• Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.

    Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
ZEISS DTI thermal imaging cameras. For more discoveries at night, and during the day.

Dodgy Canon 100-400mm IS lenses (1 Viewer)

C

crrlb001

Well-known member
Hi everyone.

Following a considerable amount of research on this and other websites (many thanks to Paul Goode and Nomdeploom) I am on the verge of committing to a Canon 30D and Canon 100-400mm IS USM lens. Having distilled a brain-numbing volume of information I really thought I had cracked it. But, not satisfied, I continued to research and stumbled on a forum discussing the variable quality of the Canon 100-400mm lens - bloody hell. Several "Googles" and further searching of this forum revealed that there appear to be some inferior samples of this lens. I wonder if anyone has any thoughts or experience of this. Was it a quality control issue that has now been resolved? My concern is that as a newcomer to DSLR photography and this quality (and cost) of lens - my current camera is a Canon S2 - how on earth will I know I have a dud until it is too late. I have nothing to benchmark against. Any thoughts or advice would be appreciated.

Thanks

Barry
 
Last edited:
Hi Barry,

I don't think there is anyone out there with a 100-400is who hasn't read the horror stories and thought long and hard about committing their hard earned cash to a potential pile of doggy-doos.

However, although there probably is some substance to these stories I think, and based my purchase on the fact, that recent lenses are more consistent, IQ wise, than previous models. Romy Ocon, Keith Reeder, PostcardCV and plenty of others who I apologize for not mentioning have recently acquired these lenses and are very happy with them.

I suppose its a fact that bad news spreads like wildfire, especially on the internet, and the majority of people who are perfectly happy with their purchase don't make a song and dance about it.

I think in some ways the 100-400is is a victim of its own success. It sells in big numbers and inevitably some people who's experience of long lenses is limited maybe a bit quick to criticize.
Using long lenses is something that has to be learned, good images don't come on the first afternoon, well certainly not for me they haven't!! if you look long enough you'll find someone criticizing every lens ever made. Not many question the big primes though because so few people can afford to actually get their hands on one...

Undoubtedly there are duds of every lens etc out there but I honestly don't believe you are any more likely to get a dud 100-400is than any other lens.

Paul
 
Last edited:
Hi again,

Been thinking.

When you get your new lens.

Aim at something stationary thats fairly contrasty, with
Good light
IS off
Lens on a tripod
One shot focus set
centre focus point set
iso 100/200
shutter speed at least 1/250
fire shutter with self timer

If the resultant image looks good (after pp'ing!) the lens is fine, what happens afterwards is all down to technique.

Paul
 
Hello Barry,
I have recently bought this lens and combined it with an EOS350D and i'm still getting to grips with it, but so far, so good. I'm happy with it's performance. I love the image stabiliser and the slower shutter speeds you can use,without a tripod.
I hope to use it more when the weather gets a bit nicer and i've got some time off work!
Good luck with whatever you choose.

Alan.
 
Barry,Paul is writing words of wisdom.The 100-400 is an excellent lens.But much is due to the user to produce a good image.I am still one of those people who uses the "P" mode on a cam,but this lens almost always produced good shots,if any were not good,it was my fault,contrasty lighting etc,and not using the controls in the camera which are there to help produce good pics.
 
Personally I think there are more iffy 100-400 owners than there are iffy 100-400 lenses!

;)

It does seem like there may have been a slight QC issue with older copies of this lens, but I honestly get the impression that the vast majority of newer lenses are very good to excellent in quality: mine's a 2006 lens and I reckon it stacks up against anything else out there - I've taken pictures that are every bit as sharp and detailed as many pictures I've seen from the big Canon primes, even when I've got a converter on (example below).

Ultimately there's always a risk with buying any lens (I've seen more postings from unhappy 500mm f/4 IS users than you might anticipate!), and as Paul says there's a learning curve to getting the best out of the 100-400: but I wouldn't give mine up if you put a gun to my head.
 

