1st lens audition results

[claudermilk]

Here's a few on the better results from my long tele lens auditions. Those of you paying attnetion to the gear forum knows I'm looking at a number of longer zooms. First up is the Canon 100-400. Great results, though I hate the handling of the lens.

http://claudermilk.smugmug.com/photos/195412474-M-1.jpg
Lorikeet

http://claudermilk.smugmug.com/photos/195502380-M.jpg
Macaw

http://claudermilk.smugmug.com/photos/195502537-M.jpg
I've got my eye on you

[Richard]

Those images look very good. What do you hate, the push-pull? I have been considering this lens as well. I'm guessing that you would get used to it after a while. What I find attractive is the range and quality for the price. :dunno

[kdog]

For my money, push-pull is the only way to go on this lens. When you get some wildlife suddenly pop up in front of you, you need widen your field of view RIGHT_NOW, or you've blown the shot. This is a long lens. The last thing in the world I want to do is feel around for the zoom ring and twist it. That critter(s) will be long gone. Much better to just grab the lens and slam in to position (hopefully not too hard). One learns to set the friction drag just-so to facilitate this.

I love my 100-400. :lust I have the 400mm F5.6 as well, but if I had to pick one, it would definitely be the 100-400.

http://www.jacara.com/cpg144/albums/page/IMG_3458.jpg

Cheers,
-joel

[dbaker1221]

terrific shots!!!!:clap

[Maestro]

Great captures. I have this lens along with a 500mm and I grab the 100-400 probably 80% of the time. For the price, it is a must have lens for wildlife photographers shooting with Canon. You will not be disappointed and the push-pull is really a non-issue with me.

[Giphsub]

Great shots. I am getting big lens envy. But that will have to wait at least a couple more years...

[claudermilk]

...away for the weekend. Thank all, I'm really happy with the optics of this lens. I'm also pretty darn pleased with my adjustment to the longer reach--first time out at 400mm & f5.6 max for me. The first few shots sucked enough to see it in the LCD--I've gotten spoiled with all f2.8 zooms.

Yes, the push-pull is one thing I'm not used to & didn't care for. I suspect the lock ring wasn't working 100%--it was a well-beat rental lens. I am pretty darn quick with the ring zooms (slam from wide open, full-stage shots to head & shoulders of one performer in my theater stuff pretty much instantly). It is definitely a different animal from what I'm accustomed to. Size & weight was a nice surprise--about the same as my 70-200/2.8, so not the huge, heavy monster I was expecting.

I'm still going to be looking at Sigma's offerings in the range (Bigma 50-500, 100-300 [+TC], maybe 80-400) and Tamron's 200-500. Specs are too close to call on paper, thus my auditions. Prices on the third-party lenses are a decided edge over Canon at about 70% the price.

[Maestro]

...away for the weekend. Thank all, I'm really happy with the optics of this lens. I'm also pretty darn pleased with my adjustment to the longer reach--first time out at 400mm & f5.6 max for me. The first few shots sucked enough to see it in the LCD--I've gotten spoiled with all f2.8 zooms.

Yes, the push-pull is one thing I'm not used to & didn't care for. I suspect the lock ring wasn't working 100%--it was a well-beat rental lens. I am pretty darn quick with the ring zooms (slam from wide open, full-stage shots to head & shoulders of one performer in my theater stuff pretty much instantly). It is definitely a different animal from what I'm accustomed to. Size & weight was a nice surprise--about the same as my 70-200/2.8, so not the huge, heavy monster I was expecting.

I'm still going to be looking at Sigma's offerings in the range (Bigma 50-500, 100-300 [+TC], maybe 80-400) and Tamron's 200-500. Specs are too close to call on paper, thus my auditions. Prices on the third-party lenses are a decided edge over Canon at about 70% the price.

When looking for a longer reach down the line, since you already have the 100-400mm area covered I'd look at a 500mm prime. For the price, I have been relatively happy with my Sigma 500mm prime. It doesn't have the IS like the Canon version nor do I think the IQ is equal (but close), but it is a good performer and it has a nice price/performance ratio. I just couldn't justify the $1,500 more that I would have paid for the Canon. However, the Canon 500mm prime is one heck of a great lens. I may some day sell my Siggy and go with that one. Who knows?

[claudermilk]

But, I don't have the 100-400 range covered yet. This was a rental-thus the thread name. :deal

I'm also looking at the Tamron 200-500, Sigma's Bigma, 100-300 (plus TC--apparently it takes one very well), and maybe 80-400. An outside possibility is the 400/5.6L & TC. I plan on posting the best results from each lens as I try them out & a few biased opinions on the handling of the lens.

[Deadeye008]

Awesome sharpness and color! I need one of those!

[zacker]

oh man i really really want this lens!!! thanks guys, what next, go to some starving, 3rd world nation and walk around, eating a pizza???

lol

[riddim_maker]

Seems like a great lens to me, judging by your post.
At the moment this is probably the best choice of telezoom for canon users.
Happy shooting whatever your choice.

[Shasoc]

The 100-400 ia a very versatile lens that I found invaluable in certain circumstances.
Very nice shots, BTW.

[Maestro]

But, I don't have the 100-400 range covered yet. This was a rental-thus the thread name. :deal

I'm also looking at the Tamron 200-500, Sigma's Bigma, 100-300 (plus TC--apparently it takes one very well), and maybe 80-400. An outside possibility is the 400/5.6L & TC. I plan on posting the best results from each lens as I try them out & a few biased opinions on the handling of the lens.

Misunderstood. Well, I can definitely recommend the 100-400mm. Awesome lens! :thumb I am curious to find out what you think of the others.