300 f4, 400 f5.6 or 100-400 Zoom

[steve_lee19]

<p>It's not like me to be unable to make a decision but I'm struggling to decide on these lenses. Please help.<br>

Is it going to be:<br>

The 300 f4, the 400 f5.6 or the 100-400 zoom?<br>

I photograph a bit of wildlife, landscapes, motorbikes, anything really.<br>

I favour the 300 f4 because of the IS, but then the 400 has a bigger throw.<br>

Thanks for your input.</p>

 

[tomwatt]

<p>Although it wouldn't be my choice (I don't like the push-pull zooms), it seems to me that the 100-400 would suit your needs. No? Explain to me why you would want one of the primes for what you describe as your interests.</p>

[hal_b]

<p>The 100-400 has IS, too, but it's more expensive than the other 2 you mentioned. Is there a cheaper version of the 100-400 without IS? Other than cost, I can't see why the 100-400 IS wouldn't be a hands-down decision over the others.</p>

[gabriel_l1]

<p>Hal,</p>

<p>Sharpness at the longest end, some people don't like the push-pull zoom, the 300 and 400 both take a 1.4 better than the zoom, the 300 and 400 have built-in telescoping hoods, the 300 is faster at the same focal length, the 300 has less vignetting, the 300's got better max magnification (0.24 vs 0.2), the 400 has very fast AF for birding, etc... there are plenty of reasons to consider the primes vs the zoom.</p>

<p>Of course, I'm not recommending a specific lens as I don't own, nor have I extensively used, any of these lenses. I'm just stating the facts.</p>

[bobatkins]

<p>The 300/4L IS is faster. For action sports that may make a difference.</p>

<p>At 300mm, the 300/4L IS is clearly the winner, but of course the 100-400 is much more versatile.</p>

<p>The 400mm is a very good lens, but would be great if it had IS. Without IS I'd only really consider it if you do most of your work from a tripod.</p>

[nathangardner]

<p>What other lenses do you have? If you already have a 70-200mm and don't mind changing lenses, then maybe one of the primes would be better since you'd already have the 100-200mm range covered. You'd also get better IQ with the primes.</p>

[anthony_zipple]

<p>I faced the same decision and went with the 100-400. A very good lens, reasonably fast, IS, and less glass to carry in the field</p>

[jim_newman5]

<p>Regarding the push-pull feature of the 100-400 zoom, for me it's very handy for finding and following moving targets. It just feels more intuitive in action shots to "stretch and compress" the lens than to twist it. I've heard it called a 'dust pump," and you may sacrifice some sharpness, but I think it's a very good lens.</p>

[steven_crist]

<p>I use the 100-400 with good results. As others say, the push-pull zoom takes getting used to but you adjust. The 400 doesn't have IS which for me took it out of consideration (I have no problem using the 100-400 with IS hand held). The image quality is fine. </p>

[bieg]

<p>I have the 300 f4 IS and it is one of my favorite lenses. It is tack sharp, takes the 1.4 convertor well and it also has pretty decent Macro abilities as a side benefit.</p>

[steve_lee19]

<p>Many thanks for the responses. I have the 70-200 2.8L IS and it could be argued that, with a 1.4 extender, I'd be at 300mm (nearly) without much cash layout............<br>

..........but to a point it isn't really a cash issue - thought I can't afford the 300 2.8.<br>

I'd like image quality, weight and ease of use to be the prime requisites for this lens. It seems that there is a swell favouring the zoom, which is interesting.</p>

[steven_crist]

<p>The 100-400 can also be used with the 1.4 tele-converter. The attached photo somewhat tests the edge of its ability. Canon 1D MKIII with 100-400 @400mm with 1.4 teleconverter hand held at about 1.5 miles across the Potomac River from Mount Vernon standing on a somewhat shaky pier. Sizing for internet didn't really help but you get the idea.</p><div></div>

[ben_goren]

<p>Steve,</p>

 

<p>I went with the 300 f/4 and I'm glad I did.</p>

 

<p>The only thing the 400 f/5.6 has over the 300 is autofocus speed at that focal length —

and, to be sure, the 300 is no slouch. The 300 with the 1.4 gives you an image-stabilized 420 f/5.6

with superb image quality.</p>

 

<p>I’m a “bag o’ primes” guy, which is why I never gave the zoom

much consideration. If you need to quickly change focal lengths, then the zoom is the obvious

choice. If you can take the time to swap lenses (and / or teleconverters) then the 300 wins. That

should probably be your deciding factor.</p>

 

<p>Or, of course, you could always sell your firstborn for a 400 f/2.8…but not your

secondborn…you’ll need him to carry it for you….</p>

 

<p>Cheers,</p>

 

<p>b&</p>

[steven_f1]

