Thank you Dustin, just bought this lens and in the process of learning it's capabilities. Thank you again for taking the time to review it and in helping me make a descision. Greetings from Bangkok :)
+Barry Kirton - that is a challenging question, and I can understand your concern. All of those lenses are awesome. I think that I like the two lens approach here simply because it gives you a lighter lens for birding and carrying around along with a big, amazing tele for the blind. Really, though, there isn't a wrong answer here.
+Barry Kirton - my 2 cents: I have the 500 f/4 IS II. It's simply superb for birds and wildlife. Another "plus" for the lens - I often use the Canon 2x III extender with it, and I have been super happy with the sharpness and overall image quality. The only negative is that it won't auto track and I have to use single point focus. But there are quite a few times you simply cannot have too much "reach", and this is one way to achieve that. I'm looking at acquiring this new 100-400 to give me the medium lengths- it looks superb also.
Good Review Dustin. I used the 100-400 last night and think it did quite nicely in Dusk lighting on an Eagle's Nest. I took the Canon 2x Converter out with me, and I felt as I expected that the 2x is not delivering fine details I would like to see, although I was using stabilizer setting 3 instead of #1. Later I switch to 1 and you can literally see the image stabilize in the lens and settle out the image from my ability to brace and shoot. Both the 2x and 100-400 worked amazingly well, it was technique of mine that was suffering. Great lens and combination. I was shooting 5D mkII and believe this lens would perform even better with the more evolved Canon AF systems of the present Canon cameras that can handle f8 AF with a 1.4x converter.
Randy Smith I think I agree with everything you've mentioned. I'm not typically a big fan of 2x converters as the hit on sharpness and AF is too high IMO.
Excellent review, thanks for taking the time to put it together and I loved the included sample shots. This lens is now firmly in my wish list. Oh how I wish I didn't suffer "Gear Acquisition Syndrome"!!
Thanks Dustin for your answer to my query. I'm a newbee at this and my purchases have to be the best choices I can make . This clarification sure helps. You do give great reviews thanks. You live in a beautiful country.
Just picked one up used for almost half price for landscape photography during traveling. It's heavy for my hiking but the quality and flexibility is great!
they can innovate stuff with more confidence now such as the lens hood and tripod collar after they spent much time and effort innovating their new lens cap.
I Purchased the lens on the back of this video, No regrets , what a fantastic lens, Im really pleased. Thank you for your video,...best regards From Switserland !!
Hi Dustin, Thanks for a great review. I have just brought the 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS USM II and the 7d mark ii. I was thinking of buying the Canon EF Mark III 1.4x Extender. Will I loose sharpness and also does the auto focus still work. Thank you.
Graham, there is always a bit of a sharpness hit when using an extender, but fortunately this lens is built to work with one and I found the sharpness loss minimal on a full frame body. I can't speak as to the sharpness loss on a 7DII. You should retain autofocus on a 7D2.
Hi Dustin, Just wanna give you a thumbs up 👍 for your reviews you provide for your viewers... I have always enjoyed watching you give us the pros and cons with the lens of the day if you will! I have my eye on the Canon 100-400 L 4.5-5.6 is ii. I had purchased the older version and could not produce a decent shot of a Snowy Egret or Great Blue Heron. So unfortunately I returned it. Soon I will be adding the version 2 to my kit of L lenses.
Thank you for this review. I just purchased the lens yesterday so I'm really looking forward to using it. I was wondering which harness you're wearing in this video? I've never had to wear one but with this new lens, it seems like a good idea to have one. Thanks!
@@DustinAbbottTWI Thank you for getting back to me on this. That is a feature I want to have on all my lenses if possible for fine tuning the focus when needed. Your reviews are always very thorough and helpful!
Hi Dustin! I love the way you review. I would like to get some videos from you related to photography techniques with sample photos. Thanks in advance ☺️
Hello again Dustin Abbott. I came on here a while ago asking about the 100-400 L IS II. I was torn between the lens I just mentioned and the Canon 70-200 f/2.8 L IS II. In the end I got the 70-200 f/2.8 L IS II. Why? Just gut feelings. Now I have owned the 70-200 f/2.8 L IS II for 3 weeks or so I am very glad and also relieved I bought this lens. The 70-200 f/2.8 L IS II is a fantastic lens. I also have a Canon 1.4x Extender III which works very well with the 70-200 f/2.8 L IS II.....Maybe the 100-400 is something for the future, or maybe not. Who knows? Anyway thanks....
