Sponsor Message:
Aviation Photography Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
300 F4+1.4 Vs 100-400  
User currently offlineLHSebi From Germany, joined Jan 2004, 1049 posts, RR: 8
Posted (9 years 5 months 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 4569 times:

Hello all,
I am considering upgrading my equipment (lens) very soon. However, I am sort of torn. What do you guys suggest? Should I go for the 300 f4 with 1.4/2x converters, or for the 100-400? I have heard many good things about the 300, and obviously primes will give you better quality. I do plan on buying the 70-200 f2.8 in addition to these in the near future, so would it be smarter to go for the 300 now? Any advice is appreciated!

Greetings,

Sebastian


I guess that's what happens in the end, you start thinking about the beginning.
8 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineMikec From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2004, 247 posts, RR: 13
Reply 1, posted (9 years 5 months 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 4553 times:

If you are talking about your main lens, I'd go for the one with the most flexibility - the 100-400. Having a 300mm prime as your main long range lens is a bit restrictive in my opinion. Excellent as a secondary lens to compliment a telephoto, but I wouldn't have a prime as my main long range lens personally.

If it were my money, I'd buy the 70-200 f2.8 IS first (it's not THAT much more than either of the two you mention), along with a TC (maybe the 2x to give you 140-400mm with it on, and retain AF). Then you have a nice versatile, high quality telephoto. You can then later compliment it with the 300mm f4L prime and then possibly get the 1.4x if funds allow

Just how I'd do it anyway

[Edited 2005-03-31 00:17:56]

User currently offlineJderden777 From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 1755 posts, RR: 29
Reply 2, posted (9 years 5 months 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 4543 times:

just got my 70-200 2.8 and 1.4x and absolutely love the combination...the quality is just amazing plus the versatility of the 2.8 is unmatched...i chose this setup over the 100-400 and am more than happy with it...i'm thinking i may even pick up a 2x sometime in the near future to give me a little bit more range, depending on if funds allow...

jd



"my soul is in the sky" - shakespeare
User currently offlineTin67 From United Kingdom, joined May 2004, 268 posts, RR: 3
Reply 3, posted (9 years 5 months 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 4505 times:

Sebastian,

This is quite a common question and given that you intend to buy a 70-200 f2.8 in the near future, the answer in my mind is easy.

Buy the 300mm f4  checkmark 

When I bought my first L-Series lens I was limited on funds, so for me at the time it was any easy decision to go for the 100-400. I was still using film so was delighted with the results, although I never liked the push/pull zoom.

I found when moving to digital that the 100-400 was a little soft at the long end and when the budget permitted I changed to a 70-200 2.8 IS and a 300mm prime. Firstly the Sigma 300 f2.8, but then to the 300 f4 IS.

I find that my most used lens now is the 300 and more often than not I have a 1.4x extender combo. The results are better at this range that the 100-400 of that there is no doubt. When combined with a 70-200 f2.8 it's a far better option.

The 100-400 is the best alrounder and great value if you're limited to one lens. If not the 300 + 70-200 is the way to go, complimented by a 1.4x extender.

Regards
Martin


User currently offlineFlight55 From Russia, joined Mar 2005, 5 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (9 years 5 months 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 4494 times:

Hello.
I also think, that 2,8/70-200IS and 1,4 - the best variant.
Unfortunately 4/300IS it is worse than 4/300, and to buy lens 300mm without IS probably does not cost.
100-400IS for such price - not a masterpiece.
Extender 2.0 (this general opinion of professionals) can be applied only when there is no other variants.
www.traumflieger.de/objektivtest/telekonverter/telekonverter_check.php


User currently offlineFergulmcc From Ireland, joined Oct 2004, 1916 posts, RR: 53
Reply 5, posted (9 years 5 months 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 4478 times:

I have this setup and think its a great combo

Some samples


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Fergul Mc Clean
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Fergul Mc Clean



View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Fergul Mc Clean
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Fergul Mc Clean



Fergul Big grin

PS Any excuse to plug a few shots !!



