Canon 100-400mm f/5.6 L Lens, opinions?

[Mark_C]

Hello,
Just wanted to know what owners' opinions of this lens are. I already own a Canon 24-105mm F4/L but find it's too short for quite a lot of applications. I used to own a Canon 70-200mm F4/L (without IS) but found that on a full frame camera the 200mm length was still too short for quite a lot of occasions.

I thought that the focal length offered by this lens offered continuity with my current lens' focal lengths and would give me a signification boost in what I can zoom in on if required.

It will be mostly used on a tripod however there might be occasions where I'd have keep it handheld.

Just want to be double sure that owners are happy with theirs before considering looking out for one second hand.

Thanks,
Mark

 

[Mike Jackson]

I've had some cracking shots with mine. I rarely use it on a tripod. The only issue is weight, I had to swap from an Optech pro strap to an R strap because it was making my neck sore. Some people don't like the pump action zoom but I find it fine.

 

[tirc83]

I love mine. Wear it around my neck no problems when out birding etc. I've owned the 400 f/5.6 as well and found no difference in the results so sold the prime in favour of the versatility the zoom offers.

 

[danbroad]

An evergreen lens choice. The perfect zoo lens, with or without a tripod.

 

[Olly_K]

I love mine. I've owned the 400 f/5.6 as well and found no difference in the results so sold the prime in favour of the versatility the zoom offers.

That's interesting because im trying to sell my 100-400 and grab the 400mm f/5.6.

But having said that I do love my 100-400, its probably one of the best lenses I own. I've found that it really works well on sunny days. Push/pull zoom is fine once you get used to it, its actually quite good to use when wanting to quickly zoom in and out.

I think it's one of those lenes that you just have to own in your life

 

[squishy]

my, this is a popular lens at the moment. There's been several 100-400 threads over the past few days.

It's a cracking lens, produces sharp results across the zoom range with a minor quality drop off at 400mm wide open.

I'd only be trading mine in if canon release a 400mm f/5.6 prime with IS and closer focussing.

 

[Byker28i]

I've found that it really works well on sunny days.

I kinda know what you're saying, but actually I find it really versatile in all light conditions. I was shooting rugby with it last weekend on really dark, grey overcast conditions and it was brilliant. ISO 1600 to get the shutter speed upto 1/500th or more, f5.6 (or f4) and it was great.

I think it's a brilliant lens, really versatile and you don't notice the weight.

 

[tdodd]

I've had mine for 3.5 years. It is my most used lens and I am very happy with it. I've considered a 400/5.6 prime, because that lens does supposedly have the edge for BIF photography, but the zoom is so much more flexible. Definitely a good zoo lens, aircraft lens, wildlife and birding lens, motorsport lens. It can even turn its hand quite well to portraits. IQ is good too.

Here's a recent shot from my 7D and 100-400 with 100% crop and no edits. This was wide open at 400mm...

If you want action then here's one again from the 7D and 100-400 at 400mm, f/5.6 and 1600 ISO. This has had some minor editing....

There are more examples in my recent Whipsnade thread, taken in grim light and some through glass - http://www.talkphotography.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=288707.

 

[Mark_C]

Hello,



Thanks for the response! Sounds very promising. Looking at the push/pull mechanism I couldn't say it would bother me a great deal. I shall take a look around and see if anyone has one up for sale. Looking at eBay and on this forum there never seems to be many for sale which in a way is quite promising.

EDIT: Tim, those are fantastic pictures, lovely and sharp with vivid colours, wow!

One of my possible uses this year for this lens will be motorsports. Will be going to Oulton park in April/May so could be the perfect choice for me!

 

[cw318is]

I have one, best lens I own and certainly the one I use the most at the moment. Yeah the weight can be an issue so I usually have it on my shoulder rather then round my neck, and a monopod is quite useful with it as well. Nice and sharp and I've shot down to 1/30 handheld with the IS and its still been sharp.

They do crop up from time to time on here, alternatively there are some quite good deals available on new ones as well. Don't know what your budget is but might be worth having a word with Kerso.

 

[tdodd]

Just noticed the 5D2 in your kit list. Here's a 5D2 example, hand held at 400mm, f/5.6, 1/160. Sharpening is at Ligtroom defaults.

For a 100% crop hand held at 400mm and 1/160 I think that is not too shabby.

Something a bit more challenging, again with the 5D2, again wide open at 400mm, and again with no sharpening adjustments....

They're not great shots, but that's no fault of the lens.

 

[tdodd]

p.s. one thing to check for, especially if buying second hand, over time the tightening ring for the zoom adjustment can begin to wear. Pieces of black "tape" start to appear and eventually the ring loses its grip. Overtightening to compensate will just end up grinding the ball bearings into the lens barrel. Mine started showing these signs after about two years of ownership, but I got by for another year before finally sending it into Canon to be fixed. There is a current discussion thread about this here - http://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?t=190098

 

[tdodd]

Oh. I suppose you want some motorsport examples now. I'll have a look.

