In Praise Of The Canon 100-400L IS.

[CT]

My Canon 100-400L IS has been sadly neglected for some time due to me being fortunate in having much more expensive glass at my disposal, so it's tended to languish in the cabinet pining away for lack of love.

It suddenly occurred to me though what I dumbass I am, as this lens has always impressed me, and I'd never used it at all with the 50D which was bound to give the lens far more effective reach than it previously had.

You've guessed it - a test shot!

Full Frame Uncropped. 400mm, 1/320th at f5.6, 800 ISO. Handheld.

The Crop

Well I'm impressed anyway - there's no way I could have got away with a crop like this prior to the 50D.

It just re-iterates what I've always said, this is one great lens and it gets better mated to a 50D. It's certainly a lot more pleasant to cart around than most of it's more expensive stable mates, it's easily handholdable, and when you don't want to be laden down like a pack mule with kit it's a very attractive proposition indeed, as well as not needing a second mortgage to acquire one.

 

[trapper501]

Did you manual or autofocus that?

Still getting to grips with focussing here.

 

[CT]

Did you manual or autofocus that?

Still getting to grips with focussing here.

I never use MF for birds, it was Servo AF, centre AF spot only - IS was ON.

 

[mmcp42]

indeed
nowt wrong with that!

 

[trapper501]

I never use MF for birds, it was Servo AF, centre AF spot only - IS was ON.

Thanks, I'm very impressed with the autofocus, in speed and accuracy, my problem is always getting it to focus on the right thing.

I've had it pick up on a twig or blade of grass I hadn't even realised was there, great for macro from 5 metres!

 

[DonnaM]

Almost makes me want to change sides to Canon. On second thoughts Nah! But seriously, Mr DonnaM has a 50D and that with his Canon glass is awesome.

 

[CT]

Thanks, I'm very impressed with the autofocus, in speed and accuracy, my problem is always getting it to focus on the right thing.

I've had it pick up on a twig or blade of grass I hadn't even realised was there, great for macro from 5 metres!

The trick with birds is to try and get that AF spot on the eye, or on the head at least if you can. Those oof twigs and things that get in the way are something we just have to live with.

 

[fletch5]

hey CT, is it my eyes or is there something wrong above the birds head in the uncropped?

the white bits seem "odd"

 

[trapper501]

The trick with birds is to try and get that AF spot on the eye, or on the head at least if you can. Those oof twigs and things that get in the way are something we just have to live with.

That's a good tip about the eye. thanks.

I took a pic of a goose with the 70-200 f4 and found when I started cropping it I was there in the reflection in the eye. I hadn't consciously focused on the eye and in other shots of the goose I wasn't there so clearly. I'll remember that one.

 

[CT]

hey CT, is it my eyes or is there something wrong above the birds head in the uncropped?

the white bits seem "odd"

It's just the sky showing through the tree and giving that odd oof bokeh effect.

 

[Weetobix]

it's a gorgeous piece of kit alright - I was so glad I hired one for Safari

 

[buckas]

lovely test CT

still can't decide between this and the 400mm f/5.6 prime

oh and you've pretty much sold me the 50D this week with your pics + write ups

drew

 

[markta]

That Bokeh is something else!

Jo Fisher has been taking some shots with a new 400mm f5.6L and lots of the shots are within the Bird section..

Absolutely tack sharp, a close run between that and the 400mm f5.6 on the 100-400. I'd guess the prime will be a little sharper at 400mm :|

 

[B_M]

Not much wrong with them!!

Have you any comment on its use for sports?

 

[frank]

Don't have the 50D, but have a 40D and I have to agree the 100-400L is a cracker of a lens on it. It's got me some nice bird shots up close and sharp. I use it mostly handheld, seems easier carrying it on the arm rather than stowed away in the bag, thats when I start to feel the weight on the shoulder.

 

[markta]

Don't have the 50D, but have a 40D and I have to agree the 100-400L is a cracker of a lens on it. It's got me some nice bird shots up close and sharp. I use it mostly handheld, seems easier carrying it on the arm rather than stowed away in the bag, thats when I start to feel the weight on the shoulder.

You'd find the 50D even better with the extra resolution of being able to crop into the picture and still have sufficient pixels to keep IQ high

 

[CT]

lovely test CT

still can't decide between this and the 400mm f/5.6 prime

Well realistically, the prime has to be that tad sharper as well as being a bit lighter I'd guess. As far as birds go, you're always going to be shooting at the 400mm end of the zoom with small birds, so the zoom is a bit redundant really. For larger species though, and other walk round uses, the zoom is so handy, so it's a difficult call, and comes down to personal preference and anticipated usage.

oh and you've pretty much sold me the 50D this week with your pics + write ups

drew

Soz!

