Just hired a lens Canon 100-400 is l

thatone1967

thatone1967

Suspended / Banned
Messages
153
Name
Jim
Edit My Images
Yes
Off to the Eastbourne Air Show in a couple of weeks, have just ordered a hire of the above lens.
Never used decent "glass" before, my current lens I'd a Tamron 70-300 4.5-5.6.
Iam guessing that apart from the lens being better and heavier, there is nothing else I need to know?
Really looking forward to it!
 
It's a push/pull zoom system on it which I quite like once you get the preferred amount of resistance from the "tight/loose" ring.

It's a nice sharp lens and has two IS modes on it. One for general hand held usage and mode 2 which is for panning shots.
 
heavily rumoured that a mk2 is just around the corner.......turn of the year possibly, and twist rather than push-pull.
 
It's one of my favourite lenses, have hired it a couple of times over the years. Nothing really you need to know - just go out and use it and enjoy! I almost bought one recently, agonised over it a lot, but ended up going for the smaller 70-300 f/4-5.6 L IS USM simply because it's smaller lighter and with newer IS, meaning it's more likely to get good shots when used by my wife while we're travelling (I tend to do the driving), at a cost of that last 100mm. If I could afford it I'd actually buy both :-)
 
I have the 100-400 and you will be very happy with the quality. As has been said, the push pull is a little odd, but I use mine on a monopod and it works just fine :)
 
George said:
heavily rumoured that a mk2 is just around the corner.......turn of the year possibly, and twist rather than push-pull.
Click to expand...
Yeah, but you could have said exactly the same thing last year .. and the previous year ... and the year before that ...
 
Mike.P said:
When the MKII does make an appearance I would be prepared for around a 2k+ starting price.
Click to expand...
Don't hold your breath.

When Nikon replaced their aging 80-400 VR last year, the new version launched at £2449. I can't see a 100-400 Mk II launching any cheaper than that.
 
This was discussed a little while back and some are expecting the price of the MK I to increase as demand for it increases when they release the MK II at well over £2K.

Be interesting to see how it pans out. I'm glad I got my MK I when I did and it's a superb lens.
 
StewartR said:
Yeah, but you could have said exactly the same thing last year .. and the previous year ... and the year before that ...
Click to expand...
Want to have a small bet on that, Stewart?;);)
 
StewartR said:
Yeah, but you could have said exactly the same thing last year .. and the previous year ... and the year before that ...
Click to expand...
George said:
Want to have a small bet on that, Stewart?;);)
Click to expand...
I don't understand. You definitely *could* have said the same thing last year, and the previous year, etc. So what exactly do you want to bet on?
 
StewartR said:
I don't understand. You definitely *could* have said the same thing last year, and the previous year, etc. So what exactly do you want to bet on?
Click to expand...

Well, all I'm saying is that this time I'd put money on an announcement of a replacement this year with availability either end 2014 or early 2015....
 
Looking forward to seeing the results.

I'm seriously considering either one of these or the 300mm f4 L.
 
right... need some advice now on shooting the lancs tomorrow. Forecast looks good, will be somewhere between bright sunlight, and maybe a little cloud cover.
I usually shoot in Shutter Priority mode, to allow for the props to have some blur, at around 1/125, but in the past, I have had blur on the aircraft too (particularly when shooting helicopters), but I am guessing that the IS will help with this?
 
I'm seriously considering either one of these or the 300mm f4 L.[/QUOTE]

Just bought the 300L with a 1.4 Extender ......Wow.
 
thatone1967 said:
its just arrived... GOD it's heavy! Really looking forward to using it tomorrow. Watch this space.
Click to expand...

I always find that amusing, because i view the 100-400 to be as light as a feather. But then i realise it's because i've spent years using the big whites.
Hope you have fun :)
 
I've used one for years, wouldn't be without it! I'm sure you'll be impressed. I look forward to seeing the results! The friction ring on mine isn't marked tight/loose, its marked Yorkshire/ Lancashire LOL!!!
 
thatone1967 said:
right... need some advice now on shooting the lancs tomorrow. Forecast looks good, will be somewhere between bright sunlight, and maybe a little cloud cover.
I usually shoot in Shutter Priority mode, to allow for the props to have some blur, at around 1/125, but in the past, I have had blur on the aircraft too (particularly when shooting helicopters), but I am guessing that the IS will help with this?
Click to expand...
I'd cancel both IS modes mate, pump up the ISO to 200 or higher if it's cloudy.
Us TV mode, try and shoot at 650 and if your very luck and it's bright F8 ( the F8 aperture with good light is the sweet spot).
You won't get many chances for this picture as it won't happen again after next month so don't worry about prop blur, go for capturing the scene clearly.
Just my opinion though.
 
