|
|
Post by Tonji Ramos on Apr 27, 2009 7:25:03 GMT
We are thinking of getting another birding rig.
I just wanted to ask a question regarding the Canon 300 f4 vs. 400 f5.6 vs 100-400???
Sylvia and I enjoy using the 400 f5.6 because its light and easy to carry. We are planning to get another body and lens and we are wondering how the 300 f4 with a 1.4 tc compares with the 400 f5.6 and the 100-400.
I also do not know the best places to look for these lenses? Can anyone point us in the right direction?
|
|
|
|
Post by Romy Ocon on Apr 27, 2009 8:37:04 GMT
We are thinking of getting another birding rig. I just wanted to ask a question regarding the Canon 300 f4 vs. 400 f5.6 vs 100-400??? Sylvia and I enjoy using the 400 f5.6 because its light and easy to carry. We are planning to get another body and lens and we are wondering how the 300 f4 with a 1.4 tc compares with the 400 f5.6 and the 100-400. I also do not know the best places to look for these lenses? Can anyone point us in the right direction? Tonji, a good copy of each of these lenses is very sharp natively (without TC) and all should be comparable in sharpness. I'd choose based on other lens properties. Since you already have the 400 5.6L, I'd imagine your choice will be either the 100-400 or the 300 f4 IS. The 300 f4 IS is very light, has a closer MFD (5 feet), has a very good hood design and can be used at f/4. The 100-400 has framing flexibility but heavier and has a flimsier hood. I'd think a good copy of the 100-400 is sharper than a good copy of the 300 f4 +1.4x TC when shot wide open. At f/8, it will be tough to see the IQ difference between these. |
|
|
|
Post by ppaaoolloo on Apr 27, 2009 9:18:22 GMT
tonj what body are you eyeing? another 50d? the new 500d? 5d mark 2 the killer 1d mark 3?
personally speaking i wouldnt get another 400 i would either go for a 300 or the 100-400. i'd go with the 100-400 for flexibility and focal length.
|
|
|
|
Post by Tonji Ramos on Apr 27, 2009 11:47:50 GMT
Thanks Romy, 100-400 is sharper at 5.6. Hmmm. I will ask around see if I can get myself a good copy. Is there a specific year of manufacture or serial numbers to avoid? Paolo, I think I will get the 50d again. The 1.6 crop factor turns the 400mm into a 640mm without a tc. Plus its cheaper than the other options you mentioned. Actually its getting quite confusing with all the options.  |
|
|
|
Post by ppaaoolloo on Apr 27, 2009 22:09:50 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Romy Ocon on Apr 27, 2009 22:44:23 GMT
My ultra-sharp 100-400 was made in 2005. Just bring your 400 5.6L to the lens store and shoot both the 100-400 and the prime at the same subject (400 mm wide open). The sharpness of both should be equivalent, otherwise look for another copy of the zoom. Thanks Romy, 100-400 is sharper at 5.6. Hmmm. I will ask around see if I can get myself a good copy. Is there a specific year of manufacture or serial numbers to avoid? Paolo, I think I will get the 50d again. The 1.6 crop factor turns the 400mm into a 640mm without a tc. Plus its cheaper than the other options you mentioned. Actually its getting quite confusing with all the options. |
|
|
|
Post by Tonji Ramos on Apr 28, 2009 2:05:06 GMT
Hi Paolo, The 500D looks like a very good deal. The video feature is a great addition. But I am looking for a dedicated birding camera and I think the frame rate of the 500D is a big disadvantage at 3.4 frames per second versus 6.3 fps for the 50D. Some birds don't want to pose! The sunbirds are awful. They keep hopping around from branch to branch and sometimes they just hang out for a few seconds. I think the 50D doubles the chances of getting a shot. Just that one advantage alone makes the 50D worth it for birding. Imagine, double the chances of a shot! The video feature of the 500d is nice. But I think it should have an external mic. The distance of the birds plus the wind noise will affect the sound a lot. I think bird videos are best when they have the bird calls. I find those really informative and entertaining. But the 500D has no mic input. Thanks for the link to the lens codes! It will surely be useful. Romy, Thanks for the tips. I really appreciate the help. I have a bead on one made in 2008 and will check against the 400 5.6. I will bring my laptop so I can check the output. I will bring the tripod and cable release also so the test is accurate.  I hope its a good copy. |
|
|
|
Post by Tonji Ramos on May 3, 2009 13:09:42 GMT
I got the 100-400 and another 50D. This is now my rig and Sylvia got the 400 5.6.
I did a bunch of tests over 2 days and the store was nice enough to let me spend all the time I wanted testing. They even helped as I was taking test photos in the store and outside. I really had my way in the store, with two tripods and two rigs.
The 100-400 seemed like a good copy so I bought it last Wednesday. We went on a trip to Nueva Ecija the next day (well technically its was 2:00am Friday).
