I have a 100-400 lens. Need a second smaller lens for wildlife - any recommendations?

[Sandra1]

I have a Canon 100-400 lens. I'm looking to buy a second smaller lens for wildlife - do you guys have any recommendations please?

[ebiggs1 · Accepted solution]

Sandra,

" I only want to take two lenses with me on holiday. "

This is different than what I assumed you wanted. I thought you wanted a replacement lens for the heavy zoom 100-400mm.  But you want a combo to compliment it? My suggestion (ef 400mm f5.6L) will certainly fill the bill for a better and lighter lens but it is in the same use class.

A lens to compliment your current zoom would make the ef-s 18-135mm a reasonable choice.  The ef-s 17-55mm f/2.8 is usm would be a great addition.  It is better in several ways.  It has a fast, constant aperture and pretty good IQ.

[Waddizzle]

---

@Sandra1 wrote:

I have a Canon 100-400 lens. I'm looking to buy a second smaller lens for wildlife - do you guys have any recommendations please?

---

Hmm.  Smaller than 100-400mm and wildlife photography generally do not mix.  Most wildlife photographers seem to want the longest lens possible.  I suppose it depends upon the size of the wildlife.  Birders want long lenses.

But, you cannot go wrong with one of the 70-200mm "L" series lenses.  The EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM is a really quick to focus, and very sharp.

[Sandra1]

Thank you. I've been looking at that lens today. I do have a bigger lens but I want to stop using it because it's so heavy.

[ebiggs1]

"... I want to stop using it because it's so heavy."

Sandra,

This is easy.  You want the Canon EF 400mm f/5.6L USM Lens.  It is very light.  It is still 400mm and it has better IQ than your 100-400. If memory serves they are less than 3 pounds. It is a constant aperture, too.

If you want to maintain the same IQ, you do not want any ef-s kit type lens like the 18-135mm.  Not even in the same zip code!

 And you certainly don't want the big ef 70-200mm f2.8lL, if weight is your concern.

[RobertTheFat]

---

@ebiggs1 wrote:

"... I want to stop using it because it's so heavy."

Sandra,

This is easy.  You want the Canon EF 400mm f/5.6L USM Lens.  It is very light.  It is still 400mm and it has better IQ than your 100-400. If memory serves they are less than 3 pounds. It is a constant aperture, too. ...

---

The usual meaning of "constant aperture" is that the maximum aperture doesn't depend on the focal length. So a prime lens is CA by definition, isn't it?

[ebiggs1]

Bob
Boston, Massachusetts USA

Depends on your level of photographic understanding.  Some folks don't even know what a variable aperture is or that a constant aperture is preferred.

[RobertTheFat]

---

@ebiggs1 wrote:

Bob
Boston, Massachusetts USA

Depends on your level of photographic understanding.  Some folks don't even know what a variable aperture is or that a constant aperture is preferred.

---

I guess that was my point, sort of. It's important to be precise, so as not to risk unnecessarily confusing such folks.

[Waddizzle]

---

@Sandra1 wrote:

Thank you. I've been looking at that lens today. I do have a bigger lens but I want to stop using it because it's so heavy.

---

How do you carry the camera in the field?  Do you use the standard neck strap?  I find the standard neck strap awfully uncomfortable for long term use, most especially with a heavy lens. 

A less expensive option could be to invest in a different type of camera support, like a better neck strap, a belt or harness that goes over your shoulder, or something else entirely. 

My personal preference is for an over the shoulder holster, which frees my hands.  I use a Lowepro Toploader 75 II.  It can hold a pro-size DSLR with a 70-200mm lens, or the 100-400mm lens, still attached.  Some people prefer just the sport strap, so that they raise the camera quickly.  I use both.  I find a [naked] camera bumping off my hip to be uncomfortable, [but a padded bag is fine.]

[Sandra1]

I've just bought a holster which will help with the weight issue. I have various lenses but I don't feel I have the right companion lens for my 100-400. I only want to take two lenses with me on holiday. 

[Waddizzle]

---

@Sandra1 wrote:

I've just bought a holster which will help with the weight issue. I have various lenses but I don't feel I have the right companion lens for my 100-400. I only want to take two lenses with me on holiday. 

---

Ah.  I see said the blind man.  A companion lens.  That changes things a bit.

I assume that you do not wish to duplicate much of the 100-400mm focal length.  The zoom range makes that lens pretty versatile.  Going shorter than 100mm, like with the EF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM lens, for example, gives you more range, but how good it would be for wildlife is subjective.

Going with a longer lens will only mean a heavier lens, so that's ruled out at this point.  Another idea is the Canon Extender Ef 1/4X III.  It will work with the 100-400mm lens, but I would check to see how effective it would be with the 80D.  I'm not sure if the 80D can use it's center AF point when the lens is zoomed out to 400mm. 

What type of wildlife do expect to shoot? 

--------------------------------------------------

I typically go to zoos with two camera bodies, if I want to shoot wildlife.  I don't have the energy for the woods and wild. I've found that your gear can get the insides dirty very easily swapping out lenses in the wild. 

I carry a crop sensor body like the 7D Mark II, or a 1D Mark iV with the 100-400mm lens.  And, I will carry the 6D with the 70-200mm lens.  Between those two setups, I can shoot anything from 70mm to 640mm.  I may also carry a 24-105mm, or a 16-35mm, too, just for tourist mode and sightseeing.