<blockquote>

<p>I've heard it called a 'dust pump," and you may sacrifice some sharpness, but I think it's a very good lens.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Based on past forums I believe the only people calling it a dust pump are the ones that never owned or tried it. Since I have had it I have noticed that my camera is consistantly cleaner than it is with my other lenses (Ihave the original 5D which doesn't have a built in cleaning system). When I was going through some images one day I noticed a large piece of dust that disappeared a couple of shots later. I have never noticed dust that disappeared on its own on my other lenses.<br>

<br />I purchased the 100-400 for the range and versatility. It only comes in a IS version (which works very well) and has nice bokeh</p>

[lee_derrickson]

<p>Steve, congratulations on your new lens. <br>

My strategy has been to keep adding longer lenses (and shorter) as I can afford them. I've had years of 35mm slr cameras with a maximum of 200mm lenses. In 2008 joined the DSLR world. I started with the kit zoom, and (among other various lenses) acquired the 100mm f/2.8 macro, 70-200 f/4 L and late last year I added the 300mm f/4 L IS (purchased used from KEH--sweet deal and great lens). I've played for some time with each of them and see it as a learning experience. This year I want to add the 400mm f/5.6 L. Next year--who knows? I'm working as much overtime as I can get and saving my money.<br>

Have fun, Lee</p>

 

[pjmeade]

<p>I own both the 300/4 and the 100-400.<br>

The 300 is a very light lens, is capable of being hand held at quite low shutter speeds and gives some really superb images. Focus with the 300 with or without the 1.4x seems a good deal faster than the 100-400, although in good light the 100-400 is very capable.<br>

If I didn't need the 100-400 length and flexibility of the 100-400 to shoot polo commercially, I wouldn't have it. It's quite heavy and quite unwieldy compared with the 300.<br>

Today I tried shooting some red kites with the 100-400, it was a struggle.</p>

[mark_ethridge]

<p>I absolutely love my 100-400. As others have attested, it's heavy and bulky. But for me, versatility of a zoom (and IS to boot) is worth the slight loss of IQ compared to a prime. I do not own, nor have I ever used either 300 or the 400 telephotos so they may be amazing, but I'm very happy.</p>

[eric merrill]

<p>Steve:</p>

<p>I went with the 300/4 IS. With the 1.4x, it's a 420/5.6 with IS. IS is really, really handy. Advantage, 300.</p>

<p>It's faster than 100-400 by a full stop at 300mm. Throw on the 1.4x, and it's the same at 400m. Advantage, 300.</p>

<p>If you need to quickly change focal lengths, I'd go with the 100-400.</p>

<p>Now, if you never use the IS, and fast autofocus speed at 400 is important, then I'd go with the 400/5.6. </p>

<p>I've seen stunning images from users of all of these lenses. I don't think you'll go wrong with any choice.</p>

<p>Eric</p>

[craig_meddaugh]

<p>Can we please retire the "dust pump" meme. Any non-internally zooming lens MUST move air in and out when it changes volume. It doesn't matter if it uses a ring or not... air still must move through the lens. It's so sad the people are so ignorant regarding simple concepts. </p>

<p>As for which one to get... unless you already have 70-200 or 300 covered (or plan on doing it soon) you're better off with the 100-400 as it is the most flexible by far. The primes aren't really any sharper in the center, the 400/5.6 lacks IS and the 300/4 really isn't long enough for many wildlife situations. </p>

<p>If you already have 70-200 covered get the 300/4 unless you only planning on working on sunny days or have and use a tripod as 5.6 at 400mm is quite slow for many situations. </p>

[buffdr_rasouliyan]

<p>I love my 100-400 but I only use it during the air shows. I use my 70-200 2.8 IS more. I'm so used to the pump style that I don't even notice it. v/r Buffdr</p>

[g dan mitchell]

<p>If you photograph "a bit of everything" the zoom is going to almost certainly be more useful to you, and the image quality is generally excellent.</p>

<p>If you need to shoot only at focal length X, then a prime with that focal length can give you slightly better IQ, though it may not be relevant depending on how you shoot and what you do with the photographs.</p>

[mbkissel]

<p>I think G Dan hit the nail on the head; the zoom is just so much more versatile for a wide variety of subjects. I really like the push/pull zoom on the 100-400...so much so, I sometimes find myself trying to pull the zoom on my 70-200 and suddenly realize that's not how it works. </p>

<p>Why not rent the 100-400 for a few days to really check it out? That will allow you to use the push/pull zoom feature and decide if you like that method before you make the investment. If you've only used twist zooms, I can assure you the push/pull will feel foreign at first, but you'll quickly get used to it.</p>

<p> </p>

[tomwatt]

<p>Not to be argumentative (all too much of that in the forums), Mark my early zoom usage was with a push-pull Vivatar Series 1. And then I discovered the twist zooms. I would never go back. And I do like your suggestion at rent and try... until you have some experience with it, you won't know for sure if it fills the niche for you.</p>

[steve_lee19]

<p>I think it's the 300 f4 for me plus the 1.4 extender.<br>

Without your views I don't think I ever would have got there, so thanks to all for your input.</p>

 

[bieg]

<p>Good choice, let us know how you like it.</p>

<p> </p>