Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 IS L Topic

Redskin301 · Post by **Redskin301** » 11 May 2007, 07:28

I have this lens in my assortiment since yesterday, i will use it for the first time during the airshow of Bierset and the Metz spottersday

Tom Tiger · Post by **Tom Tiger** » 09 Jun 2007, 15:03

Cool, I really like to hear the results on that.

I'm missing some info in this thread though...

My 100-400mm IS USM has 4 switches....
manual/af on off
IS on off (obviously)

But also IS 1 and 2, 1 for static and 2 for moving objects

plus, focussing distance, 1.8 and 6.5. Now searching around the web most recommend setting the latter to 6.5 to get a slight increase in speed.

Could the latter been the cause of the formentioned problems? Just my two cents.

Testing mine I haven't found any problems (fingers crossed) But I'll give it a real workout on the coming Volkel Airshow

boele · Post by **boele** » 27 Oct 2008, 09:08

Hello,

Is there anyone who has experience with the Canon 100-400 mm lens in combination with the Canon 40D?

Regards,

René.

John Rambo · Post by **John Rambo** » 27 Oct 2008, 09:17

boele wrote:Hello,

Is there anyone who has experience with the Canon 100-400 mm lens in combination with the Canon 40D?

Regards,

René.

I am using my 100-400 in combination with my 40D. Nice combination in my opinion.

boele · Post by **boele** » 27 Oct 2008, 09:35

John Rambo wrote:
boele wrote:Hello,

Is there anyone who has experience with the Canon 100-400 mm lens in combination with the Canon 40D?

Regards,

René.
I am using my 100-400 in combination with my 40D. Nice combination in my opinion.

Hello Marien,

Oké, good to hear that. What about the sharpness in the 300-400 mm range that a lot of people are complaining about?

Thanks.

Tom Tiger · Post by **Tom Tiger** » 27 Oct 2008, 09:36

Same here, as you can see this is rather an old thread, and I've upgraded beginning this year to the same combo, a 40D with the 100-400mm L IS USM.

IMHO, I LOVE this combo.... fast and flexible.

You can find a few examples of shots I made with this combo on Flickr

Leeuwarden 2008
http://www.flickr.com/photos/tomtiger/s ... 718921166/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

and Kleine Brogel 2008
http://www.flickr.com/photos/tomtiger/s ... 238984044/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
(not the best of weather, dark rainy, small shower inbetween)

In short, I'm very happy with it

John Rambo · Post by **John Rambo** » 28 Oct 2008, 09:04

boele wrote:
John Rambo wrote:
boele wrote:Hello,

Is there anyone who has experience with the Canon 100-400 mm lens in combination with the Canon 40D?

Regards,

René.
I am using my 100-400 in combination with my 40D. Nice combination in my opinion.
Hello Marien,

Oké, good to hear that. What about the sharpness in the 300-400 mm range that a lot of people are complaining about?

Thanks.

I think it's a fact that in this range the images sometimes become a little unsharp. Not always, but sometimes. When you want the best quality it's better to go for the 300mm with and 1.4 extender.

Mark B. · Post by **Mark B.** » 28 Oct 2008, 10:20

Bought this lens a few months ago and used it (mounted on a 20D) for the first time at Spa Francorchamps during the Formula 1 weekend. Last week the first aircraft pictures were captured during a short visit to Gilze Rijen.

Pictures were sharp at full range, even with poor light conditions. The push-pull system was very easy to work with, it took me almost no time to get used to it.

The story about the softness was one of the reasons I hesistated a long time before buying. But after trying and comparing it to the new Sigma 120-400 OS it turned out this lens is sharper, better build and still has an excellent Image Stabilizer.

According to the dealer the problems this lens used to have are gone because Canon introduced a better quality control proces. Not sure what to think about that but for sure, I'm happy so far!

Janos · Post by **Janos** » 01 Nov 2008, 16:16

Found this test of the lens :

http://www.photozone.de/canon-eos/204-c ... rt--review" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

SilverWingPix · Post by **SilverWingPix** » 02 Nov 2008, 23:23

Hey Guys,

Have read this thread from start to finsh without finding any info on the performance of 100-400L on the new 50D.
Does anyone have any experience with this combo?

I just got the 50D and 100-400 two days ago and haven´t had a chance to really test it (weather has been awfull here in CPH). Feeling a bit anxious as the feed back I am reading is so much all over the place. I hope this lens is not a case of Hit´n miss (or as someone mentioned a monday model)

Egon/CPH

SilverWingPix · Post by **SilverWingPix** » 03 Nov 2008, 23:11

SilverWingPix wrote:Does anyone have any experience with this combo?

First time ever I quote myself

Had a wonderfull sunny day today - A great opportunity to test the 50D + 100-400L combo.
I am very happy so far with the results although there were a small percentage of shots that were soft at full 400mm (10-15% I would say).

Have a look here for some of the results (no fast jets though

):
http://www.scramble.nl/forum/viewtopic.php?t=46472" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Egon/CPH

boele · Post by **boele** » 04 Nov 2008, 08:37

I know enough!!! Thanks.

René.

Pete T · Post by **Pete T** » 08 Nov 2008, 21:48

I would be interested to know if anyone getting soft photos with the 100-400 lens had a filter fitted?

I had the soft focus problem with my 100-400 lens, I then worked out that it started after I put a UV filter on!

I took the filter off and the sharpness returned

Anyone else find this?

Heron · Post by **Heron** » 08 Nov 2008, 23:04

No, I've got an UV-filter (B+W) on my 100-400 and I get sharp pictures. This B+W UV-haze filter is the only filter allowed on this objective, any other filter would interfere with the sharpness and/or colors, so I was told.
Also... (according to the instruction manual) when making pictures in the 300-400 range, the minimum aperture should be F.8, otherwise your pictures end up soft...

FISHER01 · Post by **FISHER01** » 10 Nov 2008, 16:09

i also get rid of the uv- filter and the pics are much sharper indeed