New to Canon (and FF), looking for long telephoto

Hello everyone,

I'm new to Canon; I've used Olympus SLRs for 5+ years, but I've given up on them and moved on to Canon. My main issues with Oly was noise and resolution, so if figured I'd solve that once and for all, and get a 5DII. I got the kit with the 24-105 a few days ago and it's great.

Now I'm looking to add to that lens, in the telephoto direction. The long f/2.8 lenses are nice, but too bulky and heavy for travel, and really expensive to boot. The candidates I'm looking at are:

-Canon 100-400mm f4.5-5.6L
-Canon 300mm f/4L (plus 1.4x TC when required)
-Sigma 120-400mm f/4.5-5.6 OS
-Sigma 50-500mm f/4.5-6.4 OS

The only one of these I've seen in person is the Canon 100-400, and while the build quality looks good, the push-pull zooming doesn't feel very intuitive.

The 30mm f/4 seems like it would be a good choice. Not too big, not exceedingly expensive. But it leaves me a gap that I would need to fill with a 70-200 of some flavour (there seems to be lots of choice in the 70-200 range)

The Sigma 120-400mm is at a very attractive price point, but it seems that it may not be as sharp as the Canon. I went for the 5DII for the extra sharpness and resolution, so I don't want to compromise the sensor with a sub-par lens. Perhaps there are some good and bad ones too.

I have the 50-500mm Bigma with my Oly 4/3 gear. I got it mostly because it was the only choice short of getting a 300mm f/2.8 on that system. I was never truly impressed by it. Perhaps the new version with OS is better, but I think there's a lot of compromise made to get to 10x zoom, but it is seldom used below 200mm anyways.

I was just curious to see what you guys were using for telephoto, when size becomes a factor.

Cheers,

Luc Delorme

The new 70-300 lens looks interesting... may be worth considering.

I use the following:

The 70-200mm f4 IS is a fantastic lens. As long as you don't need very low light AF it is very versatile and easy to carry around since it is so light.

The 300mm f4 IS is an old lens, the IS is a couple generations old... but I love it! Great performer with the 1.4x teleconverter. It is also quite light weight.

I've used the 100-400mm many times, but never liked it. Some people love it.

--
Sayer
Galleries: http://PBase.com/Sayer
Website: http://sayersweb.com/photography/

Haven't tried the other lenses you mention, but I got the Canon 100-400mm about 6 months ago for a (pretty) light telephoto, and I have been surprised of the good quality of this lens.

A couple of images from the 100-400 here:

400mm - f/5.6 - 1/250 sec. - ISO200 - handheld:



400mm - f/5.6 - 1/400 sec. - ISO400 - handheld:



Never used a push/pull zoom in the past on any lens, but I feel it's easy to use.

Ludvig

I have both the 100-400 & the 70-200 2.8 with a 2x TC. I primarily shoot sports and prefer the push-pull of the 100-400 lens.



--



http://www.pbase.com/sullyc5er

The 100-400L is a great daytime lens, but like you say it is not small or light. The push-pull thing really isn't bad, but it's not as nice the usual rotary zoom. However it's the cheapest way to get high IQ at 400mm.

I think you should forget the 300/4L and consider the new 70-300L. A lot smaller and a bit lighter, and A LOT more versatile. MTF chart looks better too.

But if you can make do with 200mm, the 70-200/4LIS is a no brainer. It will be a bit short for field sports on FF though.

I agree, the 300 f/4 with a TC is excellent. I wish Canon would update this lens with newer IS. Heck, I wish Canon would update the 400 f/5.6 with some sort of IS.....come on now.....a 400mm without IS in 2010???

SayersWeb said:

The new 70-300 lens looks interesting... may be worth considering.

I use the following:

The 70-200mm f4 IS is a fantastic lens. As long as you don't need very low light AF it is very versatile and easy to carry around since it is so light.

The 300mm f4 IS is an old lens, the IS is a couple generations old... but I love it! Great performer with the 1.4x teleconverter. It is also quite light weight.

I've used the 100-400mm many times, but never liked it. Some people love it.

--
Sayer
Galleries: http://PBase.com/Sayer
Website: http://sayersweb.com/photography/

Click to expand...

--

Photography, like many other hobbies, persuits and art forms, is first and foremost about having fun and exploring.

I have the 400 f5.6L and the 70-200 f4L.

I looked at the times when the 70-200 wasn't long enough and figured that 300 wouldn't do either. Since I already had the 70-200 range covered I saw no point in the 100-400 zoom only to use it at 400 all the time.

I've been extremely satisfied with the 400 f5.6L. As far as I can tell all the 70-200 L choices are great lenses.

Sample from 5D the first time I used the 400:



And a 100% crop :



Kevin

Hi

I also swapped from Oly (E3) to 5d2 and have never regretted the least. Oly had some great glass, but hopelessly outdated high end bodies.

I have the 70-200 2.8 IS, but I find it far too heavy and bulky for any kind of traveling or walk around.

