400mm Canon / Canon fit lens advice

dinners

dinners

In Memoriam
Suspended / Banned
Messages
15,745
Name
Phil
Edit My Images
Yes
I'm contemplating a lens (probably used) suitable for wildlife photography for use with my Canon 40D but be worthy of using with a 5d MkII at some point in the future.

Really I'm looking for something with a little more reach than my old kit Canon EF 75-300 f 4-5.6 II USM lens which would be good for photographing birds, otters, seals etc whilst sitting (on and off tripod) or strolling along the loch shore.

Firstly I was hoping somebody could share any experience of the following two lenses - in particular does the zoom v fixed result in any difference in quality at the 400mm end ?

Canon 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 L IS USM
Canon 400mm f/5.6 L USM

I was also wondering about the following.

Sigma 120-400mm f/4.5-5.6 DG OS HS

Any advice / opinions / comparissons or indeed alternative suggestions based on what I want it for would be much appreciated.

Thanks
 
dinners said:
I'm contemplating a lens (probably used) suitable for wildlife photography for use with my Canon 40D but be worthy of using with a 5d MkII at some point in the future.

Really I'm looking for something with a little more reach than my old kit Canon EF 75-300 f 4-5.6 II USM lens which would be good for photographing birds, otters, seals etc whilst sitting (on and off tripod) or strolling along the loch shore.

Firstly I was hoping somebody could share any experience of the following two lenses - in particular does the zoom v fixed result in any difference in quality at the 400mm end ?

Canon 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 L IS USM
Canon 400mm f/5.6 L USM
I was also wondering about the following.
Sigma 120-400mm f/4.5-5.6 DG OS HS

Any advice / opinions / comparissons or indeed alternative suggestions based on what I want it for would be much appreciated.

Thanks
Click to expand...

In order of quality IQ's at 400mm, the prime (400mm) has a fast autofocus, very sharp, light and ideal as a wildlife lens. Would work well with a 1.4x TC, although your would only be able manual focus this lens with your 40D attached, same as the 100-400mm.

canon 400mm f5.6 sharp

canon 100-400mm f4-5.6 soft

sigma 120-400mm f4.5-5.6, would rather buy the bigma 50-500mm both softer
 
I've recently got the Sigma 120-400mm for motorsports and I have found it to be brilliant and it works really well hand held.

It's definitely terrific value for money but obviously not quite in the same class as a Canon L lens!

A definite thumbs up though! :thumbs:
 
I use the Sigma 120-400mm lens on an EOS 40D and can't fault it for the cash. If you want to see some images taken with it click on the link to my Flickr, pretty much everything uploaded in 2009 has been shot with that lens. It's really not that far off the Canon 100-400mm L, and in some ways (particularly the image stabilisation system) is better. Yes, at 400mm wide open it is quite soft, but so is the Canon lens, which is nearly double the price.
 
Thanks everybody - I will check out the pics.
 
As said, the prime will give you the best image quality but at the penalty of less flexibility compared to a zoom.

I found the Sigma 100-300 f/4 to be superb, and it works very well with a 1.4x teleconverter as well. Might be worth looking at as another very flexible option.
 
Tobers said:
As said, the prime will give you the best image quality but at the penalty of less flexibility compared to a zoom.

I found the Sigma 100-300 f/4 to be superb, and it works very well with a 1.4x teleconverter as well. Might be worth looking at as another very flexible option.
Click to expand...

Yes - In terms of the two Canon lenses I'm leaning toward the prime as most of the time I would use this lens at full length. I rarely use the 300mm at anything other than 300mm and more often than not need that little bit extra.

I will look into the others though.
 
dinners said:
Yes - In terms of the two Canon lenses I'm leaning toward the prime as most of the time I would use this lens at full length. I rarely use the 300mm at anything other than 300mm and more often than not need that little bit extra.

I will look into the others though.
Click to expand...

What about the 300mm f4 and fit a 1.4x TC as an alternative making it a 420mm f5.6, you'll still have autofocus capabilities with this setup, but the 400mm f5.6 is a good bird lens, better than the zooms.

The sigma 100-300mm f4 is also a very good lens, would buy that over the 120-400mm
 
pete.rush said:
What about the 300mm f4 and fit a 1.4x TC as an alternative making it a 420mm f5.6, you'll still have autofocus capabilities with this setup, but the 400mm f5.6 is a good bird lens, better than the zooms.

