Bit the bullet...

[Kevin]

Well, for those who have known me a while and my anguishing over the decision as to which telephoto lens to get, you'll be relieved to know I finally decided.

I ordered the 400/f5.6 L and should be getting it soon. :)

Except for my macro choice, my saga should be coming to an end. Still leaning toward the Tamron 180.

Will also be selling my Sigma 100-300 and in turn purchase the 70-200/f2.8 non-IS or 70-200/f4. If my timing is good, I may consider the 70-200/f4 IS. Anyone know for sure when that lens is coming out?

[Harv]

Well, for those who have known me a while and my anguishing over the decision as to which telephoto lens to get, you'll be relieved to know I finally decided.

I ordered the 400/f5.6 L and should be getting it soon. :)

Except for my macro choice, my saga should be coming to an end. Still leaning toward the Tamron 180.

Will also be selling my Sigma 100-300 and in turn purchase the 70-200/f2.8 non-IS or 70-200/f4. If my timing is good, I may consider the 70-200/f4 IS. Anyone know for sure when that lens is coming out?

Congratulations, Kevin. I think you made the right choice.

I remember reading that the 70-200 f/4L 'IS' is supposed to be on the market in November. Canon USA already has it showing on their website...

http://www.usa.canon.com/consumer/controller?act=ModelDetailAct&fcategoryid=150&modelid=14260

[mdephoto]

Well, for those who have known me a while and my anguishing over the decision as to which telephoto lens to get, you'll be relieved to know I finally decided.

I ordered the 400/f5.6 L and should be getting it soon. :)

Except for my macro choice, my saga should be coming to an end. Still leaning toward the Tamron 180.

Will also be selling my Sigma 100-300 and in turn purchase the 70-200/f2.8 non-IS or 70-200/f4. If my timing is good, I may consider the 70-200/f4 IS. Anyone know for sure when that lens is coming out?

Kevin, I think you will love the 400 5.6 -- I sure love mine. I have both the 100-400 and the 400 5.6 and unless I KNOW that I am going to have to do something that involves varying the zoom I would much rather have the 5.6 as it is much faster, lighter and seems sharper.

And, I also share your interest in the new 70-200/f4IS -- sounds like a real sweet lens..... should be available here in another few weeks....

[Keith]

congrats, sure took you long enough :rolleyes: :couch:

I have an opportunity to trade my 17-40L and buy a 400 f5.6 (date code March 06) and pay $375 difference, what you think bossman???

[Rudi]

Yeah, the 400/5.6L is one sweet lens. A good friend of mine has one, and I considered getting one for my long end (leave it alone! :)). Unfortunately, I couldn't make myself buy a lens that long without IS, and since Canon do not have anything reasonably priced, with IS, in a prime that long, I went with the 100-400L.

The 100-400L is one surprising lens though, and I am finding that I use it more often than my 70-200/2.8L (unless I *know* I will be needing the shorter zoom and wider aperture).

Kevin, I think you will find that there are very few bad "L"enses out there! :) Congratulations on the 400/5.6L, and let's see some photos when you get it (through it, not of it! :p).

[Kevin]

congrats, sure took you long enough :rolleyes: :couch:

I have an opportunity to trade my 17-40L and buy a 400 f5.6 (date code March 06) and pay $375 difference, what you think bossman???

I don't konw off the top of my head the going rate for a 17-40. I think in the $500's. If that's the case, you're right around high 800's to low 900s which seems to be the going rate.

I decided to just buy new and take advantage of the double rebate. I got it for $1084 - 90 = $994 which is only $50-$75 more than what I've been typically seeing them. For that little difference, having the warranty is worth it.

Are you sure that focal length is going to suit you ok? It's a great lens to handhold when you need to. I'm also going to buy the cheap Tamron 1.4 tc. It doesn't report the aperture when adding it so my 30D will still AF. Of course with the 1-series it doesn't really matter.

