BIF- Cropping EF 100-400 L IS vs Tamron 70-300 SP VC Photos ?

Started Nov 21, 2012 | Discussions thread
Shop cameras & lenses ▾
Pastynator Contributing Member • Posts: 925
Re: BIF- Cropping EF 100-400 L IS vs Tamron 70-300 SP VC Photos ?

Glenn_Sydney wrote:

Pastynator wrote:

Glenn_Sydney wrote:

Hi folks

I do a bit of bird in flight photography for fun using a Canon 7D. Some time ago i purchased the above Tamron lens. The lens is great for the price (about 1/3 the price of the 400mm canon lens). I tend to shoot larger birds rather than small birds so figured that the 300mm would suffice. i do now find myself often have to aggressively crop my photos, as its not always easy to get close to my subjects. This shows up weaknesses in the lens (and obviously technique). I am now considering buying the Canon EF 100-400 L after all, but only if the quality of the photos is that much better that it will allow the photos to stand up much better to heavy cropping, when I have to do so and result in much better quality images. This is where I would very much appreciate some information and advice from forum members. Obviously, the Canon lens would require a bit less cropping for starters.

Look forward to opinions, particularly based on experience.


PS. The focus speed of the Tammy is quiet good. Anyone know if that of the Canon is better ?

If it's for BIF and wildlife in general, i'd urge you to consider the 400 F5.6 L prime from Canon, on average it's noticeably sharper than the 100-400 (by average i mean the zoom has more sample variation) and is faster focussing than the 100-400 also.

It doesn't have stabilisation but that's not very beneficial for BIF. The lens is amazing for general wildlife use too, longs you have the skill to use it.

At this point i should say that i have the 100-400 and NOT the 400 prime! But that's because i have the 500 F4. If i had to choose between the 100-400 solely, i'd go with the prime.

is the sample variation you refer to in relation to the 100-400 something that can be corrected with MFA ?

I guess sometimes. But most of the time not from what i've seen.

It's been the general consensus that in recent years there's been a lot higher percentage of "good ones" though.

Please don't think i mean the "bad ones" are terrible. Just the good ones are as sharp or very nearly as the 400 F5.6 L prime. Just on average the lens is not as sharp. It's usually expected that zooms aren't as sharp as primes.. so can't really do the lens down because of that.

Post (hide subjects) Posted by
(unknown member)
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow