jitendra_katre

<p>thanks John..</p>

<p>thank you all for your opinions, ...</p>

<p>thanks Nathan for help..<br>

i work in pretty warm climate (India) and i always make it sure that battery is completely run down, but even after that charger desplays green light after about 45 min......</p>

<p>hi,<br>

i recently purchased 550d..but battery doesn't last for longer than 150 images...this is without flash and only still images, no videos....while charging charger displays green light after some 45 minutes indicating full charging ....is there anything wrong with charger? or something wrong with battery itself? does charger contnues with charging even after it displays green light? .. please help.</p>

<p>thanks for the answers,i will follow Nathan's advise...</p>

<p>sorry,i meant canon 400mm,f-5.6</p>

<p>i recently purchased this lens. it seems to give sharper images at f-8 than f-5.6, but some reviews (slrgear,the-digital- picture,etc.) say the results at both aperture values are equally sharp. any opinions?</p>

<p>there seems to be strong objection to the word"every"..well, i am sorry for that, may be not every review but reviews like 'slrgear', 'photozone', certainly mension this 'bad copy' point..anybody can verify...only reason i raised this issue is because i am going to buy this lens or canon 400mm,5.6.<br>

.. i am thankful to all those who have taken trouble to answer.</p>

<p>every review seems to be warning against so called 'bad copies' of canon 100-400...<br>

what is the incidence of getting bad copies? what is the quickest way of identifying them ? is it still a<br>

prefered lens over canon 400mm,5.6(prime) ?<br>

i am leaning towords canon 400mm, but strong recomendation of canon 100-400 has confused me...</p>

 

<p>thanks for the answer..of course i want the lens for Birds..</p><div></div>

<p>i am currently using tamron 200-500, and a i am fairly satisfied with the results. Would upgrading to Canon 400mm,5.6 prime give me substantially better results? is it worth upgrading to this lens?</p>

<p>how about these,.. all are shot with tamron 200-500,handheld.<img src="http://mail.google.com/mail/?ui=1&view=att&th=124e20ae5eef9113&attid=0.12&disp=attd&realattid=f_g1vqqf66&zw" alt="" /><img src="http://mail.google.com/mail/?ui=1&view=att&th=124e20ae5eef9113&attid=0.11&disp=attd&realattid=f_g1vqq5jt&zw" alt="" /><img src="http://mail.google.com/mail/?ui=1&view=att&th=124e20ae5eef9113&attid=0.6&disp=attd&realattid=f_g1vqpsck&zw" alt="" /><img src="http://mail.google.com/mail/?ui=1&view=att&th=124e20ae5eef9113&attid=0.2&disp=attd&realattid=f_g1vqpgk3&zw" alt="" /></p>

<p>my answer may sound weird..i am an ENT surgeon by profession and i have an operating microscope which gives me 16 x magnification.low pass filter and dust particles on it, when viewed under this microscope look so big that the dust can easily be brushed away with soft brush.i have done this many times with four SLRs i have owned so far.no chemicals required and dust is removed under direct vision...i think this is very safe.</p>

<p>how does canon 100-400 compares with tamron 200-500 at 400 m.m.?</p>