topic EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS USM in EF & RF Lenses

EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS USM

EllerySoifer — Sat, 14 Feb 2015 22:32:18 GMT

Just acquired an EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS USM lens. Is there anyone in this Canon community that can offer any dos or don'ts about this lens. Any information would be helpful. Thanks.

Re: EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS USM

cicopo — Sun, 15 Feb 2015 01:22:13 GMT

I'll assume you mean the push pull version but in general this applies to both it & the new one. Use mode 1 IS for stationary subjects & mode 2 for panning. Use the limiter switch to speed up AF response on things that are further away & REMEMBER to re set when shooting things inside the far setting's range limit the switch controls. If you haven't used a long lens before keep shutter speeds high until you develop good technique.

If it is the push pull version don't overtighten the ring that locks / applies the tension to the zoom barrel.

Re: EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS USM

EllerySoifer — Sun, 15 Feb 2015 10:10:26 GMT

Yes, it's the push/pull version. All good points that you mention. Thank you.

Re: EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS USM

cicopo — Sun, 15 Feb 2015 13:51:33 GMT

I've been shooting that one for about 8 years. Took a while to get used to push pull but now that I have I'm happy to say it helps with my technique because my left hand is further out than it would be with a twist zoom. One thing to warn you about is that lens DOES NOT seem to like having a protective filter on it. Most feel that using one softens the images. Rely on the lens hood for protection.

Re: EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS USM

ebiggs1 — Sun, 15 Feb 2015 15:44:45 GMT

I have not had my EF 100-400mm for eight years but I have had it for a long time. I traded a EF 400mm f5.6 prime for mine. There is no doubt the 400mm prime is sharper but it lacks IS. For me this makes the 100-400mm much better in my hands. This lens is softer than the prime and it is one of the few I don't put a protect filter on either.

My main most use is in a dark auditorium shooting stage shows from the sound both. Of course in this case the prime can't zoom. I use a heavy Manfrotto tripod with a gimbal head, The lens does a fantastic job.

Lastely don't read or pay any attention about the push-pull design being anything but good. Thoes folks simply don't know of what they speak. All zoom lenses "zoom". Whether by twisting or pushing, they all zoom!

Re: EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS USM

RobertTheFat — Sun, 15 Feb 2015 18:30:34 GMT

@ebiggs1 wrote:
Lastely don't read or pay any attention about the push-pull design being anything but good. Thoes folks simply don't know of what they speak. All zoom lenses "zoom". Whether by twisting or pushing, they all zoom!

I think it's fair to say that some people can get used to a push-pull lens and others can't. I probably couldn't, but that's just me. If the shoe fits, wear it.

Re: EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS USM

ebiggs1 — Sun, 15 Feb 2015 21:29:37 GMT

The new Sigma 150-600mm Sport is either or.

Re: EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS USM

Edward1064 — Thu, 19 Feb 2015 00:47:14 GMT

Regarding the warnings about not using a protective filter on the 100-400 zoom, I do not understand this. Unless the filter is of poor optical quality, there should be no optical imaging effect. And why should such a filter make more of a difference on this zoom?

I use my 100-400 zoom regularly, and the biggest variable in getting sharp images, for me, seems to be technique plus some limitations of my 60D (perhaps).

Re: EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS USM

ebiggs1 — Thu, 19 Feb 2015 14:13:12 GMT

Ed.

A couple things, I got my 100-400mm way, way back so I have used it a lot. It has marginal IQ which is really OK until you actually compare it to other similar lenses. This means by itself it is good but any addition can have undesirable results.

Don't get me wrong as I have some pretty darn good bird pictures with mine. However any time you add anything to the light path you degrade it. True for any lens not just the 100-400mm.

The most common problem is ghosting or flare caused by light bouncing off the filter. 75% of the time the filter will do no harm and I use them on almost all of my glass. I do use B+W or lens brand filters. Only high quality and less prone to cause problem.

Folks seem to have a problem removing the filter when conditiions arise that warrant it's removal. It does come off as easily as it went on! I don't have a filter on my 1000-400mm and I don't recommend you do either. But in the grand scheme of things it will not cause the end of the world if you do.

Re: EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS USM

marcosphoto — Tue, 10 Mar 2015 16:57:07 GMT

I think it possible that there may be different batches of lenses in these old generation products. Had my 100-400 for over 4 years and find it to be sharper than my 24-105L. Hate the push/pull barrel though, I find it very cumbersome and lacks fine control. Sure, if you're lucky to get the perfect tension adjustment it's better, but then the adjustment has to be moved to avoid creep if hiking through the forest. Mine has some German filter on it that I can't remember the name of right now, super thin and doesn't appear to have any real effect on the IQ - and I've cropped my shots hard core for birds and such. Aforementioned suggestions all good, not much more to say on this lens - very simple. One last noteable, I've heard this lens referred to as an "air-pump" before, due to internal volume of air moved while zooming. This air-pump effect is presumed to be harsh for dust on the sensor. No special solutions I'd imagine, just be active about keeping dust out of the inside of the lens/body. The lens is "Sealed", however the air has to move in and out of somewhere - or else the lens wouldn't move. Enjoy the lens and don't be scared to crop, it may be crude by construction but the optics are fantastic in mine.