Thanks for another great review. If you could only pick one telephoto zoom for wildlife and landscape photography, would it be this lens or the 70-200mm?
It would be this one. A 70-200 just doesn't have the kind of reach for wildlife photography that you need. Now if you need to do event work, that is a whole other story. The 70-200 f/2.8 every time!
I traded in my 100-400mm l Canon for the 100-400mm ll and am extremely happy with the improvement in the image quality. I was wondering with the 2x extender what the hit on quality would be relative to the 1.4 extender. Does AF work with the 1.4 extender?
I didn't use a 2x extender myself. The lens will AF with certain bodies with a 1.4x (5D3, 1Dx, 7D2) Canon extender. It AFs fine with a Kenko 1.4x on a broad range of bodies
Awesome review Dustin Abbott , thanks so much for doing this timely review. I was thinking of selling my 70-200 L IS II and putting the funds towards this lens.
So in your opinion, which teleconverter works best? The 1.4 or the 2.0..I have a Canon 5Ti which i generally use a Canon 24-105 lens but i also have a Canon 100-400 zoom which i recently traded my Sigma 120-400 for. I am wondering if i neede to buy a converter to use in addition to the zoom. I have an after mkt 2x converter, but it seems the focus is slower. Would a Canon converter work better with the Canon lens, or is it a shooters choice?..Just watched the video on the Canon 100-400 zoom. Nice video
+JEROME MUNDY I don't often use 2.0 converters. It's too much of a hit on both image quality and autofocus. You also should know that even the 1.4x TC from Canon combined with this lens will only work with certain bodies, and your 5Ti isn't one of them. You could use something like a Kenko 1.4x TC, though.
Sorry, one small piece of "nitpicking" on a review I found really useful! At 9:18, which axis are stabilized: When panning, I'm quite shure it is only the VERTICAL axis that should be stabilized. After all, one is moving the lens along the horizontal axis, thus the IS-system must be prevented from trying to counteract movement along that (the horizontal) axis? Or?
Great review, thanks! Any comments on how the lens works on the new R5 (I have R6)? Is the autofocus 'flawless'? I'm also considering the 70-300 L that you loved, its more compact size being one point for travel. If you compare the image quality and AF between 100-300, any comments on which you regard better, or is there a notable difference? My main motivation is to photograph kids soccer, outdoors mainly, and the 70-200 reach isn't quite long enough in all game situations. And greetings from Finland, I hope we get a good winter (like you on the video!) this year to southern Finland, last year was exceptional, we had hardly any snow at all (northern Finland took it all I guess...)!
Hey, what camera are you using with the Lens? I'm in the market for a new camera and I'm torn between a canon 5d mark 3 and the 7d mark 2. I'll be doing all kinds of photography with these and plan on getting several lenses. Which would you suggest? (Money not really an issue)
I purchased the Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS USM II along with a Hoya uv filter. I was wondering why my images where a little soft until someone suggested to remove the uv filter to see if it made a difference. After removing the uv filter my images are now exceptionally sharp. My question is what make of filter works best with this lens?
Ahh, I've seen that before. Stores package a cheap UV filter, and it seems great, until you discover it is actually ruining your images! Try this: bhpho.to/2omLByQ
Hi Dustin, thanks for the interesting reviews. I'm looking at either the 70-300mm L or this 100-400mm lens, i'm leaning towards the 70-300 because of the lighter weight and smaller size and i'm interested in your thoughts on this. It seems like the 70-300 (with my 6d2 camera) would be easier to take along on a walk etc or travels when a bigger lens would be more likely to be left behind. On the other hand 300mm is generally described as a bit small for wildlife. How have you found the two lenses, have you noticed big differences in portability between them? And how much of a quality sacrifice is there between them, eg with cropping from the 300mm lens? I'm doing it for enjoyment not commercially. Thanks
There is not a big difference between them optically. I would choose what you want based on your needs and priorities without worrying about IQ. They are both great!
