Canon 100-400 mm f/4.5-5.6IS vs. 300mm f/4 IS

[Craig Thayer]

I recently purchased Canon 30D with a kit lens. I now want to begin using this terrific camera for bird photography. Many birders in the Chicago area use the 100-400mm zoom with great results but others have said I should consider the 300mm f/4. What are the pros and cons of these lenses for bird photography? Are than any other IS lenses I should consider in that price range??

THANKS

Craig Thayer

[postcardcv]

Personally I'd go for the 100-400 IS over the 300 f4 IS, the 100-400 has a better close focus, more reach and the versatility of a zoom. The 300 f4 is a bit faster but if shooting birds you'd probably use it with a 1.4x tc quite a lot which would remove this advantage. The best thing would be to try both lenses for yourself and see what you think of them.

[erwinx]

definitely the 300 f/4 if bird photography is your primary area. It's optically superior to the 100-400 even with 1.4x TC attached, faster in AF, better resistance to dust and sand.

[Keith Reeder]

Any photographic proof of that, Erwin?

;)

My 100-400mm is fantastic, even with a 1.4x on (560mm) and I've seen absolutely no definitive proof at all that the 300mm f/4 + TC is better than the 100-400 - and God knows, I did enough research on the subject before I bought my 100-400.

This topic has come up a few times on here, and when it comes right down to it the 100-400 comes out on top every time for Real World bird shooting.

(Not that I'm suggesting that the 300mm isn't a great lens too - it is. But just not demonstrably "better", in a Real World sense, than the 100-400mm).

[dennisalden01]

Hi,

I have the 300 + 1.4x and my wife has the 100-400. I chose the 300 as I did not like the trombone zoom, whilst my wife likes the convenience of a zoom.

Both are good lenses and I see very little, if any difference. The 300 is a great butterfly lens - and both are a little short (IMHO) for serious bird photography.

I think it all comes down to your style of photography - if you want convenience its the zoom - if you want the closer focusing then its the 300.

I think both are very capable lenses and to get better you need very deep pockets! Also I am sure that many of the problems people have with the 100-400 is due to technique rather than the lens itself.

Whatever you choose I'm sure you won't be disappointed :)


dennis

[paul goode]

Hi Dennis,

I also thought long and hard over these 2 lenses. Both excellent lenses but to me the 300mm just isn't long enough to be a birding lens. The zoom has the extra length AND will work with a 1.4x tc if needed to get to 560mm.

I eventually chose the zoom and can honestly say I'm delighted. It produces excellent images throughout the range, is light enough to carry all day without noticing it and has the flexibility of a the 100-400 range.

Paul

[erwinx]

I was not particularly impressed by the 100-400 samples I've seen at max zoom and wide open. Maybe they were well-used lenses with minute optical errors and accumulated dust/dirt caused by years of pushing and pulling the zoom.

Coincidentally, this is the view shared by Bob Atikins (if you read photo.net you'll know who he is). http://www.bobatkins.com/photography/reviews/300-4.html

"I found that the EF300/4L + 1.4x TC also outperformed the EF 100-400/4.5-5.6L IS USM at 400mm "

Anyway here are some 300 f/4+1.4x shots which I took couple weeks ago purely for your viewing pleasure (as web-sized pics prove nothing :) ):

http://kingfisher.clubsnap.org/gallery/albums/album20/GZ6V4704_web.jpg
http://kingfisher.clubsnap.org/gallery/albums/album20/GZ6V4938_Puffin_web.jpg

[RJL2005]

Having bought a good 100-400 2nd hand for £700 two months or so ago I have to say that's what I would recommend. I don't understand buying a lens just to add an extender too it. Before this I used the 400mm 5,6L (also great), but the zoom is alot easier to use with the IS (IMHO).
Rhod

[postcardcv]

definitely the 300 f/4 if bird photography is your primary area. It's optically superior to the 100-400 even with 1.4x TC attached, faster in AF, better resistance to dust and sand.

I found the exact opposite when I was testing lens, I found that the 100-400 was faster focusing than the 300 f4 with 1.4x tc attached. As for image quality, this will always be debated but personally I'm more than happy with the 100-400.

[gkrpepper]

As much as I love my 300mm f4 with the 1.4 extender, I have to go with Keith, I should have have gotten the 100-400mm.

Why? because it's got to be more versatile, ie. when you're to close to the object (like a duck), or when you need the extra 100 -160mm (when they're just a little to high in the tree) or to small (painted bunting on a wire). I don't know if that makes any sense, as I am a newbie in Bird Photography myself

BTW, I am impressed by all shots, either or, and some with a 200-500mm Tamron, like KC's.

I guess its just the shooter, not what he/she shoots with


Gunter

[andrew_chick]

In April I went through the whole process of buying a new Canon lens, should I buy the 100-400mm or the 300mm. In the end I went for the 300mm BUT I couldn't find one to buy anywhere (Warehouse Express had a waiting list!). So, in the end I brought the ............. Canon 400mm EF 5.6 and have never looked back - the first 2 attached pictures below are hand held with a Canon D30........lots more to see here http://www.forktail.co.uk/pictures/index.html

Andrew.............

