'Upgrade' of lenses, your thoughts appreciated! =]

nikkilouise · #1 (**permalink**) 30-04-2009, 04:19 PM

I currently have the Sigma 50-500mm, and lately I have been looking at selling this and getting the Canon 100-400 L IS lens.

I have looked at many reviews and have gotten the impression that the Canon will give sharper results, I also know its a lot lighter!

The main thing I was wondering is whether it would really be worth upgrading to the Canon? To me the option of IS is very promising

Just wondered if anyone has tried both lenses and knows how much of a difference the IS will make?

[I take a lot of pictures of birds in flight, so I don't use the tripod all that much!]

Thanks!
Nikki

Cellarman · #2 (**permalink**) 30-04-2009, 05:38 PM

I have the Canon 100-400 IS USM and find it a very handy lens, although I do wish that I had a longer focal length sometimes.

The following image was taken with this lens on a Canon 450D + the 1.4x converter. It's very heavily cropped!

nikkilouise · #3 (**permalink**) 30-04-2009, 05:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cellarman

I have the Canon 100-400 IS USM and find it a very handy lens, although I do wish that I had a longer focal length sometimes.

The following image was taken with this lens on a Canon 450D + the 1.4x converter. It's very heavily cropped!

Thats still a pretty sharp image, even at a high crop and with a converter, thats nice to know =]
Was that taken on a tripod?
Thank you for your reply!

Ollie · #4 (**permalink**) 30-04-2009, 05:46 PM

Hi Nikki.

I have the Sigma 50-500mm and although I don't have the Canon 100-400mm lens I do have the Canon 400mm f5.6L lens.

You say you take a lot of in flight shots, the Canon 400 f5,6L lens is regarded as one if not the best in flight lens available. I use it hand held for all my in flight shots and would highly recommend it.

It's lighter than the 100 - 400mm and is also slightly cheaper to buy. Just look in my Gallery for shots taken with it. Although it lacks the image stabilisation it is light enough to hand hold for in flight and I use it with a monopod for static shots rather than a tripod.

I'm not knocking the 100-400mm it's a great lens as well but I do think the 400mm f5.6L would be more suited to your needs.

Cellarman · #5 (**permalink**) 30-04-2009, 05:48 PM

It was taken this afternoon in rain and very poor light, with a shutter speed of around 1/8th second, on a tripod and using a remote release, even so, I had to wait for the wind to die down before I could take the shot, but I do frequently hand hold and get some good images.

nikkilouise · #6 (**permalink**) 30-04-2009, 07:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ollie

Hi Nikki.

I have the Sigma 50-500mm and although I don't have the Canon 100-400mm lens I do have the Canon 400mm f5.6L lens.

You say you take a lot of in flight shots, the Canon 400 f5,6L lens is regarded as one if not the best in flight lens available. I use it hand held for all my in flight shots and would highly recommend it.

It's lighter than the 100 - 400mm and is also slightly cheaper to buy. Just look in my Gallery for shots taken with it. Although it lacks the image stabilisation it is light enough to hand hold for in flight and I use it with a monopod for static shots rather than a tripod.

I'm not knocking the 100-400mm it's a great lens as well but I do think the 400mm f5.6L would be more suited to your needs.

i was having a look at that one yes =]
it looks like an amazing lens and the fact that it is also cheaper is brilliant

i just saw that it had a minimum focusing distance of 3.5m, is this going to be a downfall if a subject comes fairly close?

So you reckon the lack of image stabilisation isn't a problem for this lens then? If thats the case it looks like the perfect lens =D

Ollie · #7 (**permalink**) 30-04-2009, 07:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nikkilouise

i was having a look at that one yes =]
it looks like an amazing lens and the fact that it is also cheaper is brilliant

i just saw that it had a minimum focusing distance of 3.5m, is this going to be a downfall if a subject comes fairly close?

So you reckon the lack of image stabilisation isn't a problem for this lens then? If thats the case it looks like the perfect lens =D

I've never found the lack of IS to be a problem. The minimum focus distance I must admit isn't quite as close as I would like but it's only been a problem on the odd occasion. I've never had a problem with being too near for in flight shots in fact it's usually the opposite not near enough.

It's a tack sharp lens and is very fast to focus for a f5.6 lens locking onto the subject almost immediately.

Fair enough there are faster lenses such as the Canon 300mm f2.8 which performs well with a 1.4 or even 2x converter but you are looking at a much higher price for one of these. For the price I don't think the 400mm f5.6L can be beaten.

pressld2 · #8 (**permalink**) 30-04-2009, 07:51 PM

Hi Nikkilouise, I'm a Nikon user so can't offer an opinion on Canon lenses but I will say that if you're using a shutter speed slow enough that you need IS then it's too slow for birds in flight as you'll get blurring due to subject movement.

I have the Nikon 80-400mm VR lens which is broadly equivalent to the Canon 100-400mm IS. VR is "Vibration Reduction" - the Nikon version of IS - and I very rarely, if ever, switch it on. This thread explains why not: VR (or IS) - Is it worth it?

In your shoes I'd be very tempted to go for the straight 400mm lens and not worry about the IS. Ollie has shown what it can do in a skilled photographer's hands, his in flight shots are some of the best on WAB.

Dave P.

glsammy · #9 (**permalink**) 30-04-2009, 08:17 PM

I back up everything Roger and Dave said re the 400mm and the IS.
I had a Canon 300mm F4 IS with a 1.4X TC and although I was very happy with the image quality and the closer focusing I wasn't happy with the AF performance. The 400mm is much crisper; focusing faster and more accurately. I've never missed the IS,in fact towards the end of my use of that lens I switched it off as it tended to slow the camera continuous shooting rate.
Get the 400mm F5.6 L. You will not regret it.

Geoff F · #10 (**permalink**) 30-04-2009, 08:23 PM

Dave is correct about the shutter speed needed for flying birds. But what else do you want to do with that lens. Do you use the smaller sizes or mostly at 500mm.

I recently faced the same dilemma. But the lack of IS, a long minimum focusing distance and loss of smaller zoom range put me off the 400. But if I had just wanted a full distance lens, plus a 1.4x converter I would have seriously considered that lens.

Eventually I comprimised and bought the Sigma 150-500 which has excellent OS stabilisation and is good value. You do lose the 50-150 range but otherwise it is similar to the 'bigma'.

I do find the OS very useful for handheld shots.