@@DustinAbbottTWI thanks, yeah I think portability is the priority for me, and i'm sure I can work with the range, i watched your 70-300mm review again and I think you're right that it makes a nice portable kit
Hello Dustin, I have since upgraded camera to the 90d. In viewing this video again, you mentioned it works well with the 1.4 extender, yet remains in focus. Is this is AF or MF with the 1.4? I have yet to try with the 1.4 extended.
It's the part that connects the lens to the body. Other cameras are bigger mine is a smaller square. Or are you saying I can use but I would have to use a tripod all the time?.
No, but I am saying that when you mount a camera on a tripod you need to use the tripod foot, as that is the time there will be the most stress on the mount. But Canon designed your camera to accommodate its larger lenses.
Ong Kelvin The build on the lens is exceptionally high. Roger at LensRentals broke one down and feels like the construction is near to the level of the super teles from Canon.
Thanks for your excellent review. I am a bird photographer and have had the prime 400mm f 5.6 for years. It’s about as sharp if not a little sharper than this lens according to some tests. I have also the 70-300mm L lens for landscapes shooting. I am debating selling that lens for this new zoom. Have you had any experience using teleconverters with the 70-300 L in order to mimic this lens so I don’t need to buy a new wildlife zoom? I know canon doesn’t recommend it, but I heard that it works? Have you tried that? Do you think selling the 70-300L is a good idea to replace with this zoom? I know I lose a little on the wide end. Thanks.
hi! My 100-400 is ii has a sound that is near "clicking" after shutter released for around half to one second. When turn image stabilizer off, this sound goes away --- so I am guessing this is something related to engaging the IS. Though the sound is not very load, I am wondering if this is just normal? Thanks!
Xiaolong WANG Hmmm, I don't recall ever hearing anything like that, but unfortunately I don't have the lens in hand. I do plan to buy one myself, just haven't done it yet.
Dustin I am in Africa and have been saving most of my life (Well it feels like it anyhow) for a long lens. I have been looking at the canon 200-400 x1.4extender which is a seriously big investment but find now that I am having second thoughts. I have now had a look at this 100-400 and the prime 500mm f4. Both these lenses will cost about the same as the 200-400 x 1.4. I would really appreciate your thoughts on this. Most of the time it is for wildlife in one of the national parks and one is restricted to your car or a dedicated hide. I also do like my birds. I think my hesitation comes from the fact that it has taken so long to save the money and now that I have it in my reach I am afraid of making the wrong move. Unfortunately it is not possible / easy to hire lenses down here. I would really appreciate your thought and advise.
sorry that i reply but as you worked hard to save money i thought maybe i would be good if i propose my idea , just go with 100-400 no hesitations here . sure 200-400 in my idea is the best canon lens ever made but in that price rane(which is correct pricing for such glass) you really cant gain back what you demanded for
Would you say the sharpness holds up on FF with the 1.4x III extender? I'm using a 1DX II and just bought this lens but wondering if the £300 for the extender will still render very sharp images.
Dustin - All right, you convinced me. I was wavering between this one and the RF Canon 70-200 for my EOS R. I'm going to get the 100-400 and use the EF/RF adapter. If I can find some money in the sofa cushions, maybe I'll get the 2x extender, too.
Truth be told I have really considered picking one up again to use on my Canon EOS R5. The RF mount telephotos are very expensive, and this lens is still a very good lens.
Should I get this lens or the 70-200 2.8 with 2x extender? I like the internal zoom of the 70-200 better for gimbals but idk if the quality is as good as this lens
I'm not personally a big fan of 2x extenders. My typical advice is that if you plan to regularly use a certain focal range, it is best to purchase a lens that actually covers that focal range. If you need 400mm, say, very rarely, then go with the 70-200, as it gives you more flexibility over its zoom range.
Brandon, I need to at some point. It has been one of my most used lenses over the past three years. It never gets reviewed because I have so many new lenses to constantly review!
Hi Dustin, Will you update this review with the arrival of the Tamron 150-600mm G2? Obviously, you need to review that first and when you do, I am pretty sure a lot of folks are interested to see that comparison. But as always, your reviews are excellent and unbiased. ' Thanks, Lyndon
Thanks for the feedback. I have reviewed the Tamron, but I will be getting it back to test it on APS-C, with converters, and to do a direct comparison with the Canon. This video will not be updated, though.
