Canon L series IS

Viking

Viking

Messages
436
Name
John
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi,

I am suffering from review overload.

Wondering which lens to buy.

I have just upgraded to a 40d from my 450d. I currently have kit lens, nifty fifty and a 70-300 IS USM. A relative newbie.

My main interests are garden birds, wildlife parks, the upper Thames and a bit of lunar images.

My choices are:
70-200 2.8, I have a 2X teleconvertor
300 f4
100-400

Any thoughts/experiences will be gratefully received.

John
 
The 2x converter is pants on the 70-200mm 2.8 so I would look at the 100-400 or the 300 f4.

I'm sure the 2x would male the f4 a f8 and slow down the autofocus? but someone here will clarify.
 
I understood that a 1.6 crop factor camera could only use a 1.4 tc on a f4.

John
 
I use a 300 f4. its great. I am trying to get hold of a 1.4x tc. I wouldn't go for a 2x.....
 
It seems that both the 300mm and the 100-400mm lenses are ageing.

Also, reviews report that the 100-400 has quality issues; it seems like a lottery on the lens you get - very good or acceptable.

John
 
Viking said:
It seems that both the 300mm and the 100-400mm lenses are ageing.

Also, reviews report that the 100-400 has quality issues; it seems like a lottery on the lens you get - very good or acceptable.

John
Click to expand...

Those lenses are aging because canon don't really need to update them. The IS is still very good and they are both cracking lenses.

My recommendation to you is have a look at your telephoto images and see which focal length you use the most. The 300F4 IS would be my choice coupled with a 1.4x convertor.

Which model convertor do you have now?
 
The 400/5.6L should also enter the reckoning, especially for the birding side of things.

Bob
 
all of my stuff is shot with the 300f4l + 1.4 convertor i love the set up. you can check out some of my shots from the link in me sig :)
 
Richard,

Thanks for that recommendation. What do you use the 300 for? With my present 70-300 I tend to use it at the 300 setting.

My 2x tc is a Kenko-Tokina C-AF Teleplus MC7. I wouldn't be using it unless I bought a 2.8 lens. I bought it before I was aware of the 5.6 restriction.

John
 
Bob,

I am retired and can't hold my current 70-300 with the IS switched off. I do need an IS lens.

John
 
68lbs,

I understand that there is a slight decrease in IQ but that a 2X will work on a f2.8.

DreamerUK,

Thanks for the recommendation. What do you use your 300 for?

John
 
Swings and roundabouts...

The 300 f4 is an excellent lens, very sharp with superb colour rendition and bokeh and will also take a 1.4 extender without degrading image quality too much..

Whether 420mm f5.6 is the same quality as the 400 f5.6 I can't answer, but obviously primes have limitations composition wise whereas the zooms offer flexibility without having to move position.

I believe only the 1 series bodies will AF at f8 (centre point only)...
 
I have a 100-400 and its a great allrounder, it gives you great flexibility for many subjects, value for money:)
 
grumpybadger said:
Use a tripod?
Click to expand...
He speaks the truth.
I have taken some pretty good images hand held - but recently each image I have in my collection that really shines is using the tripod

Viking said:
Richard,

Thanks for that recommendation. What do you use the 300 for? With my present 70-300 I tend to use it at the 300 setting.

My 2x tc is a Kenko-Tokina C-AF Teleplus MC7. I wouldn't be using it unless I bought a 2.8 lens. I bought it before I was aware of the 5.6 restriction.

John
Click to expand...
John, if you are buying Canon L I expect you would want to consider a better TC too, the Kenko Pro 300 range at a minimum. Good glass needs good quality TC's.

I use my 300 (sometimes with 1.4) for birds mainly now. I'm still very much in the learning territory mind - previously I was pointing it motorsports types and our canine friends. I rarely use it below 300mm too, there are occasions but they are very rare and I could live without those times (And I would have bougt a 300mm canon prime had funds allowed!)
 
68lbs said:
:eek:

I was advised it was ok when I got my 70-200. :cautious:
Click to expand...

Okay is probably the right word if the range is from poor, okay, good, very good, excellent :)

I have a 100-400 and although it frequently is not long enough I am happy with the pictures I get from it - would love to try a prime 300 or 400 though
 
Viking said:
Bob,

I am retired and can't hold my current 70-300 with the IS switched off. I do need an IS lens.

John
Click to expand...

Shaking's good John....it's when you stop shaking that it's time to worry :(

Bob
 
Viking said:
Hi,
My main interests are garden birds, wildlife parks, the upper Thames and a bit of lunar images.
Click to expand...

So Long, wide, wide and long?

