>OK, I admit I'm looking ahead a bit, but among the bewildering choices
>of lenses, one I'm sure I'm going to want is a 400-500mm tele for
>birds and planes. Amongst the Canon canon I would like to hear
>opinions on the fixed f/5.6L (around $1500) and the zoom 100-400mm
>f/4.5-5.6 IS USM (around $1200). The flexibility of the zoom is
>attractive - is it going to suffer significantly at the 400 end
>compared to the prime 400, being that they're around the same speed?
>Will I be able to get a true 4.5 @ 400mm with the IS?
>
Hello,
Which fixed f/5.6L are you talking about ? In France the 400 f/5,6 L is
less expensive than the 100-400 f/4.5-5.6 L IS...
Anyway, I had the 400 f/5,6 L and change for the 100-400 f/4.5-5.6 L IS.
The sharpness at 400 mm is the same (I always use them at f/5,6).
As you say, the zoom is more flexible and the IS is really great for quiet
subjects. I can shoot at 400 mm at 1/30 with more than 75 % of perfectly
sharp images.
The prime is lighter and much more easy to handle (the tripod collar on the
zoom is too close from the camera body IMHO). The integreted lense hood is
very strong and perfectly protect the front element.
For your use on birds and planes, that are fast moving subjects, the prime
will be easier to use and the IS would not be so much useful (even using
"stabilisation mode 2"). For flying bird photography, I turn the IS off
most of the time...
Regards,
Olivier
*
****
*******
***********************************************************
* For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see:
* http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm
***********************************************************
