Pickle

[vonDrehle]

I have been looking into a telephoto lens for Sports, Animals, and a few animals here and there. I've got it down to two lenses. Canon's EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS USM and EF 400mm f/5.6L USM.

The main reason I'm worried about the EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS USM is I have read many reviews of people saying it was hard to get used to. Another is that it seems it looses quality around 400mm.

The main reason I'm worried about the EF 400mm f/5.6L USM is the single focal length. I've never used a lens that only had one focal length and I am not sure how I will adjust.

I also looked at the EF 300mm f/4L IS USM and the EF 300mm f/2.8L IS USM. Second one needing me to save a little for. But with these I had the same concern as the EF 400mm f/5.6L USM

Just some more info...
The sports I will most likely being getting photographs of are: Football, Soccer, Volleyball (Indoor), Basketball (Indoor), Few Tennis, Baseball, and Track. So basically most of my high school's sports.
Last years annual had horrible, I mean horrible photos in it so I'm trying to fix it so I don't get mad again.



Thanks for any help or suggestions.

[Ads]

[usayit]

I have the 100-400mm IS and I like it very much. In general, zooms do not perform their best at the very end of it's range in both focal length and aperature. The 100-400mm lens is no exception. Some people found its push and pull zoom design hard to get used too. I personally found it very quick to zoom in and out. See if you can try one out at a local photo retail store.

I've heard that some are pairing their 70-200mm f2.8L IS lens with a teleconverter to get that longer focal length. I personally have never done it but the 70-200mm f2.8L IS lens is a well known lens for its quality and fast aperature. The only catch is that the 70-200mm f2.8 lens plus the converter means more $$$ over the cost of the 100-400.

[vonDrehle]

Thanks. I also saw lots of people talking about the 70-200mm with a teleconverter but I wasn't quit sure as to how much zoom the converter would give you. If anyone has done this before could you tell me which of these would be best? Assumming these are the right things.

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/R...er-Review.aspx
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/R...er-Review.aspx

Usayit,
have you done any sport or fast action shots with the 100-400mm IS? Many of the sample photos I keep finding are of birds. Also do you know how it works on something like a lighted football field. I'm sure the lights are bright enough not to matter though.

[vonDrehle]

I just came across this link that compares both the lenses.
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/re...tten-400.shtml

I'm still unsure as the which one I will get though. But in the test the EF 400mm f/5.6L USM's sharpness is extremely better than the EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS USM at 400mm.

[hobbes28]

I don't know if I'd be willing to shoot indoor sporting events with anything less than a 2.8. This is only because the lighting inside isn't that great and you wouldn't want to find out it didn't work after you already paid that much for it. I guess a good option would be to go rent one for an event to see how you like either of them.

[vonDrehle]

I don't know if I'd be willing to shoot indoor sporting events with anything less than a 2.8. This is only because the lighting inside isn't that great and you wouldn't want to find out it didn't work after you already paid that much for it. I guess a good option would be to go rent one for an event to see how you like either of them.

We have a small gym so I will most likely end up using my 28-105mm for the vollyball and basketball rather the 400mm. In the first post I was just spitting out my school sports without thinking.

[usayit]

Usayit,
have you done any sport or fast action shots with the 100-400mm IS? Many of the sample photos I keep finding are of birds. Also do you know how it works on something like a lighted football field. I'm sure the lights are bright enough not to matter though.

Most of what I have ( indoor ) are on film and have not been scanned for posting. I do have the following samples taken on a 10d with its x1.6 factor.

These are bright sunlight:





These were the next year ( horribly hazy that day ):





One more for grins:



I've dug and dug for a sample 70-200mm f2.8 picture. Its a relatively new to my bag and everything is on film ( portraits ). I do have this one shot (again with the 10d) ... not a great pic but you'll get taste of what this lens is capable of. Notice the bokeh is more pleasant to the eye than 100-400mm.



Hobbes is correct in regards to faster lenses indoors......

good luck.

[vonDrehle]

Just one more inquiry…

Will a lighted sports field be enough light for the 400mm to perform well?

[usayit]

Every event is going to be different.... you won't know until you are there and meter. Remember, there's always the option of using faster film or higher ISO settings on digislrs.