Canon L series IS

Byker28i,

I have set my mind on a Canon L with IS. Also, I will either buy new or used with a recent date code.

DreamerUK,

Thanks.

John
 
Byker28i said:
Anyone rate the 35-350? I remember borrowing one from the caterham press officer at Nurbergring omce and was reasonably impressed, but that was in my early days of non L lenses.
Click to expand...

I had one for several years and considered it to be the ultimate walkabout at the time. It would be fine for general wildlife but its resolving power would fall short of today's offerings when looking for the finer feather detail on garden birds.
John seems to be firmly set in the need for IS so the 35-350's replacement, the 28-300IS L would be a more suitable option.

Bob
 
Viking said:
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
Click to expand...

I was in not too a disimalr boat to you a while ago.

I already had the 70-200 2.8, and was using this as my sport / wildlife lens, but even with a 1.4x, it was just not cutting it, needing too harsh a crop to get anything I was really happy with.

That's when I started looking around. In the end I chose the 100-400 above the 300 and 400 primes as I wanted the extra flexibility to get the closer shot if it presented itself.

More than happy with the choice, just took a little time to get the hang of the push / pull, although I do find I'm playing with the tension ring at the moment to find my own sweet spot.

Sharpness is better than the cropped 200 + 1.4x combo, but this is the first lens I'm using without fitting a filter, so don't know if that's anything to do with it, I have not had time to play enough yet to be sure.

During a recent weekend away, the 100-400 was the only lens I used, so quite versatile. I suspect it will be between the 24-70 and the 100-400 now unless I'm shooting in low light in which case the 70-200 may come out to play again.
 
Bob,

Thanks for the 28-300 suggestion. I have ruled that one out since it wouldn't be able to take a tc and retain AF.

John
 
Furtim,

I suspect that this is a decision many have to make. The 24-70 would fit nicely with the 100-400.

At the moment it is a close call.

John
 
Viking said:
Bob,

Thanks for the 28-300 suggestion. I have ruled that one out since it wouldn't be able to take a tc and retain AF.

John
Click to expand...

I wasn't suggesting that it would be right for you John....just a better option than its "father" given the IS capability. Any super-zoom is going to have resolution issues that leave it floundering in the wake of the primes.

Bob
 
Bob,

I do understand that your suggestion was a reply to the previous post and not a recommendation for myself.

John
 
Furtim said:
..just took a little time to get the hang of the push / pull, although I do find I'm playing with the tension ring at the moment to find my own sweet spot.
Click to expand...

Strangely enough I didn't find this an issue and I thought I would. I tend to unlock completely to the smoothest and it's very quick to zoom easily to the required point. Just remember to lock completely when moving around as I've heard of people breaking their IS when it's dropped from zoomed in to full out.

Viking, if you want to try mine we can probably get together somewhere local one evening later next week. Just to rub it in, I got mine second hand from here for £600 just after I joined :D
 
Byker28i,

Thanks for the invite. I live 10 miles north of Swindon. Perhaps we could meet at Coate Water. Never been there since I started golf and used to frequent their pitch and putt. Either way I am quite flexible were we meet.

Please pm me re the times and place suitable to you.

John
 
How about you go out a couple of times and just wind you 70-300 out to 300 and keep it there for all photographs.

If you like it, then decide if it was long enough or if you need more, and if you didnt then get the 100-400. Simples.
 
Blue Eagle,

An excellent solution and one that will tend to lean toward the 100-400. However, I will give it a couple of tries.

The purpose of this thread is to find out other people's views/experiences with these lenses and perhaps see a few images taken with a 1.6 crop camera.

John
 
Viking said:
Also, reviews report that the 100-400 has quality issues; it seems like a lottery on the lens you get - very good or acceptable.
Click to expand...
Well, if it's a lottery, it's the kind where you should definitely buy a ticket.

I have bought 20 copies of the 100-400L. (I now have 18. One was destroyed and one was stolen.) They were all thoroughly tested before commissioning and were all fine. I have hired them out to customers 215 times and nobody has had a bad word to say about any of them.

That doesn't mean there aren't copies out there that slipped through the QC net. But the few people who've got a bad one make a lot more noise than the many, many people who've got a good one. And it does suggest that perhaps you shouldn't let your buying decision be swayed too much by this "issue".
 
Well said Stewart. I've also heard about the so called push pull getting dust in, but has anyone actually had this and proved it was caused by the push pull?

I'd love Canon to update this lens, constant f4, or imagine if it was f2.8:love:
 
StewartR,

Thank you for taking the time to post. Your comments are valuable with respect to the QC of the 100-400.

John
 
On a simple count the 300 prime has four supporters and the 100-400 has eight. There were a few who covered both tracks.

I would like to thank all who contributed to this thread including DreamerUK and Byker28i who posted some images.

John
 
I ended up buying a used 100-400 off another forum. Just over a year old, very little use. I'm very happy. Just trying to work out how I can "introduce" this lens to Mrs Viking!!!

I have since added a used (one month old) 24-105.

I just the the buying addiction.

Thanks again.

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