Attachments

  • lapwingx.jpg
    lapwingx.jpg
    197.6 KB · Views: 296
paul goode said:
Using long lenses is something that has to be learned, good images don't come on the first afternoon, well certainly not for me they haven't!! if you look long enough you'll find someone criticizing every lens ever made. Not many question the big primes though because so few people can afford to actually get their hands on one...
Click to expand...

I totally agree with this, it's amazing how often people complain about the quality of images they are getting in the first week. It really does take time to get the hang of using a long lens, especially when you are new to DSLRs. I have been using long lenses for a few years, but it still took me a while to get used to using the 100-400. My initial shots were disapointing, but I've spent some time with it and am now happy with the results (though I still reckon that in time I'll make it work even better).

When you do get your new gear, first spend some time getting used to the camera, then the long lens. Read threads on here and also look at www.worldphotographyforum.com for tips on getting the most from your camera and info on using long lenses. Then just spend time using your kit, don't expect stunning results overnight, but keep at it and they results will come (you just need to look in Keith's gallery to see how capable the 30D & 100-400 combo is).
 
It's a ripper lens, buy with confidence. There are a zillion places with good 100-400 samples to examine, Keith's gallery is always worthwhile. I bought my 100-400 in 2005 and am more than happy with it - lots of examples at http://tannin.net.au - though I don't use it as much as I'd like to since I got the 500/4.

Also, don't believe anything you read on the internet. (Unless I wrote it!)
 
I had problems with a 100-400 lens a Fungal growth in a sealed unit within the lens and with a 30D the shutter failed both faults occured 14 months after purchase Canon were not interested and most unhelpful with the lens failer. This has not put me of Canon products I now own a Canon 400DO lens and I am using a 400D until my 30D is repaired. Canon spare parts come from Germany and delivery time appears to be three weeks from a company like Canon its customer support seems poor.
 
To follow up on what PostcardCV says - I've had the 100-400 for a year now, and even though I did alright with it from Day One because I'd been using a broadly similar Sigma lens with my Nikon cameras, I am getting better at using it, even after this time.
 
The real challenge is as stated. "getting the most out of what you have". If I were starting over the 30D and the 100-400 would be it. But I had a Minolta film cameras and the lens fit a Sony. So I bought a Sony body and for a while I coveted a Canon bad so I could take those good pictures. Now I have learned as I improve that it isn't the camera. Its the technique and craft of the camera operators. The lenses and camera today as a whole are better than what most of us produce as pictures. By the time you learn to squeeze everything out of the Canon 30D and the 100-400 they might have something new out that is slightly better.
 
I have an S2 and a 350D paired with the 100-400mm L lens. As all above has said so far, it's a process of learning to get the best from it, but the difference in quality of shots between the two setups is quite frankly, amazing.

When I first used it though, after seeing the sort of results Keith was getting, I did wonder... but it was the user, not the lens. Now I occasionally get some stonking pics with it, and like Keith says, I'd not part with it for anything. Well, maybe a Porsche 911 Turbo in that deep magenta colour... :)
 
That's exactly it, Pete.

When I first got my Sigma 80-400mm OS I'd never used a stabilised lens: I'd being doing OK previously using a nice little Sigma 135-400mm hand-held and assumed that I'd take to the the 80-400mm straight away.

It took me - I kid you not - six months before I started seeing inages of the quality I'd expected: six months which included the lens going back to the shop once (they were quite rightly "rather robust" in their view that it wasn't the lens!) and me becoming more and more disillusioned.

Then one day - BANG! - It all started coming together and I never looked back. I went from "nothappynothappynothappynothappy..." to "wowdiditakethat?" overnight - but it took me six months to get there!

;)

That's why I sometimes allow myself a wry grin when I see someone declare - after one afternoon's use of the 100-400 - that they have a duff lens...
 
Keith Reeder said:
That's why I sometimes allow myself a wry grin when I see someone declare - after one afternoon's use of the 100-400 - that they have a duff lens...
Click to expand...

