Quote:
Originally Posted by The1
the 100-400 is a very nice lens, but it's a monster to carry around and if you don't have any real purpose to have it, it works out only as an occasional use lens.
also, if you're used to lenses that are constant F stops like a 2.8 or f4, you will find it a bit of a pain sometimes as it has a changing F stop requiring you to adjust exposure every time you zoom in and out.
Don't get me wrong, I love my 100-400, but it really only has use on one of the 2 cameras i have as my 70-200mm zooms almost as far when put on my crop body. And it maintains it's aperture settings throughout focal range.
Uses i have found for my 100-400mm: Shooting horse riding events on my 5DmkII and very seldomly on my 7D, good for a profile shot of a horse jumping a fence, but too much zoom for the rest of the ring, unlike on 5DII
and some shooting of birds on the 7D. Now if i lived in Hawaii and was shooting surfers all day, or doing celeb red carpet events, it might be great for some profile shots while stuck in a crowd a little far back.
Would i recommend the lens? Yes i would, it's one you would keep for years and enjoy from time to time.
Do you need it? No, you could probably grab a 70-200 F4 and a 1.4X tc or 2X and have just as much flexibility. plus you'd have a TC you could use on other lenses as well. It is big and heavy, and the push pull type zoom makes a lot of people nervous. subjects have to be about 9' away at least.
|
On the other hand, the 70-200 when put on the 5DII doesn't really provide much zoom compared to the 100-400 when compared to a crop body. It becomes more of a portrait type lens with it's uses. And it does well, it has nice contrast and sharpness. Last time i did a photo shoot, i used the 70-200 and my 135 for a lot of the shots.
the 70-200 is (in my opinion) light, and has a nice internal focus, so the camera doesn't change size on you or unbalance the weight. lots of people get the giggles when the see the 100-400 fully extended with a lens hood on. not that it's a pro or con, it's just funny.
I don't find the sharpness too far off between the 2 lenses but the constant f stop in the 70-200 is a life saver if you're a Manual mode shooter for most of your shots.
A big note i never mentioned is that i find the AF on the 70-200 is probably the fastest and most accurate of all my lenses, which makes it great for sports or just a quick shot of something where timing is everything. The IS on it is also one of the best i've used on any lenses, it's up to 4 stops of stabilization where i think it's 3 on the 100-400, and you can definitely see it while you're looking through the view finder.
I carry both sometimes and between the 2 of them, i know when i've got the 100-400 in my bag. Lately it's started to get left at home depending on my needs for it that day. there's been very very few times where i open my bag and think "wow, could use my 100-400 here" and when i do have it with me, it's only on the camera for a moment or two for just a couple shots, then i switch lenses again. But when i do use it, it is enjoyable.
so if you want a money well spent kind of post.
if you're using a crop body, i wouldn't think twice, and i would recommend getting the 70-200 F4 IS or even the 2.8 if the money is available.
if on full frame, the 100-400 has more uses, however it is still big and hefty. and i think a 70-200 with a TC would potentially make for a better option, although you start to lose your faster lens abilities when you throw one on.
I love both, but if i'm being honest, you'd get more use out of the 70-200 for the money you spend.