Re: EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS USM

ebiggs1 — Tue, 10 Mar 2015 17:11:35 GMT

"I've heard this lens referred to as an "air-pump" before, due to internal volume of air moved while zooming."

All zoom lenses "zoom". It doesn't matter if you twist it or you push/pull it. Air has to go in and go out. The 'air pump' nickname was probably put on by a keyboard jockey more than a guy that really uses the lens and actually takes pictures.

I don't know, but I doubt there ar different versions of the lens but it is certainly true you can get better copies and not so 'better' copies. But this is true of all lenses as they have manufacturing tolerance just like most items.

You know the new Sigma 150-600mm Sport, everybody is raving about, is push/pull or twist on the same lens. Hmmmmm....?

Re: EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS USM

cicopo — Tue, 10 Mar 2015 17:27:04 GMT

A friend demonstrated the new 100-400 using push pull too. Didn't seem to take much effort but until I get to play with one (someone elses) I'm still very happy with what I have. ANY lens which changes length to zoom or focus has to move air in & out. They aren't vacuum sealed.

Re: EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS USM

marcosphoto — Tue, 10 Mar 2015 18:50:10 GMT

I too have seen tests on the new Sigma, and I think there is more in the aftermarket that may have just come out. There is a lot of positive talk about them, sadly I'm sort of always committed (justified or not) to brand name.

Re: EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS USM

cicopo — Tue, 10 Mar 2015 19:33:11 GMT

The sigma has my interest but it's 50% heavier than the 28-300 L IS & that's a mighty heavy lens after 6 hours on the flight line. I have to be able to hand hold PLUS survive the day.

Re: EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS USM

DEACo — Thu, 31 Aug 2017 01:51:16 GMT

Brand new member tonight, hello everybody.

Just bought a Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS USM Lens (not a II) from 42nd St Photo (yeah, NOW I know, big mistake buying from them). I have been incredibly dissapointed with the lens' inability to produce sharp images thru my SL1. I am an amateur photographer who was looking for a lens to handle high school outdoor sports and wildlife.

At first, I shot all in RAW for greater editing ability, but read some posts (other forums) that explained why RAW might look softer. (I hate the word "soft!" Nothing soft about it...it's just not the sharp, crisp image I expected for $1250.)

Now I shoot in jpg. Yes, a little better comparing the two, unedited formats, but my kit zoom produces far sharper images. My subjective test jpg to jpg was to hit just the first level of zoom with Windows built-in photo editor (200%?). I expected an enlargement of superb quality with the 100-400.

I've gone into the camera and upped sharpness from 0 to 7 (max). I have no idea if that should have done anything or not.

I've read some users raving over this lens. I wish I could. That was a huge chunk of change out of my budget. I'd sell it back for half of what I paid.

Any ideas on what I might be doing to not get great IQ?

Re: EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS USM

cicopo — Thu, 31 Aug 2017 02:00:26 GMT

Too many variables to just pick one that will cure your problems. 200% for 1 is wrong & will pretty much always look soft or fuzzy. Long lenses have a learning curve because everything is magnified that much more. What shutter speeds are you using? Until you get your technique mastered you need higher shutter speeds & you want to avoid shooting wide open too.

Re: EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS USM

DEACo — Thu, 31 Aug 2017 02:34:45 GMT

Thanks for the reply.

200% was a guess. It's the first level of enlargement when clicking "zoom" in the Windows software. Now that I think about it, being the first level with a slider that'll go a lot farther to the right, it's probably more like 25%.

For many shots, I used the SL1's sport setting. It fired the shutter at 1/1000 or faster. No shots were taken full out zoom; most 100-200. f stops 5.0 and 5.6.

Re: EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS USM

cicopo — Thu, 31 Aug 2017 03:26:22 GMT

Those F stops are the wide open f stop for that zoom length. That means you have a very shallow depth of field (area front to rear that's in focus) The closer you are to the target the shallower that zone becomes. I've shot tens of thousands of action photos with ver 1 of the 100-400 and at lower than desirable shutter speeds but as I have said there is a learning curve.

Re: EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS USM

marcosphoto — Thu, 31 Aug 2017 11:36:36 GMT

Very strange, either your interpretation of the lenses performance is off due to conditions or there is something wrong with the lens. I absolutely love my example of the lens, and sometimes I swear it is able to take sharper images than my 24-105 f4L. Approaching 300mm and up it gets really hard to hand hold due to obvious reasons, maybe you've got some shake going on. I also find the tripod ring almost useless IMO, it seems to bounce around a lot with my 5d3.

Re: EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS USM

ebiggs1 — Thu, 31 Aug 2017 14:36:22 GMT

A couple of things. Raw does not save the sharpness setting. Does not use it at all. So setting it to 7 or whatever has no effect. The reason some folks mistakenly say jpg are sharper is they are processed so the 7 setting will effect them. Raw must be processed in post editing.

Next the biggest issue with soft pictures with a tele is mis-focus. The lens focused on something you didn't intend.

Also, not being able to hold the tele motionless while shooting. Even IS has its limit to how much it can help. A SS of 1/500 should probably be the minimum for this lens. And, 1/1000 and up is even better.

Lastly almost no lens made is at its best wide open, low f-number. Try keeping the big zoom in the f8 range.

If you would post a few samples of what you are concerned about it might help diagnose just what the issue is.