100-400 v primes, any thoughts ?

G

gary43

Messages
2,679
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi, this topic may well have been discussed extensively elsewhere but I'm very interested in the thoughts of those here on TP.

For background information, I currently shoot just about anything that moves and some stuff that does not. I use 5D1, 60D and 1D3 bodies and have an ok lens line-up. Although recently I have focussed efforts shooting weddings and events I am hoping to free up some time soon to get back into wildlife photography.

I currently have the Canon 100-400 and a cracking good copy at that. For added FL I use a Sigma x1.4 (taped pins-works fine with peripheral AF points) on the 60D and the Canon x1.4 EFII or Kenko MC4 x2 (non-reporting) on the 1D3. All combinations work fine with a bit of a work-around and in good light. I have shot lots of nice images with these set-ups.

Like most wildlife guys I find that I can never get enough FL (how many times have you read that !). The Canon 600 f4 is out of the question and experience has shown that I really do need IS in my long lenses so that really leaves the C300f2.8IS or C400f2.8IS or, I suppose the C400f4DO. OOI, I had the Sigma 500f4.5 for a couple of years and do not want to go there again. The C400f2.8 is possibly, but not definitely, out of my price range.

Now the question, for users of the 300 and 400 primes really; how does the quality of images, focus speed etc.. deteriorate with these lenses when using TCs ? I would be particularly interested in knowing whether the 300f2.8 can take stacked x2 and x1.4 TCs at all well ?

The 100-400 is my reference point of course. Do the primes with TCs work that much better than the zoom ?

Would be interested in anybody's experience in this matter.

As an aside, I have seen lots of great shots from the Sigma 150-500 here, question is how are people getting on with the 50-500 OS ?

(Michael, I know yours is fantastic but all lens makers have some variability and I was wondering what experience others have of this lens)

Thanks in advance for all feedback.

I have until it gets sunny to make my mind up about whether to keep what I have or to let it go, so plenty of time for feedback !
 
Have a look here, and have a look through Roys posts as he has some very impressive stuff with his 300mm IS and stacked 1.4 + 2x TC's
 
A couple of questions to help you choose:
1. Why is the 600mm f4 out of the question but you consider the 400mm f2.8?
2. Why no mention of the 500mm f4?
3. How about waiting for the new Sigma 120-300 2.8 OS?
 
Euan

Thanks for the link. Have just managed a look at Roy's images and they are v.impressive as you state. I have tried stacking TCs before on other lenses and it has crippled AF speed. Wonder how fast this works with the 300f2.8 plus stacked TCs ?


Micloi

Thanks for the input.

The 600f4 is just too expensive (as Clint says; "a man has got to know his limitations" or something like that!). I have considered the 500f4 but to me this is a fairly dedicated wildlife lens and I think the other options are more versatile. I reserve the right to be wrong. The Sigma mentioned above I could live with but since I have no idea of release date or price or performance I have not considered it to date.

Thanks to both for getting back
 
Do you intend to keep the 100-400, as if so then I would have thought that would give you the flexibility you need so it is just longer focal length that you need, in which case The Canon 500 & 600, with the downside of cost, The Sigma 150-500, or 50-500, or the Sigma 300-800, again expensive but gives you the range you desire.
 
The 400mm IS is almost as expensive as the 600mm
The 500mm is as versatile as the 600mm

IMHO the best combination for you would be:
1. Sigma 120-300
2. Canon 500mm
Those 2 combined (2nd hand) would cost as much as the 400mm and along with a set of teleconverters will allow you to shoot practically any subject.

And I am talking from experience
 
If I had a 120-300 and a 500 prime, I would be wanting to hang on to the 100-400, so you've still got something light[er] weight.

A 120-300 and 100-400 might seem a bit like overkill, but I've held one of those siggies, and it isn't a lightweight lens!
 
Last edited:
Ken

No, I will pass on the 100-400.

I'm not so fussed about the flexibility, up to a point though, as I have a nice 70-200 f2.8 IS mk2 which seems to work well with both x1.4 and x2 converters (but not together).

Absolutely LOVE some of your posts using the Sigma 150-500 on previous threads by the way. I had totally discounted this lens until I saw your work.

Like lots of people here I'm just weighing up long lens options and you make a great case fot the aforementioned lens.

Thanks for the advice
 
micloi said:
The 400mm IS is almost as expensive as the 600mm
The 500mm is as versatile as the 600mm

IMHO the best combination for you would be:
1. Sigma 120-300
2. Canon 500mm
Those 2 combined (2nd hand) would cost as much as the 400mm and along with a set of teleconverters will allow you to shoot practically any subject.

And I am talking from experience
Click to expand...


Micloi

Thanks for the information. I do not see many around any idea of a sensible used price for a 500 f4 ?


Adam

Tried a Sigma 120-300 a year or so ago, had it for a couple of weeks and was not impressed so I let it go. Maybe I had a bad copy and I know it is well-regarded but my experience has put me off this lens a bit.


Thanks both
 
The only upgrade path for my current Sigma as I see it, is the Canon 500 or 600 or the Sigma 300-800, all expensive! The new Sigma 50-500 is reputed to be a tad better than my 150-500
 
artyman said:
The only upgrade path for my current Sigma as I see it, is the Canon 500 or 600 or the Sigma 300-800, all expensive! The new Sigma 50-500 is reputed to be a tad better than my 150-500
Click to expand...

