Pros/Cons Canon 100-400 IS and 300mm 2.8 lens.

I'm sure this is a live one, but obviously the price of the 300 is the
holdback. Anyone out there use Velvia or Provia slide film with the 100 to
400 and what did they think of the results? I plan to buy one of these
lenses as we are taking an Alaskan cruise plus also for use in FL for birds.

Thanks.

Rick
Prattville, AL

From: "Rick Dowling"

I'm sure this is a live one, but obviously the price of the 300 is the
holdback.

Also the bulk and weight, it's in a different class and much harder to lug
around ...

Anyone out there use Velvia or Provia slide film with the 100 to
400 and what did they think of the results?

I don't have the 300 f/2.8 L IS (I guess that's the one you're talking about)
but I do have the 500 f/4 L IS, which has similar superb optical quality, and I
have a 100-400 IS as well. I've shot some Velvia in the 100-400 and quite a
bit of Provia 100F on wildlife. There's no comparison between the optics of a
fixed super-tele like the 300 or 500 vs the 100-400, but on the other hand if
you're coming from the consumer grade lenses like the 75-300 or 28-105 then the
100-400 looks pretty good by comparison to them.

Here's a quickie MTF chart I just made for you showing the 300 f/2.8 vs the 1-4
@ 100 and 400 mm ... http://members.aol.com/bhilton665/lenses.jpg ... the X
axis is the film plane with 0 the center and 21 the corner, the Y axis is
"quality" with higher being better ... they are plotting resolution and
contrast at f/8 and at wide open ... a "perfect" lens would start off at 1.0 at
the center and keep this to the edges of the film, which the 300 almost does at
f/8 ... a lens with serious drop off in the corners will graph like the
100-400, which tails off into Sigma-ville wide open, and in fact you can see
this vignetting on slides shot wide open, especially in low contrast light.

I plan to buy one of these lenses as we are taking an Alaskan cruise plus
also for use in FL for birds.

For the cruise I'd want the 100-400 for shooting from the boat, or the 300 if I
could set up a tripod on land. I wouldn't want to use the 300 hand-held on the
ship. For Florida birds I'd want the 300 with a 2x converter and a good tripod
for most of the shots, or the 100-400 for hand-held shots of birds in flight
(many bird photographers, including me, carry both a tripod mounted super-tele
and a 400 or 300 or 100-400 on a second body strapped on their shoulder for
flight shots) ... for image quality the choice is obvious since the 300 is one
of the best lenses Canon makes optically, but for other situations the 100-400
is more versatile, even if you sacrifice some image quality. Tough choice ...
and why I have both the 100-400 and the 500 f/4.

Bill

From: "Rick Dowling"

I'm sure this is a live one, but obviously the price of the 300 is the
holdback.

Also the bulk and weight, it's in a different class and much harder to lug
around ...

Anyone out there use Velvia or Provia slide film with the 100 to
400 and what did they think of the results?

I don't have the 300 f/2.8 L IS (I guess that's the one you're talking about)
but I do have the 500 f/4 L IS, which has similar superb optical quality, and I
have a 100-400 IS as well. I've shot some Velvia in the 100-400 and quite a
bit of Provia 100F on wildlife. There's no comparison between the optics of a
fixed super-tele like the 300 or 500 vs the 100-400, but on the other hand if
you're coming from the consumer grade lenses like the 75-300 or 28-105 then the
100-400 looks pretty good by comparison to them.

Here's a quickie MTF chart I just made for you showing the 300 f/2.8 vs the 1-4
@ 100 and 400 mm ... http://members.aol.com/bhilton665/lenses.jpg ... the X
axis is the film plane with 0 the center and 21 the corner, the Y axis is
"quality" with higher being better ... they are plotting resolution and
contrast at f/8 and at wide open ... a "perfect" lens would start off at 1.0 at
the center and keep this to the edges of the film, which the 300 almost does at
f/8 ... a lens with serious drop off in the corners will graph like the
100-400, which tails off into Sigma-ville wide open, and in fact you can see
this vignetting on slides shot wide open, especially in low contrast light.

I plan to buy one of these lenses as we are taking an Alaskan cruise plus
also for use in FL for birds.

For the cruise I'd want the 100-400 for shooting from the boat, or the 300 if I
could set up a tripod on land. I wouldn't want to use the 300 hand-held on the
ship. For Florida birds I'd want the 300 with a 2x converter and a good tripod
for most of the shots, or the 100-400 for hand-held shots of birds in flight
(many bird photographers, including me, carry both a tripod mounted super-tele
and a 400 or 300 or 100-400 on a second body strapped on their shoulder for
flight shots) ... for image quality the choice is obvious since the 300 is one
of the best lenses Canon makes optically, but for other situations the 100-400
is more versatile, even if you sacrifice some image quality. Tough choice ...
and why I have both the 100-400 and the 500 f/4.

Bill