Not technically true. The 100-400L II does suffer from focus breathing, so it doesn't behave like 400mm at close distances, but at further distances it is a true 400mm.
I have been watching your tutorials. Thanks. I have the 7D Mk11 and I have the 70x300 L series and it takes great shots. But I want to step up to the 100x400 ll. I shoot from an airplane at ocean wildlife. I use a polorizer and mainly shoot on auto. lol. Every moment the light is changing. Overcast to sunshine. I have very little photo exp. plus I don't have time or knowledge to set the camera up for changing conditions. Will this be a big enough change from my 70x300?
I personally made that upgrade and have been very happy with it. Exceptional IQ (as does the 70-300L, of course), but a bit better autofocus and stabilizer, too, plus a little more ability to customize the lens.
Dustin, Here’s a good one for you :). Ken Rockwell reviewed this to be a better lens than the 70-200 2.8 is ii in every situation other than indoor sports. He states that ISO tech advancements negate the need for a 2.8 lens in most cases. I am struggling because I was just about to pull the trigger on a 70-200 is ii. For general professional photography, where you would be doing portraits, have moving subjects, outdoor and landscape shots, some low light outdoor work, and a very small amount of focused wildlife photography which lens would you say is a better?
If you are going to be doing portraits and events, go with the f/2.8 lens. This is a fantastic lens, yes (and I own it!), but there's a reason why the sidelines of every major event has lots of 70-200L IIs on it!
Hello Dustin. Wanted to know how it delivers by using Canon 2x- teleconverters with the lens? What is the range it gets with 2x-Teleconverter and are the results better than 1x- teleconverter?
I'm not sure you would get autofocus with an Canon body and a 2x converter. My experience is that 2x converters also provide much more of an image quality hit than 1.4x.
What a great review. I’ve been struggling to decide what lens to buy to go with my Canon 5Div to have a try at wildlife photography. Almost went for the Sigma 150-600 Sport but the weight issues caused me to hesitate. This great review has made my mind up. Canon 100-400mm is for me. Along with my 70D looks like I should be a happy amateur. Thanks so much from a mildly chilly U.K. compared to Canada.
Dustin, love the review! I'm slowly building my gear up after starting many years ago with a T2i (crop) w/ kit lenses. A few years ago, I added the EF-100mm f2.8 Macro USM and LOVE it! Now, I'm looking at telephotos, and the 100-400 is on my wish list. So, here's my question for you: any downsides of this with a crop sensor body? I believe you recommended the 70-300 for crop and 100-400 for full to an earlier poster and was wondering why. Thanks for any sage words you have to offer! :-)
+Robert Cho My only reason for saying that is that 100mm (wide end) on the 100-400L II becomes 160mm equivalent, which is pretty long and might feeling confining for some shooters. Depending on the crop sensor body the balance of the 70-300L might feel a little better. I have a 70D along with full frame bodies and love the lens on both, though.
Great review and very helpful Dustin. I have recently bought a 5d mk 3 and am debating this lens for wildlife and aviation shots. Against the flow I am reverting back to dslr from micro four thirds, love the compact size but the ultimate image quality is sadly compromised in comparison. Keep up the good work
Hello Dustin....firstly let me thank you for your excellent candid reviews. I currently own a Sigma Sports 60-600mm f/4.5-6.3 DG OS HSM with Canon 5D Mark 4 and 7D Mark 2. While I am able to capture decent wildlife images, hand holding this combination over long hours is a bit strenuous. I am deliberating if I should invest in a Canon 100 400 IS USM II. Will it help in the overall performance improvement w.r.t. Auto Focus, Low Light and image quality. Thanks again
Hi Dustin, it looks like the 100-400mm mk 2 does a decent job with eviromental Portraits as well.......great information in this video !! i was considering the 70-300mm but will spend the extra money on the 100-400mm instead.
Thanks for you're reply Dustin. i think i have made my decision & will be going for the 100-400mm. keep your videos coming mate they are very informative.
