EF 100-400mm L IS USM

Having owned his lens for about three months I was almost set to sell it on after obtaining consistently soft and very poor quality images. I had installed a quality Hoya pro 1 digital uv filter on the day I had purchased the lens to protect my investment. It turns out this was destroying image quality!!!! Having removed it the quality is superb and I am so pleased with this lens. Wide open at 400mm it's perfectly acceptable but with good light stopped down to f8 it's razor sharp!! I am beginning to wander if some of the negative comments on this lens, in particular the softness of its images are due to it not favouring the use of filters? With the filter removed my lens is literally transformed. If you are looking for a quality versatile lens with image stabilisation (which in my opinion is very effective) do not hesitate to buy this lens. I had a 400mm 5.6 l and I find the 100-400 far more suited to my needs. Due to the IS I find it excellent to use as a walk about lens and easy to handhold and a perfect companion for my canon 7d.

I had this lens for about 1 year before i changed to a canon 400 F5.6 prime and i think the canon 400 F5.6 prime is a better lens. I use it for wildlife photography mainly birds and i think it is better because i find the images i get are sharper , the AF is noticebly faster and its a tad lighter. Although the 100-400 has IS i think the prime is better as i never used the IS so if you are thinking about getting one of the two lenes for wildlife photography i would go for the 400mm F5.6.

I have had mine for three years now and always use it without a tripod to photograph birds. I have taken it on dusty safaris in Namibia, Kenya and India. Also in cold very wet conditions in Alaska and Canada with no problems.

I wouldn't consider going on a Wildlife holiday without it!