 

[CT]

Not much wrong with them!!

Have you any comment on its use for sports?

I don't shoot sports, but I suppose in dim light a larger max aperture would be a big advantage, not to mention more dosh! I've no doubt the lens would do the bizzo in most circumstances, while you'd sometimes find the max aperture a bit restrictive.

 

[StewartR]

Almost makes me want to change sides to Canon.

Mmm. Seriously there aren't many lenses for which I'd say it's worth switching brands. But this is one of them, and arguably the most mainstream too. If you're into wildlife and/or birds and/or aircraft, this lens is a very compelling reason to go down the Canon route.

 

[birdy961]

Got the lens

Just need to get the body now to replace mine:bang: shall keep saving

 

[HoppyUK]

That's very impressive indeed CT. Thanks

Another big advantage of this lens over the 400 5.6 is that it's got IS. Do you think you would have got that sharpness handheld at 1/320sec without it?

 

[Kerioak]

CT, I hope you don't mind me adding to your thread as B_M asked about sports. I am only rarely happy with my results at 400 mm but up to 380 - very happy - that could be more down to me.

Here are some examples using the same combination of 50D and 100-400 lens all at 1/640 sec, F/5.6 resized and watermark added, no other editing all shot in one burst - just over a second hand held (towards the end of the day), I think think this will probably give a better idea for sport use than if I pick out selected shots ?

1. 310mm

2. 310mm

3. 310mm

4. 310mm

5. 310mm

6. 275mm

7. 275mm

7. Crop from No. 6

 

[Ross2]

hi folks. away on course at mo so cant post any pis but my dad used the 100 to 400mm Is lens on a motorsport and i was shocked at the sharpness of the len compared to the 35 to 350mm i use. he used in a 400D body.
if you look at www.kpbphotography.co.uk under the severn valley link on main page and stage 1a all those are using the lens.
oh btw that was the second of using that lens for him. i was unimpressed that his pictures are better then mine
unfortunately the lens was only borrowed so had to give it back.

 

[B_M]

Thanks for posting that set of shots, Kerioak. I'll definitiely be rethinking this lens now - remarkable sharpness.

And they can be bought second hand quite reasonably.

 

[grumpybadger]

I was never keen on the 100-400 when I borrowed one but I took one in part ex for my 300/2.8 and I am really impressed with it. Wide open it is a bit soft at 400mm but fine up to about 370mm. Stop it down to f/7.1 or f/8 and it's pretty good through the range.

Given it isn't as sharp as my 400/5.6 prime was, if I was looking for a dedicated long lens, I'd buy the prime everytime. But, for convenience of the zoom wins every time. By getting a 100-400, I now have a 2 lens solution from 24-400mm that I am very happy with. Before, I had 4 lenses covering that range and could never take them all out at once!

I took mine on trial to see how I got on and ended up selling my 400/5.6 prime and 70-200/2.8 and keeping the 100-400...

 

[buckas]

thanks for posting opinions - post more sample shots everyone

 

[davol]

I have had the 100-400 for a couple of months,
and my keeper rate is still preety poor.
I am sure that if YOU ( the photographer) get it right this lens
is capable of great results.

These were some of the better ones ( first attempt at aircraft )
from Shuttleworth last month.

and a Crop

Davol

 

[buckas]

still can't decide between this and the 400mm f/5.6 prime

 

[andyred]

still can't decide between this and the 400mm f/5.6 prime

see if anywhere has them both in for you to try

I'm trying to decide re the 300 prime and the 100-400

 

[CT]

That's very impressive indeed CT. Thanks

Another big advantage of this lens over the 400 5.6 is that it's got IS. Do you think you would have got that sharpness handheld at 1/320sec without it?

You're welcome Hoppy. I should add that the cropped image is still nowhere near a 1:1 crop - about half of 1:1 in fact.

No - I really don't think I'd get the same sharpness at that shutter speed without IS, not consistently anyway. The thing with IS is that before it kicks in, you can can see the image dithering about in the viewfinder as you struggle to hold it steady, but the moment it kicks in you see the image become rock steady in the viewfinder. I wish all lenses had it - it's probably the biggest advance in lens technology since AF.

 

[CT]

CT, I hope you don't mind me adding to your thread as B_M asked about sports. I am only rarely happy with my results at 400 mm but up to 380 - very happy - that could be more down to me.

Here are some examples using the same combination of 50D and 100-400 lens all at 1/640 sec, F/5.6 resized and watermark added, no other editing all shot in one burst - just over a second hand held (towards the end of the day), I think think this will probably give a better idea for sport use than if I pick out selected shots ?

Christine, if those haven't been sharpened after reducing to web size, which is standard procedure for any shot, then they're impressively sharp and looking better than I'd expect. but a few shots of USM will; really make them pop.