Dustin Abbott Just an update.......i have now received my brand new canon 100-400mm mk2 lens & i have to say i'm loving it.:) thank u again for the info within this video
Hello Dustin Abbott. What is this lens like in low-light? I have also been looking at the Canon 70-200mm L f/2.8 IS II. I have read that the 70-200mm L IS II is great in low-light. Can you tell me what the 100-400mm L II is like please...I am torn between the these two lenses.....
Jamie Gibbons I would say that this is not a strength of the lens. The 70-200 f/2.8 lets in about 2.5 times as much light, and is obviously going to be better in low light conditions.
Dustin Abbott So are you saying that the 100-400mm L II is useless in low-light? I will probably be using the lens mostly in good light, and just occasionally in low-light. My Canon 17-40mm L f/4 is very good in low-light. If ever I needed to use in low-light conditions it will be tripod mounted.
Jamie Gibbons I didn't use the word "useless". I did use it effectively in low light situations, and it focused accurately, but just not as quickly as what my 70-200 f/2.8 would have in the same situation. It isn't a wide aperture lens, so it is battling against physics when its largest maximum aperture is f/4.5.
Dustin Abbott Thanks very much for your replies. I have been stressing over which lenses to buy for about 2 weeks now. I have about £2000 as a budget. Originally I was thinking about buying 2 lenses; a macro and a telephoto. I already have the Canon 100mm L Macro lens. This is a great lens, and I didn't want it to go to waste. I wanted to be able to make things much bigger. Anyway, I bought a extension tube. This enables me to get much closer, and therefore get bigger images. Also I have ordered the Canon 1.4x iii extender. I have heard how I can use this with my 100mm L Macro, if I use a Extension tube as well. This will give me more magnification at a greater distance. So, this leaves me with the whole £2000 to spend on a telephoto. I have heard how the Canon 100-400mm L IS II can be used as a 'sort of' macro lens for large butterfly's etc. Also I want this telephoto lens to be used for street photography. It is good to photograph life in the street at a distance, that way the photo doesn't look contrived. I am very much drawn to the 100-400mm L IS II, I have heard great things about it, one well known photographer said "The 100-400mm L IS II, is a superb lens". However sometimes I do like to photograph at night, things like car trails etc. Also I was concerned if it was a very cloudy day or early dawn or late dusk if the light was low whether the 100-400mm L IS II would be able to cope. Maybe buying something like the 70-200mm f/2.8 II, could be something for the future, or maybe the Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8. Don't forget if I do use in low light I will be using a tripod. Generally speaking I don't really shoot action or movement........Anyway does this sound like the 100-400mm L IS II will be good for my requirements.....??? My plan is to order this lens tomorrow, so I am just trying to make sure I am buying a lens which will suit my needs.
Hmm, I don't know if I can answer that question. I don't really know what your expectations are. What I can tell you is that you won't get a better performance at 400mm outside of lenses much more expensive than this one.
Dustin Abbott Thanks sir , i meant the distance. Is it 100 meters or more or less from where the a small bird can be focused to its detail using this lens with canon camera 70d even at 400mm. Please explain. Thank you.
@@DustinAbbottTWI Thanks. I'm also looking at getting the Nikon D500 with a 200-500mm lens for £2700 overall. Would that be better as I've heard a lot of good things about that combo!
+Marius The Canon is the sharper lens, to be sure, though this technique works better with pixel dense bodies (5Ds (R) or 5D4). Even with a 1.4x teleconverter attached the Canon is [slightly] sharper.
very good review! subbed! here is something i wanted to ask: i want to take photo of birds and i have a 7DMKII. which lens should i choose? sigma 150-500C or CANON EF 100-400 is ii?
+TF gameplays I personally bought the Canon, myself, and feel like the AF performance will be much stronger with the Canon. On a crop sensor it has plenty of reach, too. If you choose to go with the Sigma, though, you will have a very good lens. There isn't a bad choice.
+TF gameplays I'm personally not a big fan of using a 2x extender. I feel like it compromises image quality too much. Still, its a viable option as the 70-200L does better than most with extenders.
