How popular or unpopular is Canons 100-400mm lens with birders?

[Joe Milmoe]

I worked at Natures Best for a short time, and it quickly became clear how versatile the 100-400 lens is. I don't have numbers to back it up, but, I'm confident this lens has yielded more prize-winning images in NBP than any other lens. It is sharpest at f/8-f/11.

I've bought and re-bought it several times. I recently took one with me on a trip to Kenya, comparing it with the 70-200/4IS.

As I thought, the 70-200/4IS is significantly sharper and has better color/saturation and is more usable wide open.

However, the versatility of the 100-400 is hard to beat.

This is one lens I would love to see updated, at least with current IS mechanism, coatings, and so forth.

[Emil Martinec]

Roger, I do think it's a good idea to test equipment both in conditions closely related to actual use, as well as to perform idealized tests that isolate individual issues. You stressed the value of the moon as a high contrast source. I'm wondering why that is an advantage if most of the shooting one does has to do with lower contrast targets? For instance I would think that veiling glare in a high DR scene would substantially disadvantage a lens such as the 100-400 which has many more lens elements/groups, and thus more internal scattering going on, than a lens such as the 400/5.6; and that this might be less of an issue with a scene of more normal DR.

[Jim Dahl]

Anyone like me and has their 100-400 permanently at 400?

[Roger Clark]

Roger, I do think it's a good idea to test equipment both in conditions closely related to actual use, as well as to perform idealized tests that isolate individual issues. You stressed the value of the moon as a high contrast source. I'm wondering why that is an advantage if most of the shooting one does has to do with lower contrast targets? For instance I would think that veiling glare in a high DR scene would substantially disadvantage a lens such as the 100-400 which has many more lens elements/groups, and thus more internal scattering going on, than a lens such as the 400/5.6; and that this might be less of an issue with a scene of more normal DR.

Emil,
I agree about testing in multiple conditions, but in real world imaging (e.g. birds) contrast is almost always higher than a printed test chart.

A tough example is imaging a subject with a bright background (e.g. bird in a tree with white sky behind it). Often you see flare and purple fringing on the edges of the bird and tree branches. Those kind of problems will usually not show in a printed test chart, but will on a Moon test. A star test would be even better, but few have tracking mounts to do such a test.

I'm not advocating the Moon as the only test. But there have been multiple threads here and in other forums with people asking what is sharp. People need a way to see how they are doing relative to others. One way to do that is attend a workshop where they can compare images shot side by side in the same conditions. Another way is to shoot test targets, but different printed targets have different contrast and are illuminated with different lights. And yet another way is the Moon, with its pluses and minuses. There is no one perfect test just as there is no one perfect camera or lens.

The Moon offers the advantages that everyone around the world can image it. You can test hand held or on a tripod and it is illuminated by the sun, much like any outdoor target, bird or landscape. The high contrast brings out technique problems. I encourage everyone to try it. Those that have have remarked to me how much more difficult it was than they thought and how much they learned. If you shoot birds in flight hand held, try using the same technique on the Moon. E.g. you are out before sunrise and the moon is out. Try a few exposures while waiting for the light, then later see how well you did.

Here, for example, is my effort with a 500 f/4 + 2x TC hand held:
http://www.clarkvision.com/galleries...3f-8s-800.html
There is a link on the page to the full resolution image.

Roger

[Fabs Forns]

Arash,

Here's pixel crop of one with the 7D and 100-400. I must say light was horrendous and it is a hand held image. EXIF included. Processing only with ACR defaults.

Model: Canon EOS 7D
Lens (mm): 285
ISO: 800
Aperture: 8
Shutter: 1/640
Program: Manual

[Alfred Forns]

Anyone like me and has their 100-400 permanently at 400?

Hi Jim If I had the lens permanently at 400 would probably purchase a 400 5.6 About the only drawback it has is no IS and lousy close focusing distance .. which makes is great for flight.

[arash_hazeghi]

Looks nice and sharp Fabs, thanks for posting!

[paul leverington]

This whole thread brings to mind why canon has never come out with a 200-400/ 4 lens.

I have a 100-400. My first lens of any telephoto capability really. As I remember it did not get very sharp images and the zoom did get stuck on me cause a screw came loose and jammed it. I fixed that one myself. I don't like the push pull at all for a lot of reasons--dust being the major one. I think that mine was before some optic improovements were made however and it's a much better lens these days. I think now I will try it again on the markIV and see how things look.

The moon works fine for ONE type of test if all shots are taken about the same time. However as I have very recently become aware of, subject to camera distance will sometimes vary sharpness of a particular lens--sometime quite a lot. Also close up shots always look sharper than ones at a distance even though both fill the frame of two different focal length lenses because of light fall off and atmosphere that light has to travel through . A true telling test needs to test at four different distances to fully understand the optics of a lens. Close focus and infinity, and two at near and far typical shooting distances of your own flavor.

I will be testing mine more thoroughly and will get back to this thread after I do.

Paul

[James Littlejohn]

So far as I know, it's extremely popular. But there seems to be a large number of people in various forums willing to put it down without much rationale regarding its capabilities.

