Canon 400 f5.6 L v 100-400 f4-5.6 L

[Jackwow]

I'm trying to shoot some birds here in Dubai and I'm using a 100-400 F4-5.6 L lens, with so far very mixed (read poor) results.

However I've heard good things about the 400 f5.6L prime and am wondering if there's any logic getting it instead of the 100-400, which is always at 400 anyway (except when I use it in the zoo where the variable zoom is very useful).

If not what else can I try to get more reach as the next lens up with Canon is the 500 f4 L which is about 5000 quid!

 

[CT]

You've pointed out the main problem with the 100-400L yourself - shooting small birds you'll pretty well always be at the 400mm end of the zoom range, so the 400mm prime makes sense as it's definitely sharper and a known crisp performer. The 100-400L does come into it's own for other situations though where that huge zoom range is very flexible.

I'm surprised you're not getting sharp results though from the 100-400L - it was my sole birding lens before I got the 500mm and I found it a crisp performer. It is a lens where you can get a bady copy though.

If I was replacing that focal length, I'd probably go for the 400mmL prime - it's lighter and very sharp, but doesn't have IS which is a pity.

There's no denying though that for a more adaptable lens for all situations, the 100-400L takes some beating.

Perhaps try some controlled test shots tripod mounted to make absolutely sure there's a problem with your 100-400L before you do anything hasty?

 

[MartynK]

The 400mm f5.6 has the edge for sharpness and AF speed, but the 100 - 400mm is an excellent lens and you should be getting good results. I know a couple of people who use it for birds, and reckon any slight shortcomings compared with the prime are outweighed by the extra flexibility.

It sounds like you've got a lemon, or there's another problem. Can you post some examples?

 

[squishy]

before buying a 400 f/5.6, get your 100-400 off to a canon service centre.

There are a few bad copies around, and it's worth making sure yours is performing up to standard before you try a different lens.

Personally I have the 100-400, because I wanted IS and closer focussing (I will sometimes use it for dragonflies). If it was solely a birding lens for me, the 400mm prime may have been more tempting.

 

[tlr]

Adding a 1.4 extender for a few hundred pounds might be worth a try - its something I'm toying with at the moment. The loss of a stop of light might not be as much of an issue in sunny Dubai as it is in murky Blighty.

I've had some great results with my 100-400, but some terrible ones too; the bottom line I think is that taking photos in the Uk of small brown birds or waders that are miles away is difficult. The skill is as much in getting close to the birds or being in the right place at the right time as it is wielding the equipment correctly.

Even with a 400mm (or 500mm) you have to be pretty close to get a great shot.

Good luck.

 

[seriousrikk]

Adding a 1.4 extender for a few hundred pounds might be worth a try - its something I'm toying with at the moment. The loss of a stop of light might not be as much of an issue in sunny Dubai as it is in murky Blighty.

The loss of autofocus, however, would be equally an issue in Dubai as it would be here

 

[the ghost]

loss of auto focus NO
you tape the top 3 contacts inside the extender auto focus returns it works on the x2 as well but you need sunnydays as it searches if not

 

[Jackwow]

before buying a 400 f/5.6, get your 100-400 off to a canon service centre.

There are a few bad copies around, and it's worth making sure yours is performing up to standard before you try a different lens.

Thanks, but I don't think there's anything wrong with the lens as it takes good shots of larger creatures.

I suppose the problem is lack of reach and a 400 prime wouldn't give more reach than a 100-400 fully extended but it might be sharper?

 

[seriousrikk]

loss of auto focus NO
you tape the top 3 contacts inside the extender auto focus returns it works on the x2 as well but you need sunnydays as it searches if not

OK, loss of autofocus without having to perform an unreliable modification on your converter then.

 

[CT]

OK, loss of autofocus without having to perform an unreliable modification on your converter then.

Heath Roboinson at best, and it didn't work for me when I tried it - the lens just hunted back and forth interminably, even in very good light. I know some people report a degree of success taping the pins on the 100-400L with results varying from one lens to another, but you're really taking liberties with pretty expensive bits of kit at either end of that converter!

 

[CT]

Thanks, but I don't think there's anything wrong with the lens as it takes good shots of larger creatures.

I suppose the problem is lack of reach and a 400 prime wouldn't give more reach than a 100-400 fully extended but it might be sharper?

I suspect a basic technique problem tbh Jack from the fact that you say it produces sharp results on larger critters, With tiny birds everything is against you getting sharp images hand held, as invariably there'll be soime cropping which just magnifies any focusing errors or even the slightest camera or subject movement. I rarely ever shoot birds hand held and when I had the 100-400L it was always on a tripod for shooting birds.

If you're desperate to spend some dosh, spend it on a decent tripod and a gimbal head. If you're at all serious about bird photography, you'll end up doing that at some stage anyway.

 

[seriousrikk]

Heath Roboinson at best, and it didn't work for me when I tried it - the lens just hunted back and forth interminably, even in very good light. I know some people report a degree of success taping the pins on the 100-400L with results varying from one lens to another, but you're really taking liberties with pretty expensive bits of kit at either end of that converter!

Totally agree

Before I added 'unreliable' to my post I decided to try the modification on my 400mm F5.6L with the 1.4x

On ai servo the lens never properly stopped trying to focus. On one shot the lens would usually have to make 3 or 4 minor adjustments before focussing stopped - and then it wasn't critically sharp.

I think I'll stick with live view focus when using my 1.4 until I can get my mitts on a 500/4

 

[CT]

Totally agree

Before I added 'unreliable' to my post I decided to try the modification on my 400mm F5.6L with the 1.4x

On ai servo the lens never properly stopped trying to focus. On one shot the lens would usually have to make 3 or 4 minor adjustments before focussing stopped - and then it wasn't critically sharp.

I think I'll stick with live view focus when using my 1.4 until I can get my mitts on a 500/4

Exactly my experience when I tried it.

The 1.4X TC performs brilliantly on the 500mm f4L. Mind you with the added effective reach of the 7D I'm finding I use the converter less and less. but it does produce great results when you need the extra reach.

 

[Jackwow]

If you're desperate to spend some dosh, spend it on a decent tripod and a gimbal head. If you're at all serious about bird photography, you'll end up doing that at some stage anyway.

Thanks CT, I have a Manfroto 055PROB tripod (bit dusty though) and a ball head. Don't know how easy it'll be to get a gimbal head here. Would a horizontal grip action ball head (Manfroto 322RC2) be any good instead?

 

[CT]

Thanks CT, I have a Manfroto 055PROB tripod (bit dusty though) and a ball head. Don't know how easy it'll be to get a gimbal head here. Would a horizontal grip action ball head (Manfroto 322RC2) be any good instead?

Youre tripod is fine then Jack, but that grip action ball head isn't ideal. With a gimbal head you're free to track the bird wherever it moves and keep that single AF point over the head/eye of that tiny target. When you're shooting birds it's best to think of the tripod and gimbal as rather like a bren gun mount than just a tripod.

The bad news is all gimbals tend to be expensive with the exception of the Manfrotto 393 which is just over a 100 quid I think, and comes with it's own mounting plate to mount the lens. I have one and heartily recommend it.