I am certainly no expert but for those interested in these lenses my early impressions of the 100-400 vs the 400 5.6. If you are interested in one of these lenses or a deciding between the two my thoughts ( as a layman) on the matter are as follows:
1. While both lenses are 400mm they are very different.
2. The 100-400 is heavier. I did not use a tripod this trip and still took some decent (for me) pictures which I attribute to the IS. The extra weight is not a penalty since I figured with the IS I might not need a tripod. I did enjoy walking around, squatting down and trying to make bird calls (I am sure they are awful but they worked in this trip). A tripod is a great tool and I guess my pictures would have been much better with a tripod but I enjoyed the freedom to walk around and explore trails without too much effort. Thanks to the IS feature. On the other hand the prime is also easy to hand hold since its lighter.
3. The 400 5.6 prime focuses faster. It locks onto the bird and its easy to feather the shutter and stay focused. Its much better with birds in flight for that reason. I have to experiment more with the 100-400 to get better results but out of the box with no practice the prime is easier to use for BIFs.
4. The prime with no IS connected to a tripod and cable release takes super clear pics and the 100-400 handheld with IS is not as clear. Duh. Hehe. But I guess you guys knew that. Sylvia was using a tripod a lot and I really like how sharp her pics of the very small birds came out. Maybe next time I will use a tripod.
5. You can take closer subjects with the zoom as the minimum distance is around 1.8m and the prime is 3.5m. This is rarely an issue with birders as the usual problem is the bird is too far! As a birding lens its probably a non-issue. But for taking other things like butterflies, bugs and other stuff it might matter.
6. Past a certain distance both lenses don't work so well. So thats where the 500/600/800mm lenses come in. But for nearer subjects both of these 400mm lenses are great.
Overall Sylvia really likes her prime and I find the zoom is also well suited to me. I am happy with the pictures we took and look forward to more captures in the days to come.
Thanks for all the help Romy, Paolo and Tina.
|
|
|
|
Post by Edu Lorenzo Jr on May 3, 2009 14:05:51 GMT
Congratulations! So.. we will be seeing sample images real soon?  |
|
|
|
Post by ppaaoolloo on May 3, 2009 15:05:30 GMT
Enjoy the 100-400L buddy. It should make BIF's a breeze to catch now.  |
|
|
|
Post by Tonji Ramos on May 4, 2009 1:25:56 GMT
Edu, thanks. I posted someshots under the heading "Sierra Madre!" I guess you can see my first efforts with the lens.
Paolo, BIFs are easier now. I just tell Sylvia, "Honey, take that bird!" Hehe. ;D
|
|
|
|
Post by Tonji Ramos on May 17, 2009 13:43:28 GMT
Some people have contacted me about this lens buying saga so I decided to add to this post to maybe give more information to people who are thinking about buying these lenses. Ok I have had maybe 2+ weeks since I got the lens and have learned a few more things about the 100-400 in addition to what I had already posted. First of all with the zoom folding into itself it becomes really compact and easy to store and carry. I use a waterproof case (S3 model T6500) that is only 12.75'inches long and 11' inches wide by 6.75 inches deep. Its just a little bigger than the metal lunch boxes I used to bring to school.  My case is black not yellow. And now I have no worries about going out if the weather is iffy. I can just pop my whole birding kit inside the box and it is totally waterproof. I think this will be great for going on a mountain trek because usually there is no shelter anywhere in the mountain. Plus the fact that it has IS lessens the need to have to carry a tripod up the mountain. Yay. The camera and case are easy to carry in the car, a boat or into an airplane. I can fit the camera connected to the lens, spare CF cards and spare battery inside. Its probably the most compact birding kit. Second thing I learned is that the 100-400 can go really close to the subject. I have taken a few shots with the lens set a 400mm from around a little less than 4 feet. Its like a zoom/ macro/ birding lens. Its very versatile and opens up the possibility of many kinds of pictures. Tiny Frog from Ixi's Pond Canon 50D 100-400, 400mm, ISO 160, 1/250, f5.6, handheld  Canon 50D 100-400, 400mm, ISO 800, 1/160, f5.6, handheld Delicate Petals  Canon 50D 100-400, 400mm, ISO 640, 1/100, f5.6, handheld I hope this helps those thinking about getting the lenses mentioned. |
|
|
|
Post by Toto Gamboa on May 27, 2009 11:42:30 GMT
Great thead here Tonji. Mastah just pointed me here. I never looked at this before as I am a Nikon user. But just a few days ago, I realized I have to move over to Canon. I'll be faced with the same questions like you had. If it is ok, can I ask what and where is that shop you got your 100-400mm? Seems they were very nice in allowing you to conduct all those testing. Any person from that shop you can recommend? Thanks in advance! |
|
