100-400 - I took the plunge

[Words]

Well it took me all of 8 months to crack and get myself the 100-400L. I haven't had time to give it much of a work out but managed a few shots in the gloom this afternoon. Looking forward to some decent weather (joke!) over the next week or so, and may get in a trip to the British Wildlife Centre in Surrey if we do get some decent days. Been meaning to go there for ages, and I've now got a good excuse

Anyway, I thought I'd post a few of the test shots...

Flowers...


Pigeon in the rain...


Young Gulls...

[John]

Hi Words

Congrats on your new purchase. I bought the same lens myself last November and it was one of the best purchases I have made.

Excellent photos for your first attempts and things can only get better.

You are going to enjoy using that lens as time goes by, and the weather hopefully improves, and I look forward to some of your future images.

BTW save a few pennies more and go for a 1.4 teleconverter. I did and very rarely take it off. It gets me shots of birds and insects etc that without it would have flown off due to my close proximity to them.

Good luck with it.

John

[Interpreter]

Keep an eye on how your muscles are developing! Light it is not.

I have taken this lens with me on overseas trips and used it to produce some very good shots. The lens case which came with mine has belt loops on it and a shoulder strap. I think that the lens is too big to hang on a belt and if you keep the lens on the camera, it certainly makes it's presence known when it is hanging around your neck.

The extra weight of a 1.4 extender would hardly be felt, so it could be a very good buy. I hope that you will put your experience with this lens on the review page.

[Words]

John, I think I'll probably need to go for a tripod at some stage, but a teleconverter is at the back of my mind (and edging forward).

Interpreter, I know what you mean about muscles. Not light, and I'm still getting the hang of hand-holding it. Even more tricky one-handed (I often have a torch in the other hand when I'm out at night!). Oh for some decent weather.

[colincurry]

Congratulations. It is a great lens and so versatile. I echo what John has to say except that I don't use the 1.4 unless I think I need it. I do now use a monopod and find that this has helped a great deal and is pretty easy and light to cart around.

Enjoy

Colin

[Ollie]

Nice photos Words, and I agree with John about the teleconverter. I have a 1.4x teleconverter and I recently started using it with my Canon 400mm f5.6 lens and again like John it's got me photos of birds that I would not have got.
Roger

[John]

Originally Posted by Words

John, I think I'll probably need to go for a tripod at some stage, but a teleconverter is at the back of my mind (and edging forward).

Interpreter, I know what you mean about muscles. Not light, and I'm still getting the hang of hand-holding it. Even more tricky one-handed (I often have a torch in the other hand when I'm out at night!). Oh for some decent weather.

I must admit that I never use a tripod. With IS you shouldn't need it, so I would have thought that a Tripod would be an expense not needed (unless you need it for something else like a scope).

You will find that as good as the 100-400 is you do still need to get relatively close to birds for a half decent image. The 1.4 converter gives you that bit more distance allowing birds that bit more confidence to stay put.

I must admit that I have it slung around my neck for long periods but it does tend to hang heavy after a while. I then transfer it to my shoulder until I feel I can put it around my neck again.

John

[Hobjob]

Originally Posted by John

I must admit that I never use a tripod. With IS you shouldn't need it, so I would have thought that a Tripod would be an expense not needed (unless you need it for something else like a scope).

Johns 100 - 400 with x1.4 hand held photos speak for themselves.

Personally I find a tripod makes a difference, and a monopod is, for me, not as good as a tripod.

IF you buy a tripod, do get smething sturdy, not the flimsy jobbies that won't hold that weight steady in anything but zero windspeed.

I was very dissapointed in my scope until I put it a proper Manfrotto - the difference was (is!) amazing.

And I agree with John - start saving for the 1.4 now - It was John's set up at a birdforum meet at Minsmere that pushed me (damn him!!).

[Words]

I'm bound to end up with one, but I probably need to sneak the purchase past my better half. Also, I've not heard breat things about hat combo with the 400D.

What I actually need a tripod for is macro work, and possibly some sort of extender for the Sigma 105 lens. Recommendations greedily accepted

[John]

Originally Posted by Hobjob

Johns 100 - 400 with x1.4 hand held photos speak for themselves.

Personally I find a tripod makes a difference, and a monopod is, for me, not as good as a tripod.

IF you buy a tripod, do get smething sturdy, not the flimsy jobbies that won't hold that weight steady in anything but zero windspeed.

I was very dissapointed in my scope until I put it a proper Manfrotto - the difference was (is!) amazing.

And I agree with John - start saving for the 1.4 now - It was John's set up at a birdforum meet at Minsmere that pushed me (damn him!!).

Hi David

Thanks for the kind comments.

I hadn't realised that you had pushed out the boat and purchased a similar set up. What did you end up with?

John