Lens question: I have an opportunity to get a used in excellent condition Canon 100-400 4.5-5.6L IS USM lens or the same lens (new) for about $100 more than the used one. My question...

Cookie223 Loc: New Jersey

I have an opportunity to get a used in excellent condition Canon 100-400 4.5-5.6L IS USM lens or the same lens (new) for about $100 more than the used one.

My question is this, since I already have a 70-200 II Canon, besides the increase in zoom, is this a lens worth getting? I actually use my current gear to take pictures of my grandkids playing sports.

I know there is a II version, and Tamron has a 150-600mm that sounds good.

As always your opinion is greatly appreciated.

speters Loc: Grangeville/Idaho

Cookie223 wrote:

I have an opportunity to get a used in excellent c... (show quote)

I wouldn't bother, you'll be dissapointed with the image quality, keep using your 70-200, or if you have the dough, get the II version, that one you'll be very pleased with!!

Cookie223 Loc: New Jersey

speters wrote:

I wouldn't bother, you'll be dissapointed with the image quality, keep using your 70-200, or if you have the dough, get the II version, that one you'll be very pleased with!!

Thanks, I'll probably ask for the II version for Christmas & birthday combo present.

crazydaddio Loc: Toronto Ontario Canada

Tamron 150-600G2 gets good reviews. Also announced new 100-400. If $ are a consideration, these could be options at 1/2 the cost of a new canon.v2.

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

The original 100-400L is a fine lens, but the image quality is not in the same league as the 70-200 IS II. If you / your family can afford the 100-400 II, this is a much better lens where your 70-200 will be relegated to low-light situations.

rmorrison1116 Loc: Near Valley Forge, Pennsylvania

I use to have the EF 100-400 f/4.5-5.6L but sold it when the all new and improved version II came out. It was not as sharp as the EF 400 f/5.6L but it did have IS and of course it was a zoom. The EF 100-400 f/4.5_5.6L II is considerably more expensive than the older one but it is one of the nicest lenses Canon makes. I use mine quite often with the EF 1.4 III teleconverter, an awesome combination.

Cookie223 Loc: New Jersey

crazydaddio wrote:

Tamron 150-600G2 gets good reviews. Also announced new 100-400. If $ are a consideration, these could be options at 1/2 the cost of a new canon.v2.

Thanks Daddio,
The G2 has some great reviews, and it does provide an additional 200MM, but I also read something about having to make some additional adjustments to get good pictures in the 500 to 600 range. I guess like anything else practice makes perfect.

The new 100-400 also sounds good, but it's not available yet, and I couldn't find any useful reviews.

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

Cookie223 wrote:

Thanks Daddio,
The G2 has some great reviews, and it does provide an additional 200MM, but I also read something about having to make some additional adjustments to get good pictures in the 500 to 600 range. I guess like anything else practice makes perfect.

The new 100-400 also sounds good, but it's not available yet, and I couldn't find any useful reviews.

Did you reference the 100-400 II released in 2014 as not having reviews available?

Try this: http://www.kenrockwell.com/canon/lenses/100-400mm-ii.htm

Cookie223 Loc: New Jersey

CHG_CANON wrote:

The original 100-400L is a fine lens, but the image quality is not in the same league as the 70-200 IS II. If you / your family can afford the 100-400 II, this is a much better lens where your 70-200 will be relegated to low-light situations.

Thanks CH,
The Canon is more expensive, and there are some other great lenses out there, but those Canons have a great reputation. I'm hoping to get the 100-400 II for Christmas.

Take care,
Cookie

Cookie223 Loc: New Jersey

CHG_CANON wrote:

Did you reference the 100-400 II released in 2014 as not having reviews available?

Try this: http://www.kenrockwell.com/canon/lenses/100-400mm-ii.htm

Thanks, I was referring to the new Tamron.

Cookie223 Loc: New Jersey

rmorrison1116 wrote:

I use to have the EF 100-400 f/4.5-5.6L but sold it when the all new and improved version II came out. It was not as sharp as the EF 400 f/5.6L but it did have IS and of course it was a zoom. The EF 100-400 f/4.5_5.6L II is considerably more expensive than the older one but it is one of the nicest lenses Canon makes. I use mine quite often with the EF 1.4 III teleconverter, an awesome combination.

Morrison,
I have the EF 1.4 III and hope to use it with the Canon 100-400 II soon.

Thanks

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

Cookie223 wrote:

I have an opportunity to get a used in excellent c... (show quote)

I would save the $100, unless there is a problem with the used lens. On the other hand, both Tamron and Sigma have 100-400mm lenses. Don't rule them out.

https://digital-photography-school.com/review-sigma-100-400mm-f5-6-3-dg-os-hsm-contemporary-lens/
https://www.thephoblographer.com/2017/10/30/first-impressions-tamron-100-400mm-f4-5-6-3-di-vc-usd/

foathog Loc: Greensboro, NC

I think he's referring to the new sigma 100-400... the Tamrons and Sigmas weigh a lot more than the Canon

CHG_CANON wrote:

Did you reference the 100-400 II released in 2014 as not having reviews available?

Try this: http://www.kenrockwell.com/canon/lenses/100-400mm-ii.htm

Notorious T.O.D. Loc: Harrisburg, North Carolina

Cookie, if you can get the 100-400 II that is the way to go...

Best,
Todd Ferguson

Gampa

Get the 100-400 IS ll (newer version). The quality of the shots it will give you are worth the slight extra cost.