I think it may be the most suitable wildlife lens for beginners. Versatility, portability, IS, close focusing, affordable, high IQ - there are very few gaps. When I was just getting into nature photography, it was important for me to start getting decent results and have fun without needing great field skills. In this thread, it is nice to see it well regarded by shooters with a lot of experience. I do wish Canon would update it, though, with newer IS and possibly lighter materials.

A couple of my shots with the 100-400:

[canoesailor]

I'm seriously considering a 100-400, does anyone know when the really soft ones stopped and the better quality ones became the norm?

Was it a QC issue at one factory or was it produced in different factories with one being better than the other?

Does anyone use one with a 50d and are you happy with the results?

Thanks

John

[Jim Neiger]

If you are going to test and compare lenses that include the 100-400mm, you should consider that this lens is known to have large differences in sharpness from one copy of the lens to the next. My 100-400mm is very sharp and matches the performance of a 400mm F5.6 even wide open at 400mm. Other 100-400mm lenses I have seen produce very different results in terms of sharpness. I guess I was lucky when I got mine. :D

[Fabs Forns]

Let's also remember that "sharpness is in the HAND of the beholder"

I'm sure having a steady hand if handholding, will help you get a sharper pic.

[Alfred Forns]

I'm seriously considering a 100-400, does anyone know when the really soft ones stopped and the better quality ones became the norm?

Was it a QC issue at one factory or was it produced in different factories with one being better than the other?

Does anyone use one with a 50d and are you happy with the results?

Thanks

John

Hi John

I'm only aware of really bad samples at the start, many years ago. If you go for one just test it to make sure it is working as it should, if not send it back. While testing do so on a good target, don't go out shooting birds !!! ... btw when you can please send me your name so I can update, we all use real names in the forum !!!

.. one think to keep in mind ... this is fragile lens and will break down, no question. The most common fault is the zooming to be stuck, can even see bearings falling out of it !! My will be back tomorrow and the AF failed, first for me on this one. Also as mentioned several times the push/pull will suck in dust !!! ... still like it a lot !!!

[canoesailor]

Hi Alfred

Thanks for your reply, the fragility of the lens is slightly worrying. It sounds like an obvious candidate for an update - more so than the 70-200 that they've just updated. It seems a lens ideally suited to my style of photography but, I cant be doing with a lens that is known to break. I shall maybe have to rethink the idea.

I was going to put my details on my profile, but for some reason I dont have access to my own profile.

John Tompkins

[adrian dancy]

The lens is not that fragile! Based on my experience , I carry it to work every day...on a bus. Several times the bag it was in landed on the floor when the bus driver breaked hard.I have learned to keep hold of my bag. About 3 years ago I accidentally dropped it onto the concrete pavement attached to my 20D. My heart was in my mouth when I picked it up. I am happy to say that it is still working fine.

[Ed Cordes]

Hi Alfred

Thanks for your reply, the fragility of the lens is slightly worrying. It sounds like an obvious candidate for an update - more so than the 70-200 that they've just updated. It seems a lens ideally suited to my style of photography but, I cant be doing with a lens that is known to break. I shall maybe have to rethink the idea.

I was going to put my details on my profile, but for some reason I dont have access to my own profile.

John Tompkins

I do not think the lens is fragile at all. I have had it cleaned, but it takes a lot of "bumps" and keeps on working just fine. It has travelled all over the world with me and has performed as expected.

[Chris Hansen]

My 100-400 has survived being dropped to the pavement twice and slammed against the floor of the car a couple times when i have braked too hard. You would think that i would have learned from that. About three months ago I redid the braking thing one too many times and it lost the ability to have IS and focus. So i sent it off to Canon to be rebuilt and it isactually better than when i first bought it many years ago.

God's light and love to all,

chris

[canoesailor]

Thanks for those replies Ed and Adrian, I have been looking on other forums and reviews and not seen anything referring to it being fragile and your comments confirm that. Maybe there is the occasional fragile one slipped though (like the occasional soft one).

But there is no other lens suits what I need so I will be going for one - It will have to be a new one though, to make sure it has none of the early problems and has a warranty, just in case.

John Tompkins

[adrian dancy]

In fairness the 'fragility' may be assumed to its having bearings for the push pull zoom mechanism (that I like). It is a fact of life that that anything mechanical will be subject to wear and tear. It is a great lens , as are the other options described above.

I would like to add that IS is a wonderful thing and I am sure many under achieve because too much is expected of it. Respect the lens and I am sure you will end up with a few show stoppers.

Oh , and good luck!

[Bruce Miller]

Mine’s built like a tank!

I bought it in 2005. When my 40D’s flash stopped working and I had to send it in for repair, I sent my 100-400 in too. They cleaned it and calibrated it to my 40D for Free! It seems to me that it is sharper than ever! Still considering a prime (because there is no pleasing me), but not because I don’t get great results from my 100-400.

[Alfred Forns]

Not sure fragile is the way to describe but would say high maintenance compared to others. The zoom mechanism needs repair almost yearly (for my use) and mine just had the focus mechanism repaired.

.... still one of my favorites in the bag !!