EF 400 5.6L for airshows??

[tim_adams]

Opinions on this lense for those who have used it to photograph

airshows. I'm also thinking about the 100-400L, I already have the

70-200 f/4L, and the 300 f/4L (non IS), so the 100-400 would seem

redundant. IS would be nice but I got nice sharp photos at Reno last

year with the 300 & 1.4X. So has anyone used the the 400 f/5.6L

(with 1.4X attached) to shoot airshows? I would be using it with an

EOS 3.

[yakim_peled1]

Also consider the http://bobatkins.com/photography/reviews/500L.html. See also http://www.photographyreview.com/reviewscrx.aspx and http://www.camerareview.com.

 

Happy shooting ,

Yakim.

[steve_dunn2]

<p>I know birds and airplanes are different subjects :-) but they're both things which fly around while you're trying to take photos of them, so maybe some of <a href="http://www.birdsasart.com/faq_4f56or3is.html">what Art Morris has to say about the 400/5.6 vs. 300/4</a> (IS, but much of it applies to yours as well) for bird photography might be applicable. He also <a href="http://www.birdsasart.com/faq_1-4isor4f56.html">compares the 400/5.6 with the 100-400</a>. In both cases, he says the 400/5.6 is better for that specific use.</p>

[brian_potts]

I own the 100-400L, and I feel that this is a much better lens for air shows. The planes come in quick and go out quick. I find the push/pull zoom enables me to adjust quickly. I would miss many shots if I had to stay at 400mm. Also, I find that as the air show progresses so does the smoke/smog. The 400 becomes less useful over time since the air becomes more difficult to get a clean shot through. Here are a couple of pictures of the Blue Angels taken with the 100-400:

 

<br><hr>

 

<center>

<img src="http://www.potts-family.net/gallery/single%20blue%20angel%20side%20view%20cropped%20(2022)_std.jpg">

 

<img src="http://www.potts-family.net/gallery/4%20blue%20angels%20with%20landing%20gear%20down%20(1991)_std.jpg">

</center>

 

<br><hr>

 

Also, I should note that neither of these were taken at 400.

[tim_adams]

Thanks for the feedback. I was thinking that with the EOS 3 the 300 f/4L is a 600 f/8, and the 400 with the 1.4X is 560 f/8. So I think I'll just stay with the 300 f/4L. I won't miss too many shots because I'll have my Elan IIe, as a backup, with the 70-200 f/4L and extender on it. I have changed my mind and now lust after the 300 f/2.8L.

[basscheffers]

Depends on what you are shooting, although the birds at reno are pretty small. I went to Farnborough this summer and was really close to the runway with just my 28-105. I had to go all wide to fit the landing fighter jets and no way I could fit in an Airbus A340! Needless to say, the wannabe next to me with only his Sigma 300/2.8 did not get off many shots.

 

So bring a long one for mid-flight shots, but don't forget wider lenses for landings and/or static displays!