I am looking to purchase a lens and try a little wildlife photography. I have narrowed it down to the 100-400L IS and a 300L f4 with a 1.4 converter. Which lens will give me the best image quality and pros and cons of each lens? Thank you for your time! Sincerely, Dave Castle

-- David Castle (daveast@hotmail.com), February 05, 2002

Answers

I feel reasonably well placed to answer this question, as I own the 300 F4L IS and a 1.4X TC, and my father owns a 100-400L IS.

The question really depends on what your output format is. The 300 F4L IS is undoubtedly better optically than the 100-400, but not so much so that you'd particularly notice on 5x7 prints with 200ASA Kodak Royal. The 300 with the 1.4X TC also makes a very fine combination.

I think you need to consider what other lenses you have already, or want to get in addition. The 300 is great for 300, but what about when you need 200? I use a 70-200 F4L in addition to the 300, which makes a very fine lens combo. However, these two lenses together, along with the TC, are MUCH heavier, bulkier and more expensive than just the 100-400, as well as considerably less convenient. The optics are better, but you will need to enlarge or be shooting transparencies to really appreciate this.

The answer is that the 100-400L IS has worse image quality, but is still very good, whilst being more convenient. It is slower (F5.6 at 300 compared to F4), so the 300 can use cross-type focus with the EOS 3/1V/1D. I also find that the 300 handles better than the 100- 400, which can seem very front-heavy (and thus tiring) when at 400. Go to a good camera shop which has both lenses, and try them on your own camera body.

-- Isaac Sibson (isibson@hotmail.com), February 05, 2002.

David,

I have the same combination listed above, the 70-200mm f4 and the 300mm f4 (non-IS version). It is really a great combination. I use both lenses with the 1.4x and 2x converters and have been very happy with the results. I am not a fan of zooms with wide zoom ranges such as the 100-400mm range. Whatever is gained in convenience is, in my opinion, lost in handling and image quality.

-- Richard Snyder (rsnyder@lc.cc.il.us), February 07, 2002.

David,

I should have mentioned that I shoot with an EOS3 and so can still enjoy autofocus with 2X converters, although it is limited to the central focusing point and is a tad slower in locking on.

-- Richard Snyder (rsnyder@lc.cc.il.us), February 07, 2002.

Of the two lenses mentioned, the 300 with 1.4x would probably produce a sharper image. The 100-400 would be more flexible, however. The best quality, however, would come from the 400mm f/5.6L mounted on a good tripod. The 400mm works great with the 1.4x extender as well for a 560mm f/8.

-- Lee (Leemarthakiri@sport.rr.com), February 10, 2002.

Interesting question. I looked at the 100-400 as well. Just found it too dark and unwieldy. Ended up with the same combination you mention - 300 f4 and a 1.4 Canon extender. Focus is very fast too. I also use a 70-200 f2.8 with the 1.4x and it works well.

-- Keith Quigley (keithq@yahoo.com), March 10, 2002.