Sally D

A couple of weeks ago, I posted a question about my Canon camera with the 70-300 lens and the lack of focus. I received lots of great suggestions and reassurance that the combination should provide sharp pictures. I have to admit that I accidently omitted a very important bit of information when I posted my initial question. Last summer when we were in Seattle, I was walking, carrying the camera around my neck when I fell flat on my face. I ended up with badly bruised ribs. And although I didn't realize it, the lens received a bent mounting ring . . . the source of all my problems. So much time lapsed between when I fell and when I used this lens again, I just forgot about it. Anyway, the local camera shop replaced it and it's working fine. I'm posting a couple of pictures taken since the repair. Unfortunately, I've now decided that what I need for the type of photography I want to do is probably a 100-400mm L IS USM lens. And even more unfortunately, from what I've read, my Rebel SL1 is probably too light to handle this lens comfortably. Any suggestions? Thanks again.

(Download)


(Download)

out4life2016 Loc: Bellingham, Washington

look into the canon 5D mark3 full frame. I think you will be happy with the reviews. Alittle pricey but if your buying that kinda glass its worth it.

jdub82 Loc: Northern California

Because you currently own an SL1, I'm assuming that the size and form factor of your camera body are an important issue for you. Rather than jumping all the way up to a large full frame to handle the 100-400L lens, you might want to consider a camera like the Canon 80D. It would handle the lens, have increased capabilities from your SL1, and still be more manageable in size than a large full frame. If you decide that full frame is indeed an option you want to consider, the 6D Mark II is a smaller full frame than the 5D Mark III that another poster recommended.

Sally D

Thanks, I'll take a look for sure.

Sally D

Size is a bit of an issue . . . I'd prefer smaller if it'll perform. Thanks for your suggestion. I'll take a look for sure.

davidrb Loc: Half way there on the 45th Parallel

That lens (EF100-400mm v. ii) was made to pair with the 5D Mk IV, or vice versa (as rumors have it). Your shots indicate a preference for performance. The Mk IV has superior tracking ability but the Mk III is a very good camera of a similar size.

Sally D

Boy, that's a bit over my budget . . .it looks like what I'd love to have but really can't justify the cost. I was hoping to find a happy medium that could handle the lens I think I want without breaking the bank.

amfoto1 Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA

The EF 100-400mm II was definitely NOT "made to pair with the 5D Mark IV". Sure, the two will work quite well together. But the lens will also work fine on any other Canon DSLR, including your SL1... It, or any other relatively large lens, will just seem a bit unbalanced due to the small size and light weight of your camera. In fact, a lot of "large lens" users like to use a battery grip no their cameras with a second battery, to add some mass to the body and better balance a hefty lens. The SL1 is simply the smallest, lightest DSLR anyone has made... and that's not possible with the SL1, which doesn't have any means of adding a battery grip.

Not that the 100-400s are all that heavy. The original push/pull zoom model weighs just over 3 lb., while the "II" gained some weight to about 3.5 lb. To put it in perspective, it's about the largest lens I'd want to shoot with hand held for a few hours. Any longer than that, I put it on a tripod. The new Sigma 100-400mm is a little bit smaller and under 3 lb. But it's also 2/3 stop slower than the Canon lenses throughout most of it's zoom range, and 1/3 stop slower the rest. The Siggy also doesn't include a tripod mounting ring or have any means of adding one (both the Canon lenses have tripod rings, which are included in the weights). There also is the new Tamron 100-400mm, slightly larger and heavier than the Siggy, but less than the Canon. The Tamron can optionally be fitted with a tripod ring (sold separately), but once again it's not included in the weight statistics (probably adds 4 or 5 oz.)

In fact, for sports and wildlife shooting, I'd recommend using the 100-400mm on one of the APS-C cameras instead of the full frame 5DIV. Either the 20MP 7D Mark II (which is essentially the same size and weight as the full frame camera) or the 24MP 80D work great for those purposes, with that lens and others. The APS-C cameras are like having a "free 1.6X teleconverter" on the lens... "free" meaning that there's no loss of light like there is with an actual teleconverter. When using a telephoto and to photograph smaller, more distant subjects, either of those APS-C models.... or any of the other 24MP APS-C models... or even your 18MP SL1 and other 18MP models will actually "put more pixels on target" than the full frame camera.

Another way of looking at this... if you were to use the same 400mm lens on both cameras to shoot the same subject from the same distance... then cropped the 30MP 5DIV's image down to APS-C dimensions, you'll be left with approx. 12MP image! Heck, your SL1 has 50% more resolution than that... while a 24MP SL2, T7i, 77D or 80D has a full 100% more. In order to take full advantage of all the 5DIV's "full frame goodness" and out-perform what the 100-400mm can do on an APS-C model, you'll need to fit a 500mm or 600mm lens to the full frame 5DIV.

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

I know a few people who shoot the 100-400 II with the 5D3 and 7D2 and get great results. Get the best that you can afford and justify and have fun enjoying them...

Best,
Todd Ferguson

imagemeister Loc: mid east Florida

My impression is smaller and lighter is better for you. I would look at the newer SL2 with the new 70-300 IS II nano . If you are not doing really fast action or birds in flight, the new Tamron or Sigma 100-400's can do really well.

Ultimately, the 80D and 100-400 II if you do not mind the weight and cost.

..

Ny5y Loc: Mississippi

Put the 100 - 400 on the SL1 and attach the lens to the tripod and shoot on!

jeep_daddy Loc: Prescott AZ

The most popular wildlife camera is the 7D Mark II. But if you want to keep the price down, I'd suggest the 80D. But remember, the 100-400 lens you want is the new Mark II. It's Very Very Very sharp compared to the original push pull 100-400 L series lens Canon made.

47greyfox Loc: on the edge of the Colorado front range

Yup! 👍👍👍

MountainDave

I just bought a 77D which is currently on sale for 649. I already had a rebel 7ti along with a 5D IV but wanted a crop frame with better controls. I paired it up with a 100-400L IS II and 1.4X extender. Handling is not an issue and the results exceeded my expectations. I am able to get extremely sharp images fully extended 896mm equivalent and hand held. The 80D is certainly a fine choice as well with more features and a little heavier. Reviews put IQ of the two as equal though one gave a slight edge to the 77D which does use a newer processor. There is speculation the 7D will be replaced soon. Could be an outstanding wildlife camera when that happens. For now, the 77D is huge bang for the buck. It's by far the cheapest with two control wheels and a top LCD screen.

jdub82 Loc: Northern California

The 77D is an excellent camera. I've been very pleased with mine. The low light capabilities with the newer Digic 7 processor are very good, rated to 25600 ISO, though I wouldn't recommend going that high. I only recommended an 80D to the OP because of the size/weight balance with the heavier lens. Glad to hear that the 100-400L lens is working well on your 77D. The 77D would be a great choice as well.