 

[Byker28i]

I love mine so much with the 50D.

Posted on here before, but this was my first weekend with the 50D and I spotted a kingfisher. This was manual focus with the 1.4x added

even with the 40D it was great - 100% no crop

For sports, my usual shooting ground it's unbeatable as an all round lens

 

[48thEagle]

Here is one of my shots, taken at 400mm, F-8 1/250sec 100 ISO and 0.3 exposure bias.

 

[HoppyUK]

CT, I hope you don't mind me adding to your thread as B_M asked about sports. I am only rarely happy with my results at 400 mm but up to 380 - very happy - that could be more down to me.

Here are some examples using the same combination of 50D and 100-400 lens all at 1/640 sec, F/5.6 resized and watermark added, no other editing all shot in one burst - just over a second hand held (towards the end of the day), I think think this will probably give a better idea for sport use than if I pick out selected shots ?

6. 275mm

7. Crop from No. 6

Thanks Christine. I'm equally impressed with the focus tracking on that sequence. I thought 30/40/50D cameras were not supposed to be able to do that but I've also had good experience with my 40D and 100-400. Certainly not 100% success rate, but 7 out of 10 good and sharp.

CT, I agree IS is an abolutely brilliant invention. Why people knock it I have no idea. I have just paid a heck of a lot extra to get the IS version of the 70-200L 4, and happy to do it.

 

[trapper501]

I tried the focus on the eye thing, I'm not terribly good at it but hopefully I'll improve.

This was my best from yesterday at 400mm, but I've started a thread asking about autofocus as I think my technique isn't very good. Still grateful for the tip though, more practice needed.

 

[Bachs]

I tried the focus on the eye thing, I'm not terribly good at it but hopefully I'll improve.

This was my best from yesterday at 400mm, but I've started a thread asking about autofocus as I think my technique isn't very good. Still grateful for the tip though, more practice needed.

Just ordered this lens.
I need to brush up on my autofocus skills so I'll go and look for your other thread!

 

[trapper501]

Just ordered this lens.
I need to brush up on my autofocus skills so I'll go and look for your other thread!

Well your 1D should be a whole lot different at autofocus I think.

You definitely need to practice with this lens.

I'd read that there was a problem of not being able to move the focus without adjusting the lock as they were so close.

It wasn't until yesterday I realised that it is much more clever than that. The locking ring does rotate when you turn the manual focus but it doesn't affect the lock at all. Having set the level of friction that suits you then you can turn the manual focus when ever you want. The lock ring rotates with it but doesn't alter the setting.

 

[Bachs]

I'd read that there was a problem of not being able to move the focus without adjusting the lock as they were so close.

It wasn't until yesterday I realised that it is much more clever than that. The locking ring does rotate when you turn the manual focus but it doesn't affect the lock at all. Having set the level of friction that suits you then you can turn the manual focus when ever you want. The lock ring rotates with it but doesn't alter the setting.

Thats good to know...I'd read that too, along with 'dust pump' legend.
How are you getting on with the 'push/pull' zoom?

I hear people ae divided on it, but you get used to it with a little practice.

 

[trapper501]

personally I don't find the push pull thing to be the aspect that needs the most practice. Once you get the friction level to suit you then I think it is ok.

Any lens that extends on zoom is going to have an issue of sucking in air from somewhere, those with internal movement can move air around internally.

I think it is best to avoid rapid movements in dusty environments and give the seals a chance to do their job.

I'm finding the technique for using a long heavy lens and getting the focus right to be the area that needs practice.

Also I'd like some help on the best way to use it with a 40D. Should I stop it down for instance which would mean upping the ISO to get a decent shutter speed.

 

[HoppyUK]

personally I don't find the push pull thing to be the aspect that needs the most practice. Once you get the friction level to suit you then I think it is ok.

Any lens that extends on zoom is going to have an issue of sucking in air from somewhere, those with internal movement can move air around internally.

I think it is best to avoid rapid movements in dusty environments and give the seals a chance to do their job.

I'm finding the technique for using a long heavy lens and getting the focus right to be the area that needs practice.

Also I'd like some help on the best way to use it with a 40D. Should I stop it down for instance which would mean upping the ISO to get a decent shutter speed.

I think you have hit the nail on the head here Trapper. It takes a bit of skill and practise to get the most out of a long lens like this. It is quite heavy and cumbersome, but all things considered it is as easy to manage as 400mm gets. Focus is critical, as is a steady hand, even with IS.

But your point about the need to stop down is surely answered with CT's post at the top of the thread. His picture was taken with the lens wide open at f/5.6, at 400mm where this lens is supposed to be at it's weakest. Yet with solid technique, it is as sharp as you like!