EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS USM or EF 400mm f/5.6L USM (1 Viewer)

[CCRII]

Which of these would be the better choice? Primary use will be birding.

The EF 400 f/5.6L USM is $300 less then the other choice.

Thanks.

 

[IanF]

Hi CCRII,

On behalf of Admin and the Moderators, welcome to Bird Forum :t:

This is a question that's been asked quite a few times and there's already been a fair amount of discussion.

I own both and find it very difficult to choose between them - they'e both Canon 'L' series lenses so the optics are superb.

As to which lens I take out with me then it's a question of what I expect to be doing.

Purely for bird photos then I prefer the 400mm f5,6 as it's a little lighter and more compact and works well with teleconverter attached. I also prefer the built in lens hood. The autofocus is slightly faster as well, so better suited for birds in flight.

If the weather isn't so good with overcast skies the I prefer the 100-400mm as the IS helps a lot when hand holding. I also find it's a better lens for close up (macro) photos with extension tubes attached as it has a lot closer minimum focus. Even without the extension tubes the closer minimum focus maks it a better lens for feeding station use where birds are petty close. It takes a teleconverter as well but how effective it is in operating seems to depend on the camera body good with 30D - okay with 20D - less okay with 400D and 350D.

If you look in the Canon forum you'll locate the other threads where these lenses have been discussed at length. The zoom was once regarded as inferior to the prime by some, but many regard them as equals now.

 

[CCRII]

Purely for bird photos then I prefer the 400mm f5,6 as it's a little lighter and more compact and works well with teleconverter attached. I also prefer the built in lens hood. The autofocus is slightly faster as well, so better suited for birds in flight.

Does this mean that I will not be able to get flight shots with the other lens?

I do live in a temperate climate which is overcast a great deal of the time even in summer. Winter is usally bitter cold -10F. But yes lots of overcast days.:storm:

 

[IanF]

You can still get decent flight sots with the zoom, but no as easily as with the 400mm prime it just takes slightly linger to lock on focus.

 

[GYRob]

to add to this it also depends how close you can get and how big the birds are .
although not as sharp as the 400f5.6 a 300f4is + 1.4tc may be an option as you say it can often be cloudy so will a 300mm do at times you gain a stop at f4 over f5.6.
Just a thought.
Rob.

 

[CCRII]

to add to this it also depends how close you can get and how big the birds are .
although not as sharp as the 400f5.6 a 300f4is + 1.4tc may be an option as you say it can often be cloudy so will a 300mm do at times you gain a stop at f4 over f5.6.
Just a thought.
Rob.

But if you have to use a 1.4tc wont that negate the ability to focus fast enough to take flight shots? Which TC would I get? Budget is a concern here. I only $1400 max for this lens. One other concern, I have a 400D body.

Thanks.

 

[arco13]

Hi CCRII,
I have used the EF 400 f/5.6L USM for about 3 years now. It's an amazing lens. 5.6 kind of hurts sometimes but just get a monopod or lift weights sometimes and that will help. Never owned an EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS USM but I hear that’s a great wildlife lens. As mentioned above, primes are always sharper.

 

[Keith Reeder]

"Primes are always sharper".

One of yours (prime):
http://www.birdforum.net/gallery/showphoto.php/photo/98357/ppuser/42939

One of mine (zoom - and a 1.4x TC - hand-held):
http://www.birdforum.net/gallery/showphoto.php/photo/135830/ppuser/4913

Always sharper?

CCRII, the zoom is a wonderfully versatile thing: just yesterday I got shots I would not have obtained but for the ability to zoom; the close focussing distance is often useful; IS is a Godsend in the overcast conditions you will shoot in; and - as you can see - it wants for nothing in terms of IQ.

 

[gmax]

"Primes are always sharper".

One of yours (prime):
http://www.birdforum.net/gallery/showphoto.php/photo/98357/ppuser/42939

One of mine (zoom - and a 1.4x TC - hand-held):
http://www.birdforum.net/gallery/showphoto.php/photo/135830/ppuser/4913

Always sharper?

CCRII, the zoom is a wonderfully versatile thing: just yesterday I got shots I would not have obtained but for the ability to zoom; the close focussing distance is often useful; IS is a Godsend in the overcast conditions you will shoot in; and - as you can see - it wants for nothing in terms of IQ.

LOL, I was quite surprised not to see an immediate reply ... now I feel better B
IanF has said it all, and Keith is true as well (biased though by the love for his zoom)

[Psssst, CCRII - it's true that primes are sharper, just don't tell Keith :-O ]

 

[epervier]

nice shot,paul
looks great to me.

