resort, just my personal opinion
Click to expand...

I'd get them checked out :)
Most people regard 70/200 with a teleconverter as pretty good, they after all made for each other, are you using a Canon made converter?

Matt
 
Thanks Matt and Jonathan.

I tried a converter with the 70-200 a couple of years back - F1 Sikverstone. Was using a 5D2 and I wasn't very impressed.
 
I've had the 100-400 for about 6 years and purchased primarily for airshows.
Have always been happy with the lens and the images it produces. The IS does really help.
I was in the same boat though as to whether to get the 400mm 5.6 but decided the flexibility was worth the small extra outlay.
There are a couple of airshows, such as Old Warden, where 400mm is way too much.
I have also found it is a very good general lens for detail shots on the ground.
I've seen used ones for around £900.
 
I've used the 100-400 for choppers and cricket and can recommend it to anyone. Bought mine here back in Oct 2010 and sold it a couple of months ago for £760 as I just didn't need the range anymore. It's an excellent lens with good sharpness and the IS gives you that much more versatility. While I would have preferred a zoom ring as opposed to the push-pull action of the 100-400, it will nevertheless not disappoint.
 
I've had a 100-400 for 12 years now and it's a great lens I've used it for motor sport, American football, rugby and wildlife.. Fantastic range and very good results. The IS can be very useful too and I much prefer the push pull zooming to rotary control. It's far more logical and I wish more lenses had that method of zoom control.
 
I have a 100-400, but very rarely use it, preferring a prime.
But it depends what sort of aviation photography you are interested in?

If you hang round the fences at airports/airfields, what you have is enough usually. If it's airshows, then for take off and landing what you have will work, but for most of the displays, anything less than 400mm and you'll want more....Even with a 300mm F2.8 & a x2 extender I want more and that's without the CAA moving displays further away...which no doubt they will at some point.

Trouble is that at 400mm the 100-400, isn't great, it's OK, but that's all. With a 400mm prime, you lose the so called flexibility, but I never had an issue when I used one. Then again, if I can, I like to have my photos right in there.

Personally, if I was looking now, I'd be thinking about the Tamron 150-600mm, apparently it is better than the canon 100-400 and at around £950, cheaper!
 
100-400 with the 1.4 tc and you still get autofocus with the 5d mk3, it's a good combination.
Both my 100-400 are pin sharp, especially at 400mm, I use them for Motorsport etc.
 
100-400 with the 1.4 tc and you still get autofocus with the 5d mk3, it's a good combination. Me too
 
Guys thanks for all the input. Also thanks for the pointer to the Tamron 150-600. I'm going to start a thread on this lens - if there is not one already!:)

EDIT: I don't think I need to start a thread on the Tamron! :eek:
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top