Michał Szurowski It's called a Cotton Carrier. It can be found here: www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/836946-REG/Cotton_Carrier_635_RTL_S_Cotton_Carrier_Camera_Vest.html/BI/19614/KBID/12112/kw/CO635RTLS/DFF/d10-v2-t1-xCO635RTLS
I bought this lens when it first came out and put it on a 7Dii. Both replaced the original 100-400 on the 7D. Four plus years later I am wondering if I got a bad copy. Never have I gotten what I would call sharp photo's. In fact, the ODD photo with the 7D and original 100-400 is tack sharp. I have been threatening to purchase the 60-600 sigma due to reviews and seeing the photo's taken with it. However, today I called B and H and they tell me the 100-400ii (that I own) with the 1.4iii converter (that I own) is (STILL) a better choice than a new in 60-600 sigma for sharpness. NOW I seriously think my lens is just the odd one in the bunch that is not sharp. I have done fine focus adjustments on the 7dii. Professionals use this lens, but my results are severely lacking. To put it in perspective, I use it once a year in Africa, and once a year in Alaska and it sits in the case the rest of the time. One might say practice practice practice (and admittedly, that is true) but how bad can you screw up a photo when the camera is on a tripod and using the 2 second timer to snap photos of elephants drinking water at 1/320 of a second. Just not sharp. Anyone know if there is the odd "bad lens".
I agree with B&H, so either you've got a focus issue or a bad copy. My 100-400L II has held up very well against basically every lens I've compared it to.
hi sir I have seen your review of both tamron 150-600 and this Canon 100-400 at least a dozen times, the more I see the more confusing it's for me to decide the purchase,i am a doctor and amateur photographer,i own Canon eos 760d, with 19 AF points,i have canon 50mm prime ,canon18-135 efs, tamron 90mm macro, want to buy telephoto , please help
+Guruprasad Baba If you are going to shooting a crop camera like the 760D I would recommend the 100-400L II. It will balance a little better, has plenty of reach on crop, and 100mm is easier to manage on the wide end than 150mm on a crop.
thanks again sir for that wonderful piece of advice, 100mm on a crop sensor plus short min focus distance of 3ft of canon will help me to use the lens for various other purposes than just wildlife...
Dustin the body is 5d mark 3 canon with a canon 1.4 ,how ever i found out after i left the camera store that the camera needed a firm ware update so all is well sorry to question you .
@@DustinAbbottTWI thank you very much, I was a little scared about that. I've just purchased this lens and because of that noise I started thinking the worse. thank you.
The IQ isn't going to be nearly as good (and I find that the bokeh gets a little weird), but it certainly is a workable solution if you already have the 70-200L
Dustin Abbott Dustin, I picked up one these amazing lenses! If you don't mind me asking, now that you've been shooting with it for a bit, what aperture are you finding yourself shooting at when you're at 400mm? Thank you ahead of time. Keep up the great videos! Ricky
I just bought my 100-400 last week and I love it so much. Thanks to you.
It's a really excellent lens. I'm reminded of that every time I compare it to another telephoto.
Thank you Dustin, just bought this lens and in the process of learning it's capabilities. Thank you again for taking the time to review it and in helping me make a descision. Greetings from Bangkok :)
+Tony Flanagan Thanks, Tony! Thailand is not a country I've visited (yet). I continue to enjoy this lens; I added one to my own personal kit.
+Barry Kirton - that is a challenging question, and I can understand your concern. All of those lenses are awesome. I think that I like the two lens approach here simply because it gives you a lighter lens for birding and carrying around along with a big, amazing tele for the blind. Really, though, there isn't a wrong answer here.
Reviews by Dustin are just the best.
Thank you
+Barry Kirton - my 2 cents: I have the 500 f/4 IS II. It's simply superb for birds and wildlife. Another "plus" for the lens - I often use the Canon 2x III extender with it, and I have been super happy with the sharpness and overall image quality. The only negative is that it won't auto track and I have to use single point focus. But there are quite a few times you simply cannot have too much "reach", and this is one way to achieve that. I'm looking at acquiring this new 100-400 to give me the medium lengths- it looks superb also.
Another solid review Dustin. I’m off to purchase one of these. Cheers for all the effort you put into your video’s.
Hi Brad - enjoy! It's a fun little device.
Good Review Dustin.