 

[mjmw]

As mentioned above, there are hundreds of repies to this question on various forums...and there is no correct answer

There is no difference in image quality between the lenses and both are 400mm - about the minimum focal length you could want for a bird photography lens in the majority of situations - so the factors that will help you decide will be more general.

Do you have other lenses in the 100-300 range? If so, is the zoom really an advantage then and are you OK with the push-pull zoom?
If you are going to mainly have the lens at 400mm for birds and on a tripod/beanbag is the extra weight and cost of the IS really worth it?
Are you interested in the closer-focus of the zoom?

Also, try holding the lenses if you can...the handling and feel is very different for both.

For what its worth, I chose the 400 prime...but because of the above questions rather than image quality or "primes are always sharper".

 

[mjmw]

"Primes are always sharper".

I know Max beat me to this but it took you 26 hours to reply to the OP :eek!: :eek!:

and Keith, you know primes are sharper...you are just in denial...I am no longer sure who you are trying to convince...us or yourself

 

[JohnZ]

Everybody knows the truth about prime lenses and it is just a case of accepting it........LOL Taken with my trusty 400mm f5.6.

 

[GYRob]

But if you have to use a 1.4tc wont that negate the ability to focus fast enough to take flight shots? Which TC would I get? Budget is a concern here. I only $1400 max for this lens. One other concern, I have a 400D body.

Thanks.

the tc on the 300f4 does not slow it down by much and that combo may well focuse faster than the zoom but not as fast as the 400f5,6 prime but not by much .the main thing with these lenses is to set the limit switch so the lens has less work to do racking the focus.
i use canon tc's but other's are just as good .
Rob.

 

[paul goode]

Oops pressed the wrong buttons there
Think I said, to keep it simple, You pays your money and takes your choice. Both lenses are perfectly capable of taking great images.
And posted this as a sample flight shot from the zoom.

Not a patch on your dragonfly's John. I take it thats what you were proving?

 

[JohnZ]

Not really Paul just trying to elicit a response from Keith...LOL
I do truly believe that there is not a lot of difference between the two lenses. However I also believe that the 400mm f5.6 has the slightest of edges over the zoom but not the versatility of same.
I reckon Keith is deliberately ignoring this thread. HaHa

 

[CCRII]

Oops pressed the wrong buttons there
Think I said, to keep it simple, You pays your money and takes your choice. Both lenses are perfectly capable of taking great images.
And posted this as a sample flight shot from the zoom.

Not a patch on your dragonfly's John. I take it thats what you were proving?

Daaaannnnngggg!! This image is unreal!

Well I decided on the 100-400 (of course the place I ordered it does not have it yet, but will be getting it in in a couple days, but I already paid for it) but now I am thinking I made the wrong choice, I think I should have done the 300F4 and the tC would be more capable in gloomy michigan. :h?:

 

[martin england]

I reckon this discussion has been on many forums in the past and I think at the end of the day its down to personal choice. Here’s a link were all 3 lenses are tested together http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/lenses/forgotten-400.shtml . Personally I love the 300 f4 (is) plus 1.4tc if needed. I tried the 100-400 twice and got duds both times. I have never tried the 400 lens but it is meant to be the sharpest of the bunch, but you do lose the (is). Basically if you need (is) then 300 plus 1.4x but if (is) isn’t important to you then the 400 is the best bet. But saying that if you want a walk about lens that’s very versatile then the 100-400 would probably be your answer. Again its down to personal choice, all im sure can give you great images.

martin

 

[macshark]

The prime is always sharper except when IS helps the zoom to eliminate camera shake...


Joking aside, one thing I can say for sure is that the prime is always faster focusing - except, of course for objects that are closer than the minimum focus distance of the prime but farther than the minimum focus distance of the zoom...

 

[CCRII]

I reckon this discussion has been on many forums in the past and I think at the end of the day its down to personal choice. Here’s a link were all 3 lenses are tested together http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/lenses/forgotten-400.shtml . Personally I love the 300 f4 (is) plus 1.4tc if needed. I tried the 100-400 twice and got duds both times. I have never tried the 400 lens but it is meant to be the sharpest of the bunch, but you do lose the (is). Basically if you need (is) then 300 plus 1.4x but if (is) isn’t important to you then the 400 is the best bet. But saying that if you want a walk about lens that’s very versatile then the 100-400 would probably be your answer. Again its down to personal choice, all im sure can give you great images.

martin

Question, does the 1.4x tc mess with the IS with a 400D body?

I like the idea of the f4 since Michigan is overcast quite a lot!