Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS II USM Lens or other options?

Adam2 wrote:

Sandyld7 wrote:

I am looking for input from those of you shooting sports and/or wildlife. I am at the ALMOST point of ordering the 100-400 II to use on my full frame camera (Canon 5D Mark III) for sports and wildlife. I have rented it a couple of times over the past 2 years to use in the national parks for wildlife and really liked it. I need more reach than my 70-200 f/2.8L II has. I have been shooting youth sports for the past couple of years as well, and would love that extra reach. I do worry about night lights in a stadium (faced that with a playoff game) but the 400mm and up with f/2.8 is NOT in my budget. So, here are a couple of other choices I have been considering as well. I am hoping those of you with more more experience and knowledge can offer your input.

ok

1. What about using the 1.4 extender on the 70-200? That would give me almost 300, but not sure if that will enough, but what a huge price difference!

You could, but I doubt that you’ll be as happy with the IQ

2. Another option suggested to me is the Sigma 150-600mm F5-6.3 DG OS HSM. That has more reach, but I think that I will need the extra light on the Canon 100-400 more, and more often?

Perhaps you’ll have better luck but I couldn’t get the sigma 150-600 to focus well with the 5dmkiii. It needs a lot of light and had difficulty tracking and focusing consistently. There’s no comparison with the 100-400 ii with respect to af, build, mfd, etc.

3.I know I am going to look like an idiot for asking this, but I am going to anyway. Can the extra reach help lessen the need for larger apertures when shooting action shots? For example, if I am having to zoom at 200 mm on my 70-200 and it is needing f/2.8 to get a shot that I then crop in to, will it lessen the demand any if the lens is taking me "there" where the subject is at 400mm?

Not sure what you mean? Filling the frame will improve the af results and afford ability to crop. If you are asking about dof run a few scenarios in a calculator and decide for yourself.

4. Any other suggestions to consider?

Sure. The Canon 100-400 ii offers the best balance of performance, construction, and performance in its price range. Check canonpricewatch for the best deal. At its longest fl the aperture is 5.6 so in real low light such as under the lights it will struggle a bit and the af isn’t on par with a 400 f/2.8. Then again it’s 1/4 the price. Buying a 300 f/2.8 is expensive though it’s performance is spectacular with a 1.4x iii tc. The 300 f/4 isn’t my favorite in terms of af and performance and it’s less useful than the 100-400. Incidentally, the 100-400 works great with a 1.4 iii tc though the af will suffer on a 5dmkiii (all af points are available on a 5dmkiv). Realistically, it’s hard to find a better value than the 100-400 ii.

Really appreciate any advice you care to give!

Anytime.

Thank you for taking the time to give me info! I was already thinking of getting the extender even if I got the 100-400, mainly to use for wildlife. So far I have only used it for wildlife when I rented it, so I would love to try it on youth sports. I really appreciate your input!