EDIT :Here you go. I won't bother with crops. EXIF is included....

 

[dougan]

Just as I was going to get the Sigma 150-500, this throws a spanner in the works!
The Canon picture and build quality is superior, lighter in weight also. It is also £400 more and loses 100mm of telephoto to the Sigma.

Not sure what to do now! I could add a 1.4 convertor when funds permit, this would even that side up, but then you could have nearly bought two Sigma's!

12 months interest free at Jesopps is looking favourite, so the difference would be a extra £35 a month.

Time to do some thinking!

 

[artyman]

Nothing wrong with the Sigma 150-500, it has a better OS than the Canon, IQ is similar, though it is heavier, but it does have the extra reach which on a FF could be useful. Either lens would be good.

bit of a cropped shot
http://SPAM/c3whur/Birds/Img_5951c.jpg

 

[tdodd]

Dougie, If you fit a reporting 1.4X or 2X TC to a lens slower than f/4, which the 100-400 is throughout the focal length range, then you will lose conventional AF on all but the 1 series cameras. AF can be fooled into attempting to work by taping the pins on a reporting TC or by using a non-reporting TC, but the AF system will be operating outside spec and results are likely to be variable and possibly poor. If you use Live View and Live AF then that should work quite well, but for action shooting you will struggle with a TC in place.

Pin taping thread - http://www.talkphotography.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=289489.

Ken, how's the AF speed on the Sigma, especially at the long end? Does it do well with fast action close up, like BIF coming head on, rapidly approaching vehicles and running dogs?

 

[artyman]

I find the AF fine, though to be honest I haven't used a lot of other similar lenses to be able to make a meaningful comparison. The canon 400 f5.6 prime is considered to be the best birding lens at this sort of length, though of course you have no zoom and the MFD may be a problem.

 

[Mark_C]

Tim, those images are breathtaking!! Well done!

I'm really concerned about the friction ring issue though and I'm glad it was brought to my attention. Looking on google it seems this is a widespread problem with the lens and has put me off somewhat.

There are people who've been getting this issue after like 14 months of use, which is quite poor. Is the cause of this issue due to method of use or is it destined to happen to anybody no matter how careful they are? I'd rather not take the chance if it ends up costing me £100 to get the mechanism repaired due to canon choice of using poor materials.

 

[tdodd]

The lens is hugely popular and I suspect many people have the lens for several years without ever seeing the problem manifest itself. Of course, when the problem does occur you will no doubt hear/read about it. If the problem does not occur then there is unlikely to be a big song and dance made, so be careful when simply hunting down Google evidence. You are unlikely to get a balanced and statistically meaningful perspective.

For my own part, like I said, I've had the lens for 3.5 years and although I thought I was being careful I ultimately experienced the problem. Obviously the more heavily used and more frequently zoomed the higher the risk of fatigue/failure, but it perhaps also takes a degree of unsympathetic use to accelerate the issue - i.e. zooming the lens when really the friction ring is set a bit too tight to be zoomed freely. I may have been guilty of that in the past.

Having had mine repaired I now almost always leave the friction ring loose. For use in normal shooting positions that is sufficient to hold the focal length where I need it to be. For shots of the moon or wandering about, where the lens is near vertical, that is not enough. Then I will tighten it if need be, but I am now careful to fully loosen the ring if I want to change focal length. As an example, in my whole day of shooting at Whipsnade last Saturday I never once adjusted the tension ring. There was no need. It came out of the bag loose, stayed loose all day and went back into the bag loose.

If you read the thread I linked to on the Birdforum you will see that someone has improvised a solution out of tape.

 

[vicmac]

Im having a bit of dilema in this regard, Ive been advised against the 100-400mm but am on a budget so cant afford a 300 2.8L, I had a sigma 120-400mm and used it last season for motorcycle racing, performance was OK up to about 300mm but by 350mm the image quality seemed to tail off and the auto focus (with an EOS 50D) became really poor, Id maybe consider the 100-400 if I thought it would perform for me.

The problem have is a number of people have advised me that the AF is slow and the IQ poor, I was thinking about a 300 f4L?

 

[tdodd]

I think it is easy to make good equipment look poor, in the wrong hands, but much harder to make poor equipment look good no matter what skill level you are at. When people say the AF is slow and the IQ is poor you need to be sure they are being critical only of the equipment and not of the photographer.

Personally I think that some of my examples with 100% crops demonstrate that the lens has decent enough IQ and focusing that is adequate for most needs. I think that when they say the 100-400 is not all that the comparison is against the 400/5.6L prime lens. I don't doubt that the 400/5.6 prime is sharper and faster, but I bet it's pretty crap at shooting at 170mm or shooting sharp when hand held at 1/50. It isn't too clever when it comes to focusing close in either, needing an extension tube for close subjects.

I've never used the 300/4L but I have read that its AF isn't too quick either, and if you add a 1.4X to get to 420/5.6 that probably won't help speed it up.

I used to own a 50D. I'll see if I can dig up some "action" examples with that camera and the 100-400.

EDIT : I don't have any decent examples of oncoming action shots with the 50D and 100-400 wide open at 400mm. The best I can manage are this pair....

Please click the resize bar for slightly better quality.

At f/7.1....

Wide open but not a fast closing speed. (It probably did not help that my framing was off regarding AF point placement)...

Of course, I'm showing pixels here, rather than whole images, and for action shooting that is hard on camera, lens and photographer. IMAGE quality should be plenty good enough with this lens.


EDIT : one more, wide open at 400mm....

Note that the above three examples are all without additional sharpening - just raw files displayed with Lightroom defaults.

 

[AndyB1976]

Tim/Ken - some quality examples on this thread!!

cheers


Andy

 

[squishy]

The 300 f/4 x1.4 delivers IQ VERY similar to the 100-400 at 400mm.

The friction ring thing is a known issue, but honestly it's no worse than what you can get with the sigmas. Generally canon have better quality control than sigma, but the 100-400 is a bit of a weak point.

I know many people on wildlife forums using the sigma superzooms or the 100-400, and just as many sigma users have had issues to repair.
These zooms are something both manufacturers need to improve on in terms of quality control.

My 100-400 has fine AF performance. It's instantaneous at 100-200mm, then fast from 300-400mm. Instantaneous at 400mm with the 6.5m limiter set.

 

[postcardcv]

I love mine. Wear it around my neck no problems when out birding etc. I've owned the 400 f/5.6 as well and found no difference in the results so sold the prime in favour of the versatility the zoom offers.

me too - I had both prime and zoom at the same time and kept the zoom... the 100-400 can get shots that the 400 f5.6 cannot, it's a much better alrounder and it's plenty sharp enough. I've had the 300 f4 too and to be totally honest there's little or nothing to choose between the three options in terms of IQ or sharpness, but the zoom is clearly the most flexible option. Personally I've not been impressed by the Sigma 150-500 - I had one on trial for a bit and was very disapointed in it, not much more than an old 170-500 with OS. Three friends bought the Sigma as cheaper option with more reach, all three have since changed to the Canon.

 

[Mike Jackson]

I got my favourite shot last year with the 100-400 at 400 f/5.6 on my 50D.


Poser Moi? by Mike Jackson1, on Flickr

 

[Mark_C]

The pictures posted here from this lens are fantastic! Far too good for me to consider anything else. I think I may hold out, save a bit more and buy the lens new, at least it'll be a fresh copy with a canon warranty, not that it'll count for much.

I guess if I can get away without having to use the locking ring continuously when it isn't required then that'll help towards preventing the issue occuring.

 

[StewartR]

I'm really concerned about the friction ring issue though and I'm glad it was brought to my attention. Looking on google it seems this is a widespread problem with the lens and has put me off somewhat.

Hmmm. How many of these lenses have Canon made? (Well over half a million judging from the serial numbers.) How many problems have you seen reported? How many of them were complete numpties or had (unknowingly) bought the lens from a complete numptie? And how many people bother to post to say that their lens works fine?

Wearing my (now somewhat old and dusty, but still functional) statistician's hat, I would suggest that the evidence for describing this as a "widespread problem" is on the flimsy side.

On the other hand, I have THIRTY 100-400s which ought to be enough for some statistically meaningful data. When I get into the office I'll dig out the maintenance records and I bet I'll be able to put your mind at rest.

 

[StewartR]

Sorry, accidental duplicate post. Can't delete it from within the Android app...

 

[POAH]

the 100-400 is a great lens - the push pull zoom means you can zoom very very quickly. on a 40D I found the focus to be quick and accurate, the IQ great but due to the smallish max aperture it would struggle for focus at motorsport in low light. I'd get another in a heart beat

 

[Mark_C]

Thanks for all of the responses guys, definitely going to get one now! Just need to find a decent second hand one, anybody want to sell theirs?

 

[squishy]

Thanks for all of the responses guys, definitely going to get one now! Just need to find a decent second hand one, anybody want to sell theirs?

Can you hang on a couple of years till I can afford the 300/2.8 or canon bring out a 400/5.6 IS?

 

[StewartR]

On the other hand, I have THIRTY 100-400s which ought to be enough for some statistically meaningful data. When I get into the office I'll dig out the maintenance records and I bet I'll be able to put your mind at rest.