I went back to my folders to check the shots I took with the 400 I rented. Two or 3 and I was convinced that's what I wanted. Want me to post some for you? ;)

[Keith]

No pics needed, I live with the 600mm on there so not sure i really need it. But I need a fix :D :D

[gluwater]

Of course with the 1-series it doesn't really matter.
Is that a hint about your next purchase? Congrats on the new lens, I'll second that it took you long enough.

[Roger]

Well, for those who have known me a while and my anguishing over the decision as to which telephoto lens to get, you'll be relieved to know I finally decided.

I ordered the 400/f5.6 L and should be getting it soon. :)

Except for my macro choice, my saga should be coming to an end. Still leaning toward the Tamron 180.

Will also be selling my Sigma 100-300 and in turn purchase the 70-200/f2.8 non-IS or 70-200/f4. If my timing is good, I may consider the 70-200/f4 IS. Anyone know for sure when that lens is coming out?

Dunno , most of the reading I do relates that primes own zooms.

I would get some of the higher end primes and forget the new IS zoom.

But I am just passing on what I have read.

[gluwater]

Dunno , most of the reading I do relates that primes own zooms.

I would get some of the higher end primes and forget the new IS zoom.

But I am just passing on what I have read.
The 70-200 is a tried and true lens that has exceptional IQ for a zoom. It is one lens I will never get rid of.

[Kevin]

Roger, I'd agree that primes typically are going to be better than zooms. Nick's also right, though, in that the 70-200 (all 3 and probably the new 4th one as well) are exceptional zooms, image quality wise.

My primary purpose for getting this focal length is for doing outdoor location portraits. I use my 135 prime for that but also need the flexibility of the zoom so I don't end up in the middle of the street shooting (done that!). For this purpose it will work very well. I also will use it for wildlife shots at the Rookeries where slapping on a tc will give me the perfect range. (why I originally bought the 100-300 Sigma). Eventually, I'll end up with an 85 prime and maybe the 100/f2 prime. I've thought about selling my 24-70 and going the prime route of 35L/1.4, 50L/1.2, and 85L/1.2. That would be a dream setup. Then just add a 17-40 for landscapes.

Nick, part of the problem I was having was deciding between that dang 300 and the 400. The 300 is just so sharp and perfect for handholding. But you've been to the places I shoot at and realize I need the addt'l focal length.

I almost caved in and sold my 30D and bought a new body. I found a good deal on a 1DS, a 1Dm2 and a 5D. But after looking at the budget, i would have had to forgo the 400 and I just didn't think I'd be able to go for a few months without a birding lens. So, I decided to keep the 30D (now with the rebate, it's pointless to sell it). I'll just need to sell more portraits to raise the cash for a new body. I'm shooting for a 5D before the rebates end as that would be $600 off. But you never know what curves are ahead in the road. A 1 series would be nice for the upcoming winter birding season. ;)

[gluwater]

Was that the 1DS over at Naturescapes? Would you really get the 100 f/2 and keep the 135? That seems awfully close in focal length to have two expensive lenses. I don''t think I have ever met anyone that has the 100 f/2, is that a discontinued lens?

[Kevin]

No, over at FM and also KEH.com.

It may sound odd to get the 100 and keep the 135 but from what I've been reading from people who have shot both is that both are very close in quality. I would use it primarily for head and shoulder shots in the studio. When I shot Nikon, I had a manual focus 105 prime that was like 30 yrs old. That thing was the perfect lens for head and shoulder shots. The Canon 100/f2 isn't that expensive really...certainly not in the same league as the f1.2 L lenses. Iirc, it's in the $400 range.

But for me, I really do like the primes for use in the studio. You just get such exceptional quality with those lenses.

[gluwater]

You know you could have used your Nikon 105 on your canon right?

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=productlist&A=details&Q=&sku=197094&is=REG&addedTroughType=search

In a studio situation the loss of AE wouldn't be so big of a deal.

For some reason I thought the 100 f/2 was more.

