![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Posted Sat Feb 23 5:35PM | 200 is sometimes too short and I am looking for a reasonably light weight, lens min 300mm for stock. Anyone using Canon 100-400 Lens for stock? if so, how is it performing for you? |
![]() ![]() Posted Sat Feb 23 10:33PM | Soft on the long end but a great lens in good light. I did however replace it with the 300 f2.8 as it was just not up to par under low light and the softness at 400mm. The IS also had problems and had to be sent off to Canon for repair. |
![]() Posted Sun Feb 24 3:12AM | great lens! but yes, bit soft on the long end and a bit slow comparing to later zooms. I replaced mine with the new white, 70-300L version, which is the best zoom I have ever had. |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Posted Sun Feb 24 3:54AM | ^ What's the situation with a lens hood for the 70-300L, Christian? |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Posted Sun Feb 24 3:57AM | thanks. 300f2.8 is far too heavy for traveling, I will check 70-300L |
![]() Posted Sun Feb 24 4:41AM | Posted By Whiteway: ^ What's the situation with a lens hood for the 70-300L, Christian? Hi! yes there is a lens hood, quite big and it comes in the box when buying. Getting this optic and youll never regret it. Its as good at 300 as it is at 70, no CA, distortion, etc. |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Posted Sun Feb 24 5:11AM | Posted By lagereek: great lens! but yes, bit soft on the long end and a bit slow comparing to later zooms. I replaced mine with the new white, 70-300L version, which is the best zoom I have ever had. Never looked into this before but it gets a fairly decent write up here: http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-70-300mm-f-4-5.6-IS-L-USM-Lens-Review.aspx |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Posted Sun Feb 24 5:29AM | Thank you, Christian. I am tempted! I have tried the 100-400, and I own the 400L f5.6. That makes it, perhaps, a not-quite-fair comparison. But the 100-400 looked soft to me, at 400ml. You have to trade that against the extra flexibility you get with the zoom. A common complaint against the 100-400 is that its push-me-pull-you zoom encourages dust to enter the lens. My testing was too short to notice such a problem. |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Posted Sun Feb 24 11:28AM | This question I posted a while back might have some useful info. All in all, I found the lens to be acceptable, but not good enough to hold on to. I sold it and haven't missed it at all. I did manage a few decent shots with it that ended up at Getty. |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Posted Mon Feb 25 10:45AM | Thank you all for the useful info and links. I think I will go with 70-300L... I will leave my 70-200f4 at home so it will not be any major increase my bag weight. |
![]() Posted Tue Feb 26 12:01AM | Posted By Whiteway: Thank you, Christian. I am tempted! I have tried the 100-400, and I own the 400L f5.6. That makes it, perhaps, a not-quite-fair comparison. But the 100-400 looked soft to me, at 400ml. You have to trade that against the extra flexibility you get with the zoom. A common complaint against the 100-400 is that its push-me-pull-you zoom encourages dust to enter the lens. My testing was too short to notice such a problem. I dont mind the push-pull actually ( Im old school ) you know. The 70-300L however is just so much better in all aspects and so easy to handhold. |
![]() Posted Tue Feb 26 12:05AM | Posted By craftvision: Thank you all for the useful info and links. I think I will go with 70-300L... I will leave my 70-200f4 at home so it will not be any major increase my bag weight. trust me you wont regrett it. I replaced both my 100-400 and the 70-200, with this one. Its been the price-tag thats put lots of ppl off getting it. Kelvin posted a review but also check out the Luminous-landscape and Fred-Miranda reviews if you like. goo luck. |
![]() ![]() Posted Wed Feb 27 3:50AM | Posted By lagereek: great lens! but yes, bit soft on the long end and a bit slow comparing to later zooms. I replaced mine with the new white, 70-300L version, which is the best zoom I have ever had. Thanks for that info Christian. I've got this one on my shopping list. I already own the 70-200 F4 IS but a little extra reach on full frame would be welcome. |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Posted Wed Feb 27 4:48AM | Well, you've done it now Christian. I've ordered the thing. Also looking into a cheap alternative for the tripod collar. |
![]() ![]() Posted Wed Feb 27 5:30AM | Check prices. The Yen has fallen 20% against the $ over the past few weeks. Make sure you get the benefit of the new exchange rate. |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Posted Wed Feb 27 7:16AM | ^ I guess you're based in the States, David. I'm getting around £250. off the Amazon price, here in UK. |
![]() Posted Wed Feb 27 11:30PM | Posted By Whiteway: Well, you've done it now Christian. I've ordered the thing. Also looking into a cheap alternative for the tripod collar. Good one! yeah this tripod collar is a joke, one would think Canon would throw in one or at least a fair price, for the more expensive optics. BUT!! here are the good news, unless low-light shooting, you wont need one. This marvel of a lens can easily be handheld down to 15-30/ sec. Ah you gonna love it. Tell me what you think when trying it out. (Edited on 2013-02-27 23:32:28 by lagereek) |
![]() Posted Wed Feb 27 11:35PM | Posted By hatman12: Posted By lagereek: great lens! but yes, bit soft on the long end and a bit slow comparing to later zooms. I replaced mine with the new white, 70-300L version, which is the best zoom I have ever had. Thanks for that info Christian. I've got this one on my shopping list. I already own the 70-200 F4 IS but a little extra reach on full frame would be welcome. Hi there! yes, that extra 100 reach comes very handy indeed. I dont know how many times I have stood there with my old 70-200, wishing for that extra reach instead of having to work my way into the picture. |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Posted Thu Feb 28 1:15AM | Posted By lagereek: Ah you gonna love it. Tell me what you think when trying it out. Certainly will, I'm looking forward to it. I'm used to using the 400ml with its tripod collar on a monopod, so I will search for cheaper options. They do exist. |
![]() Posted Thu Feb 28 1:50AM | Posted By Whiteway: Posted By lagereek: Ah you gonna love it. Tell me what you think when trying it out. Certainly will, I'm looking forward to it. I'm used to using the 400ml with its tripod collar on a monopod, so I will search for cheaper options. They do exist. If I remember correctly. Manfrotto and Benbo does something like tripod-collars and for half the price of the Canon. Check it out. |