Lens help: Hi, Anyone with experience with the Canon 400mm prime vs the 100-400mm ? Was wondering how much of a difference between the two in sharpness. I would like to use either one...

dhendrick

Hi,
Anyone with experience with the Canon 400mm prime vs the 100-400mm ? Was wondering how much of a difference between the two in sharpness. I would like to use either one for nature photos. I just need some thoughts from anyone that has had experience with either one of these lenses. Also anything else that is used for getting close to birds or any other wildlife. Thanks for any thoughts,

Donna

JR1 Loc: Tavistock, Devon, UK

Is there any reason why not to also consider the Sigma 120-400 which way out scores the Canon in reviews

colo43 Loc: Eastern Plains of Colorado

Hi Donna,
i have the 100-400 L Glass (canon) and its very sharp. Dixiegirl also has one.
I am sure she can second my feelings on the lens.
I use mine for wildlife.

dhendrick wrote:

Hi,
Anyone with experience with the Canon 400mm prime vs the 100-400mm ? Was wondering how much of a difference between the two in sharpness. I would like to use either one for nature photos. I just need some thoughts from anyone that has had experience with either one of these lenses. Also anything else that is used for getting close to birds or any other wildlife. Thanks for any thoughts,

Donna

St3v3M Loc: 35,000 feet

Scott talks about it in the first 5-10 minutes for a specific need http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wQ4KsGYDzgU

Grammieb1 Loc: New Orleans

I have the 400 f/5.6. It is very sharp & has fast af. I have used it without a tripod on many occasions for wildlife & birds. I have used it with a tripod as well. It is an excellent lens for the price & I went through the same thing you are now before I made my decision. At the time I made my decision there were several different bif shooters that I admired that used this lens. Now many of them have moved on to 400f/2.8ll or 500/4 ll, but these are a great deal more expensive & their work with the 400f/5.6 was really good as well. Bab

Dixiegirl Loc: Alabama gulf coast

I certainly can second that! I absolutely love my 100-400L. In fact, I'm about to post some bird photos that were all but one taken with this lens. Can't be beat for sharpness, and the IS is second to none.

colo43 wrote:

Hi Donna, br i have the 100-400 L Glass (canon) a... (show quote)

Birdguide Loc: Ormond Beach, FL

I'm going to second everyone else here, I have the 100-400L 5.6 and love it, do all my wildlife with it and you can check out my last post of horses in action, all taken with a new camera and the lens in question.

gessman Loc: Colorado

dhendrick wrote:

Hi,
Anyone with experience with the Canon 400mm prime vs the 100-400mm ? Was wondering how much of a difference between the two in sharpness. I would like to use either one for nature photos. I just need some thoughts from anyone that has had experience with either one of these lenses. Also anything else that is used for getting close to birds or any other wildlife. Thanks for any thoughts,

Donna

By "400 prime," if you mean the f/5.6 version, here is a side-by-side comparison done for you. This is the 5th most visited photography site on the web...

http://luminous-landscape.com/reviews/lenses/forgotten-400.shtml

At the url below, the 400 f5.6 and the 100-400 are selected. If you want to compare other lens, select them as you desire, run your cursor into and out of the results box and note the little arrow at center top to see which lens is being depicted and determine what is most important for you.

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=278&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=0&LensComp=113&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=7&APIComp=2

I opted for the 400, wouldn't mind having the flexibility of the zoom, don't want both, and do want sharp. I have seen some very sharp images made with the 100-400. That said, the only uhh wildlife photographer I'm aware of, who has been published in National Geographic, Swamp Gator, uses a 300 f/2.8 with a 1.4x tele-converter.

EDIT: You do want to match up the f/stop for comparison across the range.

jeep_daddy Loc: Prescott AZ

dhendrick wrote:

Hi,
Anyone with experience with the Canon 400mm prime vs the 100-400mm ? Was wondering how much of a difference between the two in sharpness. I would like to use either one for nature photos. I just need some thoughts from anyone that has had experience with either one of these lenses. Also anything else that is used for getting close to birds or any other wildlife. Thanks for any thoughts,

Donna

Which 400 prime? They make several. I'm assuming your are talking about the least expensive 400 - the 400mm f5.6.

It's a good lens and is slightly better than the 100-400 for image quality, but it's hard to tell the difference. The zoom lens gives you more flexibility than the prime. I've got a friend with the 400 prime and he's wants my 100-400 because he's often too close for the surf shots he's trying to get.

Grammieb1 Loc: New Orleans

I choose the 400f/5.6, but I have the zoom range covered as I also have a 70-200f/2.8is ll & a 2x converter that I use when I need zoom. I still use the 400 prime a great deal & would only retire it if I get a 500 f/4 or another superior prime. Bab

gessman Loc: Colorado

Grammieb1 wrote:

I choose the 400f/5.6, but I have the zoom range covered as I also have a 70-200f/2.8is ll & a 2x converter that I use when I need zoom. I still use the 400 prime a great deal & would only retire it if I get a 500 f/4 or another superior prime. Bab

Same here, almost - 70-200 2.8 IS II & a 1.4x, and pull the 400 out when needed, tape the pens to keep autofocus, add the 1.4x with FF for 560mm or crop sensor @ just under 900mm, gimbal head when desirable.

Michael O' Loc: Midwest right now

dhendrick wrote:

Hi,
Anyone with experience with the Canon 400mm prime vs the 100-400mm ? Was wondering how much of a difference between the two in sharpness. I would like to use either one for nature photos. I just need some thoughts from anyone that has had experience with either one of these lenses. Also anything else that is used for getting close to birds or any other wildlife. Thanks for any thoughts,

Donna

I have the 100-400, and it is a fine lens, but the 400 f 2.8, being a prime, provides a touch finer resolution (super) and better low light capability although obviously not so flexible. However, I must admit to using the 50, 85, and 2, 3, 4, 5, and 600 big primes much more than the 100-400. The canon big glass primes are all fantastic -- you can't go wrong with any one of them, and the low light capability is a requisite for birding, along with any and all outdoor work, including outdoor natural light portraiture done with tree and evergreen backgrounds, which I particularly like for the naturalness they seem to bring out in the subjects. Buy "right" the first time, and don't lose by trading. Good luck, and show us some of your results when you get to work with that new glass !