[Kevin]

You know, I kept that 105/2.5 AIS for quite a while with the intention of using it with an adapter. That lens was just fantastic. Then it just kinda happened when I ran across someone who was looking for one. I sold it and now regret it. Well, I suppose I could always get another, they're dirt cheap. In no hurry though. :)

[Jonathan]

well I have yet to own a zoom and have always had a variety of primes. That being said I am looking at the 24-70 down the road.

[mdephoto]

Not to hijack this thread, but does anyone know anything about the 300 IS 4.0 in terms of quality of images?

[Harv]

Not to hijack this thread, but does anyone know anything about the 300 IS 4.0 in terms of quality of images?

I own one and it rocks. Superb image quality.

[Kevin]

I used the 300/f4 IS briefly (a couple of weeks). It's an absolutely fantastic lens. There isn't much not to like about that lens. I opted for the 400 due to the extra mm but I'd buy that 300 in a heartbeat. Fantastically sharp photos!!

[Rudi]

But for me, I really do like the primes for use in the studio. You just get such exceptional quality with those lenses.

Kevin,

If you already have the 135L, get the 85mm f/1.8 instead of the 100mm f/2. Much more useful focal length in combination with the 135L, and the 85 is one sharp lens!

Just my $0.02... :)

[Rudi]

I own one and it rocks. Superb image quality.

I concur! :)

[Joe]

Will also be selling my Sigma 100-300 and in turn purchase the 70-200/f2.8 non-IS or 70-200/f4. If my timing is good, I may consider the 70-200/f4 IS. Anyone know for sure when that lens is coming out?

B&H is taking orders on the 70-200L IS so release must be a few weeks away. You may recall I toyed with getting that lens. After shooting the 70-200 f4 non-IS I just can't see the point of IS for double the price. I'll switch the the 135 or 50 when I need to hand hold in low light. The non-IS is so damn sharp you just won't believe your eyes for a $500 lens (used price). I like it for studio stuff (easy to hand hold with the 5D) and outdoor portraits as well.

[Roger]

Roger, I'd agree that primes typically are going to be better than zooms. Nick's also right, though, in that the 70-200 (all 3 and probably the new 4th one as well) are exceptional zooms, image quality wise.

My primary purpose for getting this focal length is for doing outdoor location portraits. I use my 135 prime for that but also need the flexibility of the zoom so I don't end up in the middle of the street shooting (done that!). For this purpose it will work very well. I also will use it for wildlife shots at the Rookeries where slapping on a tc will give me the perfect range. (why I originally bought the 100-300 Sigma). Eventually, I'll end up with an 85 prime and maybe the 100/f2 prime. I've thought about selling my 24-70 and going the prime route of 35L/1.4, 50L/1.2, and 85L/1.2. That would be a dream setup. Then just add a 17-40 for landscapes.

Nick, part of the problem I was having was deciding between that dang 300 and the 400. The 300 is just so sharp and perfect for handholding. But you've been to the places I shoot at and realize I need the addt'l focal length.

I almost caved in and sold my 30D and bought a new body. I found a good deal on a 1DS, a 1Dm2 and a 5D. But after looking at the budget, i would have had to forgo the 400 and I just didn't think I'd be able to go for a few months without a birding lens. So, I decided to keep the 30D (now with the rebate, it's pointless to sell it). I'll just need to sell more portraits to raise the cash for a new body. I'm shooting for a 5D before the rebates end as that would be $600 off. But you never know what curves are ahead in the road. A 1 series would be nice for the upcoming winter birding season. ;)

For me the primes are the ticket. I would rather use a prime and force my self to use a creative methods to take a shot. Sure you might mise a shot here or there, but what I am after isn't just being in the right spot, it's being able to recreate great shots over and over.

Now if I can learn from primes and primes can help me to take good pictures, then so th e better. lord knowns their is alot to remember once you get everything in the viewfinder. :)

I am also a fan of being able to add a TC to an L larger than 133. That lets you get more flexibilty out of a lens you will already be using a lot.