I cancel both modes when shooting moving aircraft as I find ( and hear ) that IS on this lens doesn't really suit aircraft photography (certainly I have found that out) if you look at the RIAT 2014 folder on my Zenfolio site, all those pictures taken with the 100-400 had the IS turned off.

If your using the lens up to 400mm try easing back a bit too, 300-350 on F8 in good light is the sweet spot it seems.

Good luck tomorrow :-)
 
Well.. I have to say, I really struggled with the lens. I was renting with a view to eventually buying one, but after today, I really am not sure. Will maybe try it again before I decide..

Eastbourne 2014 626 by jimpritchard2, on Flickr
Eastbourne 2014 623 by jimpritchard2, on Flickr
Eastbourne 2014 616 by jimpritchard2, on Flickr
Eastbourne 2014 615 by jimpritchard2, on Flickr
Eastbourne 2014 612 by jimpritchard2, on Flickr
Eastbourne 2014 541 by jimpritchard2, on Flickr
Eastbourne 2014 540 by jimpritchard2, on Flickr
 
Last edited:
The lancs look fine at that size but it's difficult to get a better look on Flickr as your page is showing private.

Dunno if you turned the IS off or not but I always keep it on for prop planes because of the shutter speeds you have to use to get decent blur. Sensor needs a clean though :)
 
Last edited:
Long lens shooting requires a totally different mindset and you should be prepared for much early disappointment. Panning technique, choice of shutterspeed, aperture etc... for wildlife, I choose IS off, f/8, 1/1000 and auto ISO. If I were panning shots of cars or planes, I might choose IS off, 1/125 to 1/320 depending on the look I were aiming for (or the subject I'm aiming at), auto ISO and f8 if my techniques were well practised. Not a guide, but more a pointer - don't be disheartened if your shots appear blurred. This stuff needs lots of practise. Hiring a long lens intermittently often doesn't let you get the best out of them!
 
Last edited:
Personally I would have gone for a wider aperture or increased the ISO in order to get the shutter speed higher. With that 400mm its effectively a 640mm lens (400*1.6 crop factor) therefore you should be shooting at a higher shutter speed in order to get a sharper image, unless you are panning with whatever you are photographing, however from the shots posted it would appear that you are shooting against a blue background which is fairly consistent in terms of colour therefore you wouldn't need such a lower shutter speed.
 
Hi mate,

What was your focusing mode? Spot? Looks soft, that's for sure.
Also I'd have gone with a higher ISO and then higher shutter speed, and I'd have tried spot focussing on 1 aircraft possibly rather than anything else as theses a lot of sky and water to focus with.

Remember the sweet spot for this lens is 300-350 on f8 too.

Ok, for a first time out with a lens of this size etc it's not bad. Don't think it's the equipment, it's the getting used to the equipment. I'm 2 years in with my 100-400 and you should have seen the rubbish I was shooting at Fairford on the Sunday!

Chin up, you got to photograph all those merlins, lucky sod :-)

Cheers
Dave
 
To be honest, I have seen many Lanc pictures, where the props are frozen, so everything was geared towards prop blur, I could have left it full auto, and the shutter speed would have been a good deal sharper, but I dropped it down to 100, which I am guessing is why the focus is so soft.
 
Ok, that's a possibility.
Like I said, it takes a bit of practice to get into the groove with this lens, don't be disheartened mate.

I'd be happy with those pics, that's for sure. You've recorded history that may never get repeated in that location.
I am jealous! :-)
 
The problem with IS is that, although it saves many shots, if you're too quick on the shutter you actually create blurred shots because you expose whilst the IS gyroscope is spinning up to stabilise the lens. I would suggest turning it off for everything that might require a quick reflex 'decisive moment'. It's amazing the difference it can make depending on your shooting style, and if you keep getting blurry shots it might be a simple remedy.

I shoot f/8 on FF because DoF at extreme lengths soon disappears, and eyes-in-focus is paramount.
 
Last edited:
I think I might have another crack with it, at another air show, but I think the combination of the weight, the wind (Beachy Head was very windy) and the fact I had never used it before, was a combination that was destined to fail. Having said that, the actual glass was great, and I know that "Good glass" will be my next investment.
Any suggestions for a non IS lens that is maybe slightly easier to handle?
 
I havn't seriously shot aviation, however I think it should be OK.
I do shoot motor sport trackside (mostly with a 40D) and it depends on the track - on one particular track it is almost always at 400mm (unless you want cars in a scene).
At the other one it is mostly at around 350-400mm even though the cars can be uncomfortably close at times.
Ocassionally it will be too long. Most of the guys that use them also have a 70-200 or a 200 in the bag or on a second body.

#1 Here it would be oK

Photographers by dicktay2000, on Flickr

#2 Here it would be too long for quite a few shots. That's me and I am using a 70-200 on a full frame camera.

Trackside (Me). by dicktay2000, on Flickr
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top