Canon EF 100-400mm f4.5-5.6L IS USM

[AussieTimmeh]

It depends if you were going to live at 300, or you if would use 400 if you had it.

300 is not even close to 400 and it's the difference between an ok shot and a fantastic shot, in my opinion. I have tried a few 300s and having a great quality 400 is not to be underestimated. The 'Bigma' was not on par either.

Just my opinion.

[andrewc]

Assuming its motorsport photography, I've found 300mm to be mostly ideal for majority of trackside work, with some exceptions depending on the circuit. I've been using a borrowed 100-400L for a couple of weeks as my Sigma was away for repair.

Since getting a 7D with 18 megapixies, I've found I stopped using my 1.4TC as I could get better results by cropping, without sacrificing sharpness or focussing speed.

[Peter Mallett]

actually I've just given it a bit more thought and the attached is onre of the shots I took at the weekend. F10, 1/400, ISO 200, manual mode. On reflection the results aren't too bad. The ship in the distance is about a km away.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/4098191...n/photostream/

[Hubble]

Originally Posted by AussieTimmeh

I posted my opinion of this with test shots earlier in the thread. You end up with a very heavy setup that will not perform as well as a 100-400L but is more versatile when you don't want that sort of range.

I shoot aircraft as a side business and I wouldn't want to be holding that weight above my head all day to get worse results, but my situation is different to yours.

The 70-200 with either a 1.4 or 2x teleconverter isn't too bad actually.....if you're struggling to hold that up maybe you need to get to the gym more......

Try handholding a 400mm F2.8 fitted with a 1.4 AND a 2x tele while tracking aircraft......now that is a challenge!

[AussieTimmeh]

Originally Posted by Hubble

The 70-200 with either a 1.4 or 2x teleconverter isn't too bad actually.....if you're struggling to hold that up maybe you need to get to the gym more......

Try handholding a 400mm F2.8 fitted with a 1.4 AND a 2x tele while tracking aircraft......now that is a challenge!

Depends if you have to do it for a few aircraft for fun or for 12 hours + in one sitting for work like I do. Anyone holding anything above their head height for that long gets tiring. Then the lighter weight of the 100-400 combined with the better results over a 70-200 with a TC makes a real difference.

I have never borrowed a 70-200 with any brand TC that has outperformed my 100-400 either so for applications like mine, I wouldn't choose anything else. However, if you're not earning money with the lens or are well cashed up, then you need to consider compromising and go for a lens that you can use elsewhere too.

I probably do need to get to the gym more regardless, I need to put on 60kg of muscle mass between now and when my daughter starts bringing boys home!

[Hubble]

Originally Posted by Peter Mallett

Er, actually I was wrong. Looked at it this morning it's an F1.4 70-200, USM, L. Oops.

Carry on, just ignore me.

I think that'll be an F1:4 70-200mm.......

[ivanalesi]

Guys, what do you reckon would be the best addition to a Canon 7D for F1 trackside photography? Somewhere like Istanbul, huge run-offs... Reach is important & noise is very much not welcomed!
I don't know how to check what kind of equipment the F1 pros are using... but that would be very helpful if you can share

[andrewc]

Will be using Canon 1D / 1DS or similar spec cameras with focal lengths from 35mm to 600mm

[MikeHoyer]

I haven't been to Istanbul, but looking at you will definitely want 500mm or 600mm at the long end.

[woodyracing]

here is the lens we have been waiting for (maybe?)

http://www.dpreview.com/news/1102/11...on200400mm.asp

[MikeHoyer]

Just seen this. Looks pretty good! I do like my 300 and 500mm primes, but having it all in one (sort of) would make it easy carrying them around.

[andrewc]

If thats the newly announced 200-400 f/4 IS L then it sounds great. Prices - probably around £ 6k to start with I have heard.

[E-racer]

Originally Posted by andrewc

If thats the newly announced 200-400 f/4 IS L then it sounds great. Prices - probably around £ 6k to start with I have heard.

I knew there had to be a catch somewhere

[woodyracing]

doh !

[Snapper Baz]

Hubble...I never did have a 100 - 400...I wish I had though! Top decent bloke Mr Bryant lent me his tired example (but worked fine) and I took it to Los Angeles/Vegas with me last year but I used it mainly for my aviation shots and it helped a huge amount as am limited to my trusty 70-200 2.8.

On returning last year I thought what was going to be my cheapest option to get to 400ml so I went for abrand new (bought in the USA) 2x Canon Converter and stuck it on my 2.8 zoom...(my 1.4x converter works fine)...and took it to Nellis AFB for some military jet action...the result was absalute crap!

The 2x was not sharp at all...everything was soft...everything! It may have been ok for some but for me it was a waste of time though through the view finder it all looked fine and impressive. I got my money back on the 2x. So I will certainly go for the 100 - 400ml as this helped me so much with my aviation stuff though didn't give it much use with the motorsport stuff I did at the time. Going to need something for my next NASCAR round at Sonoma!...cheers JB for that!!

[Richard B]

A useful site for tracking price movements on lenses cameras etc
http://www.camerapricebuster.co.uk/prod37.html

[AussieTimmeh]

Originally Posted by Snapper Baz

On returning last year I thought what was going to be my cheapest option to get to 400ml so I went for abrand new (bought in the USA) 2x Canon Converter and stuck it on my 2.8 zoom...(my 1.4x converter works fine)...and took it to Nellis AFB for some military jet action...the result was absalute crap!

This is what I posted earlier in the thread, the other disadvantage is that the 2x TC + 70-200 f/2.8 is the weight over a 100-400L, starts to get pretty heavy after a few hours.

[Peter Mallett]

Even a numpty like me can get reasonable results with one of these lenses.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/4098191...7626117446049/

[NelisB]

I've just put my name on the list to hire one when I'm going to the spa 1000km. Anyone with good advice on what to and what not to do with the lens? I've shot a couple of trackdays for my friend that did some bike racing but that was with a eos 400d and a 70-300 if I'm correct.

Now I'm taking a 7D from a mate so any advice? I've already booked it a day early to try and get some practice besides the highway...

[Richard B]

The lens is fairly straightforward, IS mode 2 for panning shots mode 1 for all else. However, the 7D is quite a steep learning curve, I've owned mine for a month (having used a 350D and 30D for the past few years) and am still learning! Best advice I can give is borrow the 7D earlier.

[andrewc]

IS off for most motorsport applications.

7D - read the manual on autofocus options. Other than that its as per 40D/50D mostly.

[NelisB]

Originally Posted by Richard B

The lens is fairly straightforward, IS mode 2 for panning shots mode 1 for all else. However, the 7D is quite a steep learning curve, I've owned mine for a month (having used a 350D and 30D for the past few years) and am still learning! Best advice I can give is borrow the 7D earlier.

That won't be a problem... I'm getting it a week earlier now so I can try some shooting with the stock kit lens...