Zambian Airways, Where the Eagles fly free!!
User currently offlineJavibi From Spain, joined Oct 2004, 1371 posts, RR: 41
Reply 6, posted (9 years 5 months 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 4475 times:

A bit off topic, please forgive me!!

Anyone using the Canon 100-400L + 1.4x extender could give me opinions on this combo and explain if you have or have not autofocus?

Many thanks

j



"Be prepared to engage in constructive debate". Are YOU prepared?
User currently offlineLHSebi From Germany, joined Jan 2004, 1049 posts, RR: 8
Reply 7, posted (9 years 5 months 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 4446 times:

Thanks to all for the replies so far.

Javier,
I do not know of anyone using that combo, but I am pretty sure you loose AF if you use the 100-400 with any extender.

Saludos,

Sebastian



I guess that's what happens in the end, you start thinking about the beginning.
User currently offlineFlight55 From Russia, joined Mar 2005, 5 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (9 years 5 months 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 4446 times:

Withheld

At combo Canon 100-400L + 1.4x extender, central AF sensor
will work. (On EOS3, is for example obliged to work under the specification)

Most likely it will work also with 2.0 Extender, but it is necessary to check
on concrete model of a camera. (and image quality with 2.0 extender???)

Dmitry.


Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Canon 28-300 Is USM Vs. 100-400 Is USM posted Wed Sep 28 2005 19:16:27 by Stefan
Canon 70-200 F2.8 +2x Vs 100-400 posted Wed Nov 30 2005 23:42:06 by Donder10
300mm 2.8 Is Vs 100-400 Is posted Sun Mar 14 2004 23:05:29 by Planedoctor
Canon 75-300 F4.0 VS Tamron 70-300 F4.0 posted Mon Dec 30 2002 09:21:05 by Lugonza_2001
Canon 70-200 Vs 100-400 L Lens posted Sun Oct 13 2002 23:35:28 by Fly-K
Canon 100-400 Or 300 L Or 400 L? posted Sat May 13 2006 00:37:44 by LHRSIMON
Sigma 80-400 VS Canon 100-400 posted Tue Sep 13 2005 22:03:56 by Mrk25
Should I Trade My 75-300 For A 100-400? posted Wed Aug 17 2005 11:51:49 by Flyfisher1976
70-200 F4 L Vs. 75-300 F4.5-5.6 I.S. posted Sat Mar 26 2005 01:01:50 by MartinairYYZ
Sigma APO 50-500 Vs APO 100-400 SO posted Wed Aug 11 2004 23:51:05 by Volare
Canon 70-200 F2.8 +2x Vs 100-400 posted Wed Nov 30 2005 23:42:06 by Donder10
300mm 2.8 Is Vs 100-400 Is posted Sun Mar 14 2004 23:05:29 by Planedoctor
Canon 75-300 F4.0 VS Tamron 70-300 F4.0 posted Mon Dec 30 2002 09:21:05 by Lugonza_2001
Canon 70-200 Vs 100-400 L Lens posted Sun Oct 13 2002 23:35:28 by Fly-K
Can't Decide - 100-400 L Or Sigma 100-300 F4 EX? posted Sat Nov 28 2009 07:07:30 by JakTrax
Canon 100-400 Or 300 L Or 400 L? posted Sat May 13 2006 00:37:44 by LHRSIMON
Sigma 80-400 VS Canon 100-400 posted Tue Sep 13 2005 22:03:56 by Mrk25
Should I Trade My 75-300 For A 100-400? posted Wed Aug 17 2005 11:51:49 by Flyfisher1976
Canon 70-200 Vs 100-400 L Lens posted Sun Oct 13 2002 23:35:28 by Fly-K
Can't Decide - 100-400 L Or Sigma 100-300 F4 EX? posted Sat Nov 28 2009 07:07:30 by JakTrax
Canon 100-400 Or 300 L Or 400 L? posted Sat May 13 2006 00:37:44 by LHRSIMON
Sigma 80-400 VS Canon 100-400 posted Tue Sep 13 2005 22:03:56 by Mrk25
Should I Trade My 75-300 For A 100-400? posted Wed Aug 17 2005 11:51:49 by Flyfisher1976