[shoshone]

Personally I'd go for the 100-400 IS over the 300 f4 IS, the 100-400 has a better close focus, more reach and the versatility of a zoom. The 300 f4 is a bit faster but if shooting birds you'd probably use it with a 1.4x tc quite a lot which would remove this advantage. The best thing would be to try both lenses for yourself and see what you think of them.

Surely if he bought the 300 F4 IS prime he would have AF with the TC - no taped pins and no bad hunting problem when going for BIFs ??

Jamie

[Keith Reeder]

But no AF speed or accuracy improvements over the 100-400, Jamie, so why bother?

[gmax]

the 100-400 has a better close focus

What is the MFD of the 100-400 against the 300 IS?

[Roy C]

What is the MFD of the 100-400 against the 300 IS?
Max : 2.5 metres for the 300 and 1.8 metres for the 100-400 .

UPDATE You are correct Max MFD for the 300 f4 IS is 1.5 metres (I was looking at the non IS).

[gmax]

Max : 2.5 metres for the 300 and 1.8 metres for the 100-400 .

Thanks Roy, but I'm getting confused: don't know about the 100-400, I thought that the 300mm f/4 IS was 1.5m (while on my 300mm f/4 non IS is 2.5m)

[paul goode]

Thanks Roy, but I'm getting confused: don't know about the 100-400, I thought that the 300mm f/4 IS was 1.5m (while on my 300mm f/4 non IS is 2.5m)

Link to canon website Max

http://www.canon.co.uk/For_Home/Product_Finder/Cameras/EF_Lenses/Fixed_Focal_Length/EF_300mm_f40L_USM/index.asp

[Roy C]

Thanks Roy, but I'm getting confused: don't know about the 100-400, I thought that the 300mm f/4 IS was 1.5m (while on my 300mm f/4 non IS is 2.5m)
You are correct Max - it is 1.5 mtrs for the IS version.

[Roy C]

Link to canon website Max

http://www.canon.co.uk/For_Home/Product_Finder/Cameras/EF_Lenses/Fixed_Focal_Length/EF_300mm_f40L_USM/index.asp

Thats were I was caught out Paul - that is the non IS version (the IS version is not on the Canon UK site)

[paul goode]

Thats were I was caught out Paul - that is the non IS version (the IS version is not on the Canon UK site)

I've got to admit I did wonder. In the blurb it mentions IS but nothing else stacked up right. Impressive website - not!

Paul

[postcardcv]

What is the MFD of the 100-400 against the 300 IS?

sorry Max I did exactly what others have done and look at the spec of the non-IS version, so MFD is a tick in the box for the 300 f4 IS.

[erwinx]

the above discussion illustrates the point that the 100-400 is a great general purpose lens. If I were going on a safari and could only bring one lens to shoot large animals to small birds, 100-400 would be a good choice.

On the other hand, if I wish to specialise in shooting, say, birds in my home patch, I would pick a prime, either 300 f/4 or 400 f/5.6 or 500/600 f/4. The 400 f/5.6 has the edge on AF tracking of birds in flight, while the 300 f/4 IS is very useful for handheld shots of small birds in the bushes (the shorter MFD helps too).

Here are some pictures taken handheld with the 300 f/4 IS + 1.4x TC:

[paul goode]

To try to give the OP a fair comparison I've picked out 2 small birds in bushes and 2 flight shots taken with the 100-400and 20d. Wish our little birds were as colourful as Erwinx's ;)

Paul

[postcardcv]

On the other hand, if I wish to specialise in shooting, say, birds in my home patch, I would pick a prime, either 300 f/4 or 400 f/5.6 or 500/600 f/4. The 400 f/5.6 has the edge on AF tracking of birds in flight, while the 300 f/4 IS is very useful for handheld shots of small birds in the bushes (the shorter MFD helps too).

I don't think you'll get anyone disagreeing about the two big Canon primes being outstanding birding lenses, it's just a shame they are so expensive.

I agree that the 400 f5.6 is a great lens, but the original poster was looking for an IS lens which brings it back to his original question, 100-400 IS or 300 f4 IS. Personally I find that for birds you normally want as much reach as possible, so it would be safe at assume the 300 f4 would often be used with a 1.4x tc. This would remove a couple of the advantages of the 300 (the f4 and the faster focusing), so really it comes down to personal preference between a zoom or a prime. Between Paul and your photos you've shown just how good both set ups can be.

[eastwood]

I have both lens. I use the 100-400 in Canada while keeping my 300 f4 in Hong Kong so that when I go back, I only need to take the body and 1.4X with me. I find both are good for me. I have a friend who has the 300 F4 IS and 400 F5.6 (No IS) He personally loves the 456 more because its is sharper and focus faster. The draw back is it has a long minimum focusing distance and 5.6 without IS really needs a bit of light or else a tripod.

[Craig Thayer]

Thanks to everyone who responded to my query regarding an IS lens for my Canon 30D. I have decided to order the 100-400mm zoom. After I have used it for a while I will post my review of the lens and hopefully some pictures!!!

Craig Thayer