Canon EF 100-400 mm F/4.5-5.6 L IS USM Lens

[William Dickson]

I currently own a Sigma APO 150-500mm F5-6.3 DG OS HSM lens which I use on my Canon 7D. I am considering buying a Canon EF 100-400 mm F/4.5-5.6 L IS USM Lens.

Would this be a wise choice. Is the Canon lens better for bird photography, or should I stick with my Sigma. The Sigma is as new, but after reading lots of reviews about the two lenses, I am not sure now, if i should go ahead with this purchase. What do you experts on here think?

I just feel that, if the light is not strong, my images are very grainy with the Sigma, which i use at the recommended 'sweet spot' of F8. I have upped the ISO, and tried allsorts, but the images are not worth keeping. The only time, I reckon, I get keepers, is when the subject is close to me, and the light is strong.

Thanks in advance for any advice given :S3:

[Robert Hardy]

you might want to wait and see what the new Tamron 150/600 has to offer it due out later this month.
Rob.

[David Smith]

I have one of the Canon 100-400L IS lens and it is one of the best I have found. My images shot with that lens are always sharp and clean, when I do my part.. I would not sell my 100-400L for anything... I do not think you can go wrong if you decide to purchase one...

JMHO

Dave

[Daniel Cadieux]

Although the 500mm f/4 has become my main birding lens I'm sure glad I kept the 100-400 as it is quite versatile, and sharper than what most internet critics say. Having said this, as far as I know lenses do not affect the amount of grain (I imagine you mean "noise") you see in an image. That would be your 7D as it is notorious for that with low light / high IOSs, especially with darker colours. I like my 7D but I know its limitations and work within that. I suppose that with a faster lens you could lower your ISO and obtain finer IQ, but you will not gain much in that regards with the 100-400as it is "slow" and you'll still need higher ISOs.

[John Chardine]

I know there are a lot of rumours floating around out there but a persistent one is that this lens is going to be refreshed by Canon, perhaps getting rid of the push-pull zoom and making it f4 across the zoom range (which would make it bigger but not necessarily heavier with what Canon is doing these days with weight saving).

[Sanjeev Aurangabadkar]

I Agree with Dan. I have the 500 II and the 100-400 L and am having a hard time letting go my 100-400 L. I have still kept it and I will only replace it if and when the new V II 100-400 is released. Its flexibility and versatility is amazing. Yes it is sharp particularly bet f/6.3-f/8. I have used the sigma 150-500 and I like the 100-400 much more.

[BobbyPerkins]

I completely agree with Daniel, and not sure that you would gain alot by switching to the 100-400 with the 7D. (Perhaps if & when extra DOF is not required, you can open up from your "sweet spot" to let in more light and take care to expose well to the right at higher ISO's up to 400-800 on the 7D).

As for the floating rumor of the 100-400 upgraded I wouldn't hold your breathe. That rumors been floating way too long, and an f/4 version with out the push-pull puts it in another league all together, it would be nowhere near the same price range, (hence the 200-400), so that's been done already. I'd like to see a non push-pole version as well, with newer IS & optics but the same could be said for the 400 5.6 prime, which I'd take myself over the zoom with those upgrades.

That said, I have a 100-400 & 7D, and for what it's worth love the combo until I can upgrade. My 100-400 is plenty sharp wide open at 5.6 and as long as my images are properly exposed (no under-exposure), noise is not much of an issue so long as my iso limit range is 400-800 in lower light.

[William Dickson]

Thanks for all your replies. I have decided not to get the 100-400, as I have the opportunity to get myself another lens.

[Jim Keener]

Late to the party and slightly off topic, but I want to tag along on the 100-400mm lens upgrade rumor. I don't see how Canon could upgrade the 100-400 without charging a lot more money for it, especially if it has a constant f/4 max. The competition with the 200-400 price wise would be pretty severe. YMMV.