Not sure you can cover all that with one lens. I've got a 10-22, 24-105, 70-200 and 100-400 to cover everything.

The 100-400 is a great lens but I wouldn't use it with a TC unless you go manual focus. It's F4-F5.6 which means you go to F8 at the long end with a 1.4TC and you lose autofocus. Great for moon shots.
 
Thanks for all the great replies. Much appreciated. The score seems to be 3 to 3, with the 70-200 not yet off the starting line.

With the 300 I will also buy a canon 1.4 tc. That will give 420 at 5.6 and I still maintain AF.

With the 100-400 at the long end will give 400, but I couldn't achieve automatic focus because its 5.6 at that end.

I would appreciate it if anyone can post images from these lenses, preferable on a 1.6 crop camera.

John
 
Bob,

Thanks for these few kind words. I must be one of the few Vikings to have this affliction. I put it down to drinking too much coffee when I was younger. That's my story!!!

John
 
Byker28i,

We are almost neighbours. I live in that small town, on the Thames just north of Swindon.

Roy, Kerioak and Byker28i,

Are the images sharp at the long end of your 100-400. If so, is your lens relatively new?

John
 
some of mine 300 + 1.4

cropped from landscape to portrait range about 4 - 5 metres
_MG_1653.jpg


cropped from landscape to portrait range about 4 - 5 metres
_MG_1520.jpg


cropped from landscape to portrait range about 4 - 5 metres
_MG_0777.jpg


slight crop for comp range about 3.5 - 4 metres
_MG_1290.jpg


slight crop for comp range about 5 - 6 metres
_MG_8468ju.jpg
 
Wouldnt the 100-400 maintain AF at the long end if you didnt use the TC though? If so, then that would be my choice due to the versitility and your lack of other range.

Mike
 
Viking said:
With the 100-400 at the long end will give 400, but I couldn't achieve automatic focus because its 5.6 at that end.
Click to expand...

You get autofocus at 5.6.

You'd only lose autofocus if you used a teleconverter with the 100-400.
 
DreamerUK,

Thanks for posting these images. Taken with the prime lens, they certainly look sharp with a tc. How close were you, and/or how much cropping did you do?

John
 
MJ Sebbings,

Yes, the long end the 400 is at 5.6 - so no tc in order to maintain AF.

MJ Sebbings and MarkRichardson,

The versatility is a good point in favour of the 100-400 and I could use a tc on manual focus.

John
 
Viking said:
Byker28i,

We are almost neighbours. I live in that small town, on the Thames just north of Swindon.

Roy, Kerioak and Byker28i,

Are the images sharp at the long end of your 100-400. If so, is your lens relatively new?

John
Click to expand...
Sorry - work break

LOL - I nearly asked as the Thames starts just outside Cirencester :D
This is my 100-400 at 360. This was with the 40D in Jan.
Canon EOS 40D
1/125s f/5.6 at 360.0mm iso800
108016257.jpg


This is it with a 1.4tc and manual focus on the 50D. If I'd have thought some more I'd have used live view to focus better but this was through the viewfinder. My first use of my 50D
Canon EOS 50D
1/640s f/8.0 at 560.0mm iso400
110242884.jpg
 
The 70-200 is a great lens, but not really suited to what you are asking for. For birds etc you need long, so 200mm is a little short and the 70 is too long for landscapes etc.

I suppose there's always the 35-350 if you can find one and you wanted one lens to cover all.

Of course what you really need for birding is:
http://www.mpbphotographic.co.uk/index.php?id=23&product_uid=1148

That would work great with a 1.4x and 2x TC :D
 
Byker28i,

Lovely images. The first one helps with it being the same camera. Both using your 100-400. Does this lens stay on your camera for the majority of the time?

Thanks for the link to mpb, wouldn't we all find a place for that one.

John
 
100-400 gets used a lot. Mostly I shoot sport, motorsport and football/rugby.

The lens that stays on my camera always is my 24-105, a great all round 'walkabout' lens
 
100 - 400 l glass i would

If your looking for distance you cant really go wrong with this

Its the big red L that makes you wanna buy it
 
My suggestion would be to give a monopod a try, won't just help with stability, but will also reduce the weight you need to hold, and some make a nice hiking stick.
 
I will have been reluctant to use a Vebon Carbon Fibre monopod that I bought in January. Perhaps I will have to give it a fair trial.

John
 
There's a choice of 3 lenses for birds and wildlife in that price range

400mm f5.6
300mm f4
100-400mm f4.5-5.6

you could use a 1.4x TC on the 300mm and maintain autofocus, but you could also use a TC with the other 2 lenses and manual focus. Both the primes are faster focusing and sharper than the 100-400, but you have the versitility of a zoom.

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