Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Canon Lenses

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Feb 6, 2005, 2:11 PM   #21
Senior Member
 
bobbyz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 1,423
Default

Golfer, I am very happy with the 100-400L. For the money it is real great for that kind of reach. Most people who say IS is not for me, probably don't shoot often at that range. Ask any folks who shoot with 500F4 and 600F4 and have 1.4x or even 2x TCs on top of that, how helpfull IS is even when you using heavy tripods. For flight shots you don't care about IS. The cheap 1.4x tc on 100-400 is usuable in good light situations. I think it will give better results if I was using a tripod rather than been hand held.

Like Eric said, I too would buy if canon released something like the Nikon 200-400F4 VR.

If you don't mind using tripod most of the times, take a look at Sigma 50-500.

One thing I have noticed with canon L glass is that they hold their value. You use them and if you don't like or want something better or different, you can sell them at very good resale value
bobbyz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 7, 2005, 7:51 PM   #22
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 276
Default

Thank you, thank you guys for your help with this lense. I decided to stay with my game plan and ordered the 100x400. Thank you Eric and Bobbyz for your help.

NHL Thank you so much, you have shown me a lense that may still become part of my kit. I had spent much time on the net researching the 100x400 and not once did I see anything on your suggested 120x300. The 2.8 on this lense for its size is remarkable. Thank you for taking time to point this out to me.

I went ahead with the Canon becuase: 1. IS, this works for me and it seems I never have my tripod when I need it. 2. Extra reach of the 400. 3. Canon quality. 4. I found no other lense with the same flexibility [excepet the Sigma suggest by NHL]

By the way, surely NHL doesn't stand for National Hockey League does it? LOL

para - sorry I don't meant to ignore you - I plan to use the lense for wildlige = expecially bird photography. A lot of my photos are from a canoe or riverbank it seems. I spent too much time in my mis spent youth and can't seem to get it out of my blood. LOL




Golfer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 8, 2005, 3:47 AM   #23
Super Moderator
 
peripatetic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 3,599
Default

Golfer,

I just wondered whether you needed the zoom, as you already have the 70-200. Might you be better off with a 300mm prime? You can attach the 1.4xTC to it to give you 420mm, still with AF and IS. There is also the 400mm f5.6 L.

The 300mm f4 IS L is a little cheaper than the 100-400L. Of course the faster 400mm primes look very nice but cost $gulp.

Anyway - it's all moot now because you've ordered your lens and I'm sure you're going to love it. No review that I've ever seen has a bad word to say about the image quality of that lens. The only negative I've heard is about the zoom action, and heck - it may matter if you make your living off the lens, but for hobbyists I don't see how it can be a big deal.

Enjoy - and post some pics once you get it. :-)
peripatetic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 8, 2005, 9:34 PM   #24
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 276
Default

Peripatic - Thanks for sharing your thoughts. For me at this stage, I feel the zoom is very important for framing my shots. That is mainly because I don't have a number of lenses I can choose from in my bag.

NHL probably had the closest answer for me and I plan to still look for info on the Sigma.

Bobbyz I think you are right, IS has been useful for me. Wish I could afford the 500 DO, but that is out of the ballpark for me. Your right, Canon lenses do seem to hold their value.
Golfer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 9, 2005, 8:42 AM   #25
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,547
Default

There's a myth going on...

Try to find desirable good 'fast' used lenses - Not too many right?
People hang on to them... Lenses that don't hold their value are the ones that nobody wants check out Ebay for used Canon starter lenses (or any other brands) for example

IMO if anyone can find a fast f/2.8 Sigma especially a 120-300 that don't hold their value... Jump on IT (the folk that got my 50-500 would)! :G
NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 9, 2005, 8:29 PM   #26
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 276
Default

:? Well said NHL it is hard to find any good lense used. I think what bobbyz was trying to say is that when you do find them they are very close fo full retail cost.
By the wey, I like the looks of your Sigman lense. Tried to find some other opinions on them but fell short. Anywhere you could send me. I may have a use for that lense also.
Golfer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 9, 2005, 11:20 PM   #27
Super Moderator
 
Hards80's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Cleveland, OH
Posts: 9,046
Default

if you already have the 100x400 is on the way... why not look into a good prime 300mm 2.8 which you can get with image stab for about the price of the sigma 120-300 2.8... you have the 100x400 if you need the zoom.. the prime lens will be sharper and will have the combination of the fast 2.8 and the image stab... just an idea, can't go wrong either way :G

style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #000000"enjoy,dustin
Hards80 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 10, 2005, 12:37 AM   #28
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,547
Default

Hards80 wrote:
Quote:
... why not look into a good prime 300mm 2.8 which you can get with image stab for about the price of the sigma 120-300 2.8...
The EF-300 f/2.8 prime is twice the price of the 120-300 f/2.8!
(if it's about the same... so much for holding value hey?) :G


Golfer wrote:
Quote:
By the wey, I like the looks of your Sigman lense. Tried to find some other opinions on them but fell short. Anywhere you could send me. I may have a use for that lense also.
http://www.stevesforums.com/forums/v...c.php?id=30682
http://www.stevesforums.com/forums/v...c.php?id=32296

... more here:
http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/180589
http://photosig.pcphotoreview.com/mo...2_3128crx.aspx

... and this person shoots mainly birds (with a 2x teleconverter):
http://www.pbase.com/nikond70/birds
NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 10, 2005, 1:59 PM   #29
Super Moderator
 
Hards80's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Cleveland, OH
Posts: 9,046
Default

that was my mistake, i was thinkin of the 300 2.8 prime lens, but the price i was thinking of was for the 300 4.0 is prime.. too many numbers floatin around in my head, sometimes they land in the wrong place... :?
Hards80 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 10, 2005, 7:55 PM   #30
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 276
Default

Thanks NHL for the help on the lenses
Golfer is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 4:36 AM.