Especially when the subject is a ruler chucked on the floor, photographed indoors, lens handheld and camera set on full auto!

As Tannin says don't take too much notice of what appears in many forums. As a rule I tend to look to see if there is a link to a gallery or website. If there is you can see what the person is achieving and if there isn't, well.....
 
paul goode said:
If there is you can see what the person is achieving and if there isn't, well...
Click to expand...

Aye, I chuckle at that too - the number of folk on here that will happily opine about this lens or that camera without pointing at any evidence that they've ever even taken a photo with the item in question..!

I might be crap, but I provide pictorial proof of my crapness!

;)
 
Last edited:
Great response

Wow. Many thanks to everyone for the responses, advice and encouragement. I am particularly pleased to have received responses from the owners of galleries containing images that I have coveted while researching my choice of camera and lens. My mind is now made up - I think. Canon 30D (probably with the 18-135mm), 100-400mm IS and the Kenko 1.4 Teleconverter. Keith has proved this combination works - whether I'll be able to use it of course is another matter. Don't worry Paul, I will keep the Teleconverter in reserve initially. The learning curve you all talk about is daunting but I think time spent browsing this forum will be well spent. I have gleaned so much already; I just need to get my hands on the gear and have a go. My expectations of life changing improvement by stepping up from an S2 to DSLR have been tempered but at least I will not be too disappointed - well I will be, but I'll know why. I have been using my S2 manually, usually on AV and adjusting shutter speed, but I know I have much to learn.

Thanks again to all and particularly those who have been pestered by my PMs

Thanks

Barry
 
Last edited:
I agree with Keith Reeder's comment on this, I'm sure that the most of the complaints can be put down to user error.

When I bought my 100-400 6 years ago, I initially found that it was awful, bad at focusing, not sharp... in the first week I was going to return it as defective. As I used it more and more, I found it was an excellent lens, a step down from the 300mm f/2.8, 500mm, and 600mm in sharpness but look at their price.

One of the strongest points about the 100-400mm is its usefulness, long enough to capture good bird images, but light enough to handhold. I find it ideal for pelagic trips, or tropical birding, where you can use it without a tripod all day without fatigue.
 
I bought a 100-400 this February after 2 years with the 75-300 for a better reach for wildlife but also use at airshows / the local airbases and for the first 2-3 weeks I was doubtful about it as it was front-focussing by anything between 3 feet and on one occasion 40 feet (yes, seriously!) wide open in poor light on One-shot AF and was consistently soft when using AI Servo so after a few weeks of some serious testing and advice form Canon, it was sent back with the 20D to Canon's service centre at Elstree and within 10 days it was back having had the 20D's AF checked and calibrated with the 100-400 and hey presto, problem solved - seems the 20D's AF was OK for the 75-300 but with the quality of the L lens it being slightly out was exacerbated.

End result? Some cracking shots, much more in line with what I expected of a £1k purchase even in really poor weather and low light (eg yesterday in pouring rain at RAF Waddington departures day).

See the following thread from UKAR...

http://forums.airshows.co.uk/cgi-bin/ukarboard/ikonboard.cgi?;act=ST;f=9;t=34577

HTH,

Dave.
 
Warning! This thread is more than 17 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.

Similar threads

ermine
Canon EF USM L 100-400 Mk1 repair -
Replies
0
Views
788
ermine
ermine
Henry_Flower
Camera for EF 100-400, up to ~ £1000
Replies
8
Views
1K
Prestdj
Prestdj
T
Getting ready to purchase L series lense, looking for recommendations.
Replies
5
Views
1K
mikenott
mikenott
D
Beginner looking for advise (Canon 7d mkII + Tamron 100-400 Di VC USD)
Replies
12
Views
2K
mr_birdman
mr_birdman
L
Canon 80d 100-400 mk1 birds in flight not focused
Replies
3
Views
2K
johnf3f
J

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Back
Top