The sigma 100-300mm f4 is also a very good lens, would buy that over the 120-400mm
Click to expand...

will take a look.

maarten.dhaese said:
A direct comparison between the 100 400 and the 400 f/5.6:

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/lenses/forgotten-400.shtml
Click to expand...

Wow - there's quite a difference !
 
pete.rush said:
canon 400mm f5.6 sharp

canon 100-400mm f4-5.6 soft
Click to expand...

I've owned both and while I agree that the 400 prime is very sharp I'd never call the zoom soft. I've owned two copies myself and used three copies belonging to friends and have yet to find a soft copy.

maarten.dhaese said:
A direct comparison between the 100 400 and the 400 f/5.6:

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/lenses/forgotten-400.shtml
Click to expand...

It is an amazing copy, though I think it's a bit flawed... the five 100-400s that I have used have all been much sharper than the one used in that test.
 
Photoplus Canon edition just tested all these.

scores on the doors were..

Best on test - Sigma 150-500 (95%)
Best value - Sigma 120-400 (92%)
Canon 100-400 (90%)
Tamron 200-500 (85%)
Canon EF 400 (80%)

Not sure if you can find a copy.. But maybe some kind soul would erm Cough scan it for you...

Cheers

MIP
 
Just to clarify I have a Canon EF 100 400 IS USM L and I'm pretty happy with it. It's the sharpest long telelens I've got (and the heaviest!).

The reason for pointing at the Luminous Landscape review was that if you want the ultimate image quality at 400mm, the 400 f/5.6 is probably a better option still.

However, the 100 400 makes up for that in my view because it has the versatility of a zoom and it has IS, which is extremely useful on a telephoto.
 
Another one to throw into the mix - the 'Bigma' - the Sigma 50-500mm - heavy, but well rated for wildlife - The one on the 'For Sale' section recently (still?) is a Nikon fit unfortunately.

-Rob
 
Thanks folks. Certainly more food for thought now.
 
mipevo6 said:
Photoplus Canon edition just tested all these.

scores on the doors were..

Best on test - Sigma 150-500 (95%)
Best value - Sigma 120-400 (92%)
Canon 100-400 (90%)
Tamron 200-500 (85%)
Canon EF 400 (80%)

Not sure if you can find a copy.. But maybe some kind soul would erm Cough scan it for you...

Cheers

MIP
Click to expand...

I would dispute those score, especially if they weren't tested on a typical grey day in the UK (tests probably done in the states on a beautifully sunny day), and most of the time, like the prime, it would get hit for the price especially over something like the sigma, so I would severely take them with a pinch of salt.

The sigma 120-400mm 92%, hmmm maybe for value, but focus speed and coping with low light conditions, no way. The prime would be significantly better.

The problem with the 100-400mm is the quality control straight out of the box, some lenses need recalibration, but its still a good lens for something which is 9 years old and still competiting well with the competition, one of canons best selling lenses.
 
I had the same dilemma as you some time ago. My own inficated the following:
i)research revealed the
 
mipevo6 said:
Photoplus Canon edition just tested all these.

scores on the doors were..

Best on test - Sigma 150-500 (95%)
Best value - Sigma 120-400 (92%)
Canon 100-400 (90%)
Tamron 200-500 (85%)
Canon EF 400 (80%)

Not sure if you can find a copy.. But maybe some kind soul would erm Cough scan it for you...

Cheers

MIP
Click to expand...

If and thats a big IF i remeber that issue there was a lot of sigma ads in it for there lenes.
 
Sorry, I managed to post a reply before I finished typing and then lost the edited version.

Anyway,

When faced with the same dilemma, I found for wildlife photography length is everything. Lots of people use the 100-400 at the 400 end. The obvious choices are the zoom, the 400 prime or the 300+1.4tc. It seems that the prime has the best IQ but least flexibility but is the cheapest. The zoom offers greatest flexibility but arguably worst IQ (worst being relative cos it is very good). The 300 +1.4 offers more flexibility than the 400 prime but together slightly poorer IQ and costs more. Whatever you buy is a compromise between IQ, flexibility, IS and cost.

If you use a tripod IS is of limited use.

If you buy used you will be able to sell or swap with little money lost.

If you already have the 75-300 and need more reach, are you not duplicating much of what you already have with the 100-400 (although I accept that IQ will be better)?

For what it is worth, I bought the 400 prime. I love it. It is reasonably light, pin sharp and very fast focussing. I haven't used it with a TC but on its own it is fabulous.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top