OK, we have 30 100-400s and the average age of them is a little over 2 years, so we have about 65 years' worth of experience with them. In that time we've had 12(*) problems with the zoom/focus mechanism, so that works out to be about 1 per 5 years of use on average. I expect our lenses see a fair bit more use than most individuals' do, and of course we have no control over how stupid and/or careless our customers are. So I would expect that with one careful owner you shouldn't expect to see more than 1 failure per 10 or 20 years on average.

(*) Not counting 3 instances where the customers tried to force the zoom mechanism when it was locked, and caused so much damage that the lens was beyond economic repair. Ouch!

 

[squishy]

OK, we have 30 100-400s and the average age of them is a little over 2 years, so we have about 65 years' worth of experience with them. In that time we've had 12(*) problems with the zoom/focus mechanism, so that works out to be about 1 per 5 years of use on average. I expect our lenses see a fair bit more use than most individuals' do, and of course we have no control over how stupid and/or careless our customers are. So I would expect that with one careful owner you shouldn't expect to see more than 1 failure per 10 or 20 years on average.

(*) Not counting 3 instances where the customers tried to force the zoom mechanism when it was locked, and caused so much damage that the lens was beyond economic repair. Ouch!

May I quote these figures when anyone tries to tell me the 100-400 is an unreliable lens?

 

[StewartR]

May I quote these figures when anyone tries to tell me the 100-400 is an unreliable lens?

By all means, and please feel free to invite them to contact me (details on the LFH web site) if they want more information.

 

[Craft]

I wonder if the friction ring wear stories are due to misuse.

My lens is secondhand (bought here). I removed the tripod ring and was a bit concerned to find some black dust, which I think is from the "paper" in the friction ring assembly.
However, the lock works fine though and only needs a little turn to engage it, it will turn much further, but you don't need to screw the thing up tight, just enough to prevent it sliding, as someone else said half the time you don't even need to do the ring up anyway.

I wonder if some people do the ring up very tightly all the time and cause the wear?

My lens is 3/4 years old and had a fair bit of use by its previous owner.

 

[squishy]

under the tripod ring? That's completely the wrong place for 'pump dust'.

 

[Craft]

under the tripod ring? That's completely the wrong place for 'pump dust'.

Its not from the pump, its from the friction ring assembly. As I understand it there are layers of a material a little like crete paper in the friction ring set up, some people have seen black dust/bits of paper shed from the friction ring, this coincides with the friction ring failing.

Maybe what I found wasn't from the ring, either way its not come back and the lens is faultless, shame the operator isn't the same!

 

[Mark_C]

I wonder if the friction ring wear stories are due to misuse.

My lens is secondhand (bought here). I removed the tripod ring and was a bit concerned to find some black dust, which I think is from the "paper" in the friction ring assembly.
However, the lock works fine though and only needs a little turn to engage it, it will turn much further, but you don't need to screw the thing up tight, just enough to prevent it sliding, as someone else said half the time you don't even need to do the ring up anyway.

I wonder if some people do the ring up very tightly all the time and cause the wear?

My lens is 3/4 years old and had a fair bit of use by its previous owner.

This may well be the case. Looking a lot of threads from various forums it seems to be an easy mistake to lock the friction ring down and forget to losen it off completely when adjusting the zoom. I think with a little bit of TLC these lenses should last as long as any other.

Well that's what I'm hoping anyway!

 

[StewartR]

I wonder if the friction ring wear stories are due to misuse.
...
I wonder if some people do the ring up very tightly all the time and cause the wear?

I think that's quite possible. I'm not sure whether it's entirely fair to call it "misuse" though, because it's not necessarily obvious how tight it needs to be. One could argue that canon should have designed it to prevent over-tightening.

As I understand it there are layers of a material a little like crete paper in the friction ring set up, some people have seen black dust/bits of paper shed from the friction ring, this coincides with the friction ring failing.

That's it exactly. I'm not sure exactly what the material is - the bits that I've seen shed off look more like carbon fibre, though obviously they aren't. But in all our experience I don't think we've ever seen any of this stuff come out of the lens - it just collects on one of the internal elements. It's unsightly, but harmless and not detrimental to image quality.

... it seems to be an easy mistake to lock the friction ring down and forget to losen it off completely when adjusting the zoom. I think with a little bit of TLC these lenses should last as long as any other.

Forgetting to loosen it off is only an "easy" mistake if you're stupid or careless, I would suggest. But if you're not stupid or careless, then I agree there's nothing to be concerned about in the design.

 

[squishy]

Its not from the pump, its from the friction ring assembly. As I understand it there are layers of a material a little like crete paper in the friction ring set up, some people have seen black dust/bits of paper shed from the friction ring, this coincides with the friction ring failing.

Maybe what I found wasn't from the ring, either way its not come back and the lens is faultless, shame the operator isn't the same!

Yes, but the tripod ring is in a different place on the lens to the friction ring. I find it hard to see how it could have got from the friction ring to under the tripod collar.