I suspect you are correct above. These kinds of lenses are hard to smuggle past the wife though !
 
gary43 said:
I suspect you are correct above. These kinds of lenses are hard to smuggle past the wife though !
Click to expand...

I do not know about that. My 300mm mutated to a 400mm and then to a 600mm without anyone noticing :)

It helped that I had the 300mm on display with the hood for some time and then the 400mm was on display without the hood for a week or so :)
 
micloi said:
I do not know about that. My 300mm mutated to a 400mm and then to a 600mm without anyone noticing :)

It helped that I had the 300mm on display with the hood for some time and then the 400mm was on display without the hood for a week or so :)
Click to expand...

Top tip Michael, your wisdom, as ever, is very much taken onboard.

:thumbs:
 
micloi said:
I do not know about that. My 300mm mutated to a 400mm and then to a 600mm without anyone noticing :)

It helped that I had the 300mm on display with the hood for some time and then the 400mm was on display without the hood for a week or so :)
Click to expand...

The problem I would have is that the Sigma is black and the Canon is white, there is no way I can think of bluffing that one :lol:
 
Ken

Maybe get a camo cover for the sigma now then slip it over any new big white you may get in the future ? Do not know how swopable from one-lens-to-another these thing are ?


Micloi

OOI, I know it is new to you so you may not have fully tested it, but how do you reckon the sharpness of your 50-500 os compares to the 120-300 with x2 TCs ?

Just a thought.
 
artyman said:
The problem I would have is that the Sigma is black and the Canon is white, there is no way I can think of bluffing that one :lol:
Click to expand...

Had that problem when I moved from the Sigma 300 to the Canon 300.
Solution was a black Neoprene lens cover, something I use to that day on all of my long lenses :)
 
gary43 said:
Ken

Maybe get a camo cover for the sigma now then slip it over any new big white you may get in the future ? Do not know how swopable from one-lens-to-another these thing are ?


Micloi

OOI, I know it is new to you so you may not have fully tested it, but how do you reckon the sharpness of your 50-500 os compares to the 120-300 with x2 TCs ?

Just a thought.
Click to expand...

Below is test I did with my previous 120-300 @ 600mm open wide (f5.6) and the 50-500mm @500mm open wide (f6.3). BTW I find my current 120-300 to be even sharer. There is a reason the 120-300 is so much more expensive (even in non-OS guise).

Both heavy center crops. 1st is the 120-300 @ 600 f5.6. 2nd the 50-500mm @ 500mm f6.3
The 50-500 does better, contrast wise, for closer subjects, the subject for this test was quite far away (other side of my back yard while I was inside the house),

600mmf56.jpg

50-500mmf63.jpg
 
Micloi

Thanks for the crops. Have to say I'm impressed, particularly with the "old"120-300; seems amazingly sharp.

I know you are delighted with the new one, no wonder if it is an improvement on this !

More food for thought then :bang:
 
gary43 said:
EuanThanks for the link. Have just managed a look at Roy's images and they are v.impressive as you state. I have tried stacking TCs before on other lenses and it has crippled AF speed. Wonder how fast this works with the 300f2.8 plus stacked TCs ?
Click to expand...
Gary, AF speed with stacked 1.4x and 2x and 300/2.8 on the 7D is very variable from not too bad to very slow. But on a 1D body I would guess that it would be quite a lot faster (you are at effectively f8 which is still within the 1 series AF specs).

I bought it mainly as a 600/5.6 and providing you use a focus limiter the AF speed is very good on the 7D with a 2x tc - actually faster than a lot of bare lenses I have used before. Of course the AF at 600mm is not as fast as at 300mm or 420mm but you have to remember that Canon rate the 300/2.8 as one of the fastest focussing tele's ever made so you are starting at a extremely fast AF speed level.

edit: I forgot to mention that what has surprised me most after moving from 400mm to a 600mm focal length is the amount of birds that come into shooting range with the extra 200mm. I am getting loads more keepers these days.
 
Last edited:
Roy

Many thanks for your response above.

I think the coot photos, in particular, show the excellent potential of this combination.

By the sounds of it stacking converters is workable but pushing it since, I guess, a lot of light is being attenuated before hitting the sensors (?).

I think with the 60D that I have the stacked TCs would work only in really good light. As you say though 600f5.6 on a crop is a decent focal length with just the x2 TC attached !

I also agree that the 1D3 might work better with the stacked set-up, the AF is very sensitive at all points and as you mention it can take f8.

Thanks again for the reply and for the inspirational images. If only even used ones were not so expensive .....


Gary
 
Last edited:
500L 4 or new 300L 2.8 MkII with extender :thumbs:
 
Hi Hoppy

Is the 300 IS mkII out yet ? Fron Roy's images the 300 IS mkI with x2 TC or stacked TCs looks to give amazing images. Can only imagine how good the new lens is or will be ?

Thanks for the recommendation of these lenses.
 
Dear All

Thanks for all the superb advice above.

OOI, I have just purchased a 600f4IS from a friend who is trading UP lenses.

Will pick this up next week.

Will let all know how this works out. I currently have mixed feelings; regret at spending so much cash but sheer excitiment at what the 600f4 offers.

Thanks again.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top