If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
400mm for 10D
I am considering buying a 400mm telephoto for my 10D.
Which gives the best quality 400mm 5.6L or 100-400mm L IS 4.5-5.6 zoom or even 200mm 2.8L U/2 + 2x convertor (giving f4?). Cheers |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
b4 wrote:
I am considering buying a 400mm telephoto for my 10D. Which gives the best quality 400mm 5.6L or 100-400mm L IS 4.5-5.6 zoom or even 200mm 2.8L U/2 + 2x convertor (giving f4?). Cheers The 400mm f/5.6L is clearly better. Art Morris also rated it the fastest autofocus telephoto lens for wildlife action. See bulletin #140: http://www.birdsasart.com/bn140.htm It's one of his 10 important bird photography facts, number 6. Personally, my 100-400 is not a real sharp lens, but others seem to have shaper ones. Another option is the 300 f/4 L IS (advantage over the 400 is IS), and a 1.4x TC. I use that and it is much sharper than my 100-400. With the 300 + 1.4x, you have 420mm f/5.6 IS. On a 1DMII or other pro bodies, you can autofocus at f/8, so with a 2x, you get 600 mm f/8. Roger Clark Phots at: http://www.clarkvision.com |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
In message ,
"Roger N. Clark (change username to rnclark)" wrote: Another option is the 300 f/4 L IS (advantage over the 400 is IS), and a 1.4x TC. I use that and it is much sharper than my 100-400. About the same, here. It seems my 300 is about 320 and my -400 is about 360, so the 300+TCcombo actually has a narrower FOV. -- John P Sheehy |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
|
#5
|
|||
|
|||
|
#6
|
|||
|
|||
"b4" wrote in message
... "Roger N. Clark (change username to rnclark)" wrote in You say the 400 / 5.6 is clearly better, and I don't doubt you, but the review sites say: lens - photozone/photodo/photoreview 100:400 - 3.94 / 3.6 / 4.73 400/5.6 - 3.56 / --- / 4.43 300/4 IS - 4.04 / 3.4 / 4.71 Do you think they got good 100-400's ? I think only Photodo do systematic lens test. All other sites rely on user reviews. For many users, the 100-400IS clearly is more versatile and would "automatically" receive good review. I read a review comparing Canon 100-400 to Nikon 80-400 and the Canon is quite poor. It becomes comparible at f/9 to f/11 but that's quite useless in most situations. Many people are questioning about Photodo's rating for 300/4 IS though. It seems to be way lower than it should really be. If you want all around lens, by all mean, get the 100-400IS. If you want an easy to use and sharp 300 and and quite good 420 (might even be better than 100-400@400) with 1.4x teleconverter, get the 300/4 IS. I like this set up. 400/5.6 is really a specialized lens. It would possibly be the sharpest lens at 400mm when using a tripod, but without IS and at f/5.6, it's pretty tough to use. Not recommended. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
|
#8
|
|||
|
|||
400/5.6 is really a specialized lens. It would possibly be the sharpest
lens at 400mm when using a tripod, but without IS and at f/5.6, it's pretty tough to use. Not recommended. From: The Canon MTF chart for the 400mm f5.6 is not all that great. The low-contrast line for f8 never goes above 0.94, whereas the same line for the 100-400 @ 400 is hugging the 1.0 mark. The high-contrast lines for test lines parallel to the frame diagonal for both wide-open and f8 are the only sore spots for the 100-400 @ 400, as they drop off faster for it. The MTFs for lines perpendicular to the diagonal are clearly in favor of the zoom by a wide margin. Here are the MTF charts of four of Canon's 400 mm lenses, the f/2.8 L IS (one of the best lenses made with a near-perfect MTF graph), the 400 f/4 DO IS, 100-400 IS @ 400 and the 400 f/5.6 L ... http://members.aol.com/bhilton665/canon_400mm.jpg ... the biggest problem with the 1-4 is the rapid corner drop-off (into no-man's land) wide open, something I've seen in low contrast situations too many times. The 400 f/5.6 L is pretty close to the much more expensive 400 f/4 in performance and compares well with several other Canon lenses not pictured that have reputations for excellence and have similar MTF charts. My wife has the 400 f/5.6 L and I own the 100-400 IS (we both have 500 f/4 IS lenses which are our primary telephotos though). I've shot both of them a fair bit. The 400 5.6 is better for flight shots on birds since the min focus distance is a bit long and so it AF's quicker, plus IS is of no use for flight shots (except for the specialized situation where you're panning at long shutter speeds in IS mode 2) and is actually a hindrance since it slows AF acquisition. However the 400 is not a good all-around lens since it's limited to one focal length. If you have a really good shorter zoom like the 70-200 f/2.8 or f/4 L then it's a good second lens, I feel. The 100-400 IS is more versatile since it covers a wide focal range and the IS is very valuable in many situations. For example when we went to the Pribilof Islands to photograph birds we took the 400 for flight shots and a 70-200 for messing around (80% of the shots were taken with the 500's), leaving the 1-4 behind. When we went to Denali a month later we left the 400 home and took the 1-4 because many shots of bears and wolves would happen from a bus and the zoom plus IS was very valuable in that situation. Bill |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Bill Hilton wrote:
From: Jer out of all the zooms I had, that was the only one with push-pull zoom control. It was exceedingly difficult to deal with that oddball lens in less-than-favourable postures, ie. lying on a tree limb, in a rocking canoe, hanging off the side of radio tower, etc. and mistakeningly moving the focus ring. The Canon 100-400 has a ring that lets you adjust the tension on the zoom so you can leave it loose if you need to zoom fast or moderately tight or even lock it down so you can't change focal length without loosening the ring first. This takes care of many of the problems people experienced with push-pull zooms in the past. Yessir, it sointently wood. I forget how may pieces that lens was in. Got glue? -- jer email reply - I am not a 'ten' |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
400mm f5.6 lens vs 200mm f2.8 lens with 2x teleconverter | greg | Digital Photography | 25 | September 5th 04 02:13 AM |
Extension Tube + 400mm lens question | Eric Miller | 35mm Photo Equipment | 15 | September 3rd 04 11:40 AM |