100-400 IS L mk1 vs 70-300L & 1.4 TC

nickjohnwatson

nickjohnwatson

Messages
3,307
Name
Nick
Edit My Images
Yes
Hiya Folks.

Just wondering if someone could cast an opinion on something for me.

I bought a sigma 70-200 2.8 a few weeks ago and its just not really what i want or need. the photos are very hit and miss focus wise and on FF the reach just isnt very far. My intention was to buy a 1.4 TC to go with it but its not great wide open and you have to stop it down a bit too far to get really good results. Its just going to be too much of a compromise to get the results i want.

With this in mind I'd like something with more reach for taking photos of birds and planes etc.

I've been looking at the mk1 100-400L IS which looks a fantastic lens and can be had 2nd hand for around £600-£650 now and also the 70-300L which can be had for around £700.

My question is, would you go for the 100-400 or would you get the 70-300 and a 1.4 TC? The latter works out more expensive and will give a bit more reach but I'm wondering if the TC will have a negative effect on the AF speed and obviously at the long end i'll be limited to a narrower aperture.

Any thoughts would be appreciated before i go ahead and make a decision, there's a nice looking 100-400 on the classifieds thats caught my eye but need to shift my sigma first and though i'd see what folk thought about the other choice.

Thanks

Nick
 
I haven't used the latter combo but AF speed won't be the problem, it's an f4-5.6 lens which becomes f5.6-f8 with the TC so unless you have a 1series camera or 7D mk2 you'll lose AF altogether at the long end

100-400mm is a great lens so I'd go for that
 
nickjohnwatson said:
My question is, would you go for the 100-400 or would you get the 70-300 and a 1.4 TC? The latter works out more expensive and will give a bit more reach but I'm wondering if the TC will have a negative effect on the AF speed and obviously at the long end i'll be limited to a narrower aperture.

Nick
Click to expand...

The 70-300mm L won't take a TC, especially the canon TCs.
Surprised about the sigma 70-200mm f2.8, supposed to be a very good lens, how are you using it, what settings are you using? Accepted its on the short side for wildlife and aviation especially on a full frame camera.
You won't notice much loss of performance with the 1.4x TC depending on the lens, successfully used it with canons 300mm f4, 300mm f2.8 and 500mm f4 primes and 70-200mm f4 and f2.8

Other options in the £500-1100 are the sigma 150-500mm OS, 50-500mm OS or 150-600mm S, or tamron 150-600mm OS

The 100-400mm MKII sounds like a great lens, but currently overpriced, but the price should drop in the coming months. The MKI version not a bad lens and the used prices are dropping.
 
justinminns said:
I haven't used the latter combo but AF speed won't be the problem, it's an f4-5.6 lens which becomes f5.6-f8 with the TC so unless you have a 1series camera or 7D mk2 you'll lose AF altogether at the long end

100-400mm is a great lens so I'd go for that
Click to expand...

Thats what I was trying to find out, whether it would work properly, I use a 6D which hasnt got the most amazing AF system (it only has 9 points but only the centre point is a cross type) so I really need something thats going to work well. The 70-300 with TC sounds like it'd be a nightmare so i think the 100-400 sounds the better option :)

pete.rush said:
The 70-300mm L won't take a TC, especially the canon TCs.
Surprised about the sigma 70-200mm f2.8, supposed to be a very good lens, how are you using it, what settings are you using? Accepted its on the short side for wildlife and aviation especially on a full frame camera.
You won't notice much loss of performance with the 1.4x TC depending on the lens, successfully used it with canons 300mm f4, 300mm f2.8 and 500mm f4 primes and 70-200mm f4 and f2.8

Other options in the £500-1100 are the sigma 150-500mm OS, 50-500mm OS or 150-600mm S, or tamron 150-600mm OS

The 100-400mm MKII sounds like a great lens, but currently overpriced, but the price should drop in the coming months. The MKI version not a bad lens and the used prices are dropping.
Click to expand...

I've been using the sigma for a couple of weeks now, sometimes its great but sometimes its just very soft, I was taking some plane photos yesterday while they were landing at NCL airport (reasonably close) and even @ 1/1600 sec @ f5.6 - 200mm ISO250 they weren't sharp, but i took some Robin photos last week and they were spot on. I had some problems with it front focussing quite badly and the problems seem to be coming and going intermittently. I'd like to do some more wildlife stuff and as you say its a bit short for birds. That tamron 150-600 looks to be decent but I dont have any lenses that cover 50-150mm do dont wanna get something thats going to be too long at the short end if that makes sense.
 
You could always send your lens and body in to get calibrated at elstree, sigma lenses are renowned for focus issues ie back or front focusing.

It depends what you budget is on a replacement lens if you go down that route?
 
pete.rush said:
You could always send your lens and body in to get calibrated at elstree, sigma lenses are renowned for focus issues ie back or front focusing.

It depends what you budget is on a replacement lens if you go down that route?
Click to expand...

I think i may have just been a bit hasty in buying a short tele lens. I've been out with it a few times and every time have come home wishing it had more reach. I've got a bit saved up and if i can get what i paid for the sigma i'll be able to stretch to around £650/£700 ish for a lens with a bit more zoom :)
 
Last edited:
The 100-400 is a great lens for aircraft. I really like the push/pull zoom, seems so intuitive.
Matt
 
The 70-300L is the superior lens in many ways however if you need the extra reach then you'll need to go with the 100-400L.

PS I've just taken delivery of a 100-400L MkII and it is fantastic.
 
Jackwow said:
The 70-300L is the superior lens in many ways however if you need the extra reach then you'll need to go with the 100-400L.

PS I've just taken delivery of a 100-400L MkII and it is fantastic.
Click to expand...

70-300L resolves more at 300mm than 100-400L at "400mm" (it is only 360-370mm in real life). I'd go for either of the new zooms.
 
The 100-400 has a bit of a reputation as a 'dust pump', from most of what I've read it's more of an aesthetic issue than something that will affect image quality.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top