I will be one of the first to purchase the 70-300 L when it becomes available. I have the 70-300 non-L, and the IQ is not worse than the 70-200 if not pixel peeping, and even then the difference is minor. However the build quality (feeling) is anything but L-class, so if the new 70-300 will add even more IQ and better build, that will be the perfect choice for me. Without a doubt.

br

Marcus

Luc Delorme said:

Hello everyone,

I'm new to Canon; I've used Olympus SLRs for 5+ years, but I've given up on them and moved on to Canon. My main issues with Oly was noise and resolution, so if figured I'd solve that once and for all, and get a 5DII. I got the kit with the 24-105 a few days ago and it's great.

Now I'm looking to add to that lens, in the telephoto direction. The long f/2.8 lenses are nice, but too bulky and heavy for travel, and really expensive to boot. The candidates I'm looking at are:

-Canon 100-400mm f4.5-5.6L
-Canon 300mm f/4L (plus 1.4x TC when required)
-Sigma 120-400mm f/4.5-5.6 OS
-Sigma 50-500mm f/4.5-6.4 OS

The only one of these I've seen in person is the Canon 100-400, and while the build quality looks good, the push-pull zooming doesn't feel very intuitive.

The 30mm f/4 seems like it would be a good choice. Not too big, not exceedingly expensive. But it leaves me a gap that I would need to fill with a 70-200 of some flavour (there seems to be lots of choice in the 70-200 range)

The Sigma 120-400mm is at a very attractive price point, but it seems that it may not be as sharp as the Canon. I went for the 5DII for the extra sharpness and resolution, so I don't want to compromise the sensor with a sub-par lens. Perhaps there are some good and bad ones too.

I have the 50-500mm Bigma with my Oly 4/3 gear. I got it mostly because it was the only choice short of getting a 300mm f/2.8 on that system. I was never truly impressed by it. Perhaps the new version with OS is better, but I think there's a lot of compromise made to get to 10x zoom, but it is seldom used below 200mm anyways.

I was just curious to see what you guys were using for telephoto, when size becomes a factor.

Cheers,

Luc Delorme

Click to expand...

--
5D mk2
17-40 f/4L
50 f/1,4
50 f/1,2L
24-105 IS f/4L
70-200 IS f/2,8L
70-300 IS f/4-5.6 USM
100 macro IS f/2,8L
Canon EF 2x II Extender
Canon EF 25 II Extension tube
Speedlite 580
MT-24EX
BG-E6

http://www.flickr.com/photos/marcusaxlund/

Have the 100-400 L and have shot regularly with my son's 300/4L + 1.4.

The 300/4 combination is sharper.

The 100-400 is more flexible. The push-pull zoom may strike you as odd, but you'll get used to it in 5 minutes.

Depends what you plan to use it for.

Luc Delorme said:

I'm new to Canon;

Click to expand...

Welcome!

Luc Delorme said:

I've used Olympus SLRs for 5+ years, but I've given up on them and moved on to Canon. My main issues with Oly was noise and resolution, so if figured I'd solve that once and for all, and get a 5DII. I got the kit with the 24-105 a few days ago and it's great.

Click to expand...

I did the same after 30+ years with Olympus OMs - they lost me when they dropped that range and then locked themselves into the performance dead end of four-thirds. ;-)

Luc Delorme said:

Now I'm looking to add to that lens, in the telephoto direction.

The only one of these I've seen in person is the Canon 100-400, and while the build quality looks good, the push-pull zooming doesn't feel very intuitive.

Click to expand...

Having used push-pull zooms for decades, I find them more intuitive than zoom rings, so I am sure that you will get used to it just as I and otheers have got used to zoom rings. However there are a couple of things worth noting about the 100-400L that may influence your decision.

1. I think I am right in saying that this is now the oldest zoom lens in the Canon range and is certainly due a revamp - if it isn't discontinued completely once the new 70-300L hits the streets.

2. Being the oldest zoom, it also has an early implementation of IS. At best you get 2 stops in shutter speed with this lens, whilst more recent lenses offer 3 or even 4 stops.

3. Like your 24-105L, the 100-400L suffers from barrel creep - the lens slips to full extension when hung from the camera. The 100-400L has a clutch ring to limit this, or even lock the zoom at any position, but this is pretty clumsy to operate and can slow down operation of the lens.

4. Although an "L" designated lens, this lens is not weatherproof or sealed in any way. There is no gasket around the flange, like your 24-105L has. Some even refer to it as the "Canon dust pump" since operation of the zoom can pump uncleaned air from the front to the back. Although you can notice this off camera, I have never had any instance of sensor dust that I could prove was caused by using this lens and am not convinced that there is enough pressure for it to "pump" at all when fitted on the camera. Nevertheless, it isn't sealed and Canon don't even claim it is, but if they released it today, I doubt it would get the "L" designation because of this.

5. There is a lot of sample to sample image quality variation on the 100-400L so be ready to test yours thoroughly early on, ideally before buying it.

6. Although the 100-400 lens is compatible with the Canon x1.4 and x2 teleconvertors (and not all Canon lenses are!) the combination exceeds the maximum aperture for AF on non-1 series bodies and Canon disable the AF operation. You can defeat the disabling using the "magic tape trick" - http://www.fredmiranda.com/TipsPage/ - but focus can often hunt, especially in low light and at the long end, for obvious reasons.

As others have noted though, it is a great lens and provided you are aware of its issues and make sure you get a good copy there is no reason why you shouldn't be happy with it.
--
Its RKM

If u need 300/2.8, email