I used the 100-400 last night and think it did quite nicely in Dusk lighting on an Eagle's Nest. I took the Canon 2x Converter out with me, and I felt as I expected that the 2x is not delivering fine details I would like to see, although I was using stabilizer setting 3 instead of #1. Later I switch to 1 and you can literally see the image stabilize in the lens and settle out the image from my ability to brace and shoot. Both the 2x and 100-400 worked amazingly well, it was technique of mine that was suffering. Great lens and combination. I was shooting 5D mkII and believe this lens would perform even better with the more evolved Canon AF systems of the present Canon cameras that can handle f8 AF with a 1.4x converter.
Randy Smith I think I agree with everything you've mentioned. I'm not typically a big fan of 2x converters as the hit on sharpness and AF is too high IMO.
Excellent review, thanks for taking the time to put it together and I loved the included sample shots. This lens is now firmly in my wish list. Oh how I wish I didn't suffer "Gear Acquisition Syndrome"!!
Malcolm King Get in line! I've got the same issue when it comes to this lens!
Thanks Dustin for your answer to my query. I'm a newbee at this and my purchases have to be the best choices I can make . This clarification sure helps. You do give great reviews thanks. You live in a beautiful country.
I do. Thank you
I really love your reviews. Really interesting.
+mochannel25 Thank you!
Great review thanks Dustin. How much of an improvement is this lens over the previous Canon 100-400mm lens? Is it worthwhile upgrading?
I feel that it is a significant upgrade over the previous version.
Dustin Abbott Thank you.
Awesome video. Thank you so much. I also love those trees to your right. The trees stand there and cannot be bent.
Thanks.
Just picked one up used for almost half price for landscape photography during traveling. It's heavy for my hiking but the quality and flexibility is great!
That's an amazing price.
they can innovate stuff with more confidence now such as the lens hood and tripod collar after they spent much time and effort innovating their new lens cap.
I Purchased the lens on the back of this video, No regrets , what a fantastic lens, Im really pleased. Thank you for your video,...best regards From Switserland !!
+Steve Struthers It is pretty fantastic!
Hi Dustin, Thanks for a great review. I have just brought the 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS USM II and the 7d mark ii. I was thinking of buying the Canon EF Mark III 1.4x Extender. Will I loose sharpness and also does the auto focus still work. Thank you.
Graham, there is always a bit of a sharpness hit when using an extender, but fortunately this lens is built to work with one and I found the sharpness loss minimal on a full frame body. I can't speak as to the sharpness loss on a 7DII. You should retain autofocus on a 7D2.
Dustin Abbott Thank you
Well explained. Thank you very much.
You're welcome!
Hi Dustin,
Just wanna give you a thumbs up 👍 for your reviews you provide for your viewers... I have always enjoyed watching you give us the pros and cons with the lens of the day if you will! I have my eye on the Canon 100-400 L 4.5-5.6 is ii. I had purchased the older version and could not produce a decent shot of a Snowy Egret or Great Blue Heron. So unfortunately I returned it. Soon I will be adding the version 2 to my kit of L lenses.
It's a fabulous lens.
Thank you for this review. I just purchased the lens yesterday so I'm really looking forward to using it. I was wondering which harness you're wearing in this video? I've never had to wear one but with this new lens, it seems like a good idea to have one. Thanks!
Hi there, I was using the earlier version of this harness: bhpho.to/35JycZw
Love your video reviews, does this lens or the 70-300 F/4-5.6 L ii have full time focus override?
Both do.
@@DustinAbbottTWI Thank you for getting back to me on this. That is a feature I want to have on all my lenses if possible for fine tuning the focus when needed. Your reviews are always very thorough and helpful!
Hi Dustin!
I love the way you review. I would like to get some videos from you related to photography techniques with sample photos. Thanks in advance ☺️
Check out my "all about the photos" series.
Hello again Dustin Abbott. I came on here a while ago asking about the 100-400 L IS II. I was torn between the lens I just mentioned and the Canon 70-200 f/2.8 L IS II. In the end I got the 70-200 f/2.8 L IS II. Why? Just gut feelings. Now I have owned the 70-200 f/2.8 L IS II for 3 weeks or so I am very glad and also relieved I bought this lens. The 70-200 f/2.8 L IS II is a fantastic lens. I also have a Canon 1.4x Extender III which works very well with the 70-200 f/2.8 L IS II.....Maybe the 100-400 is something for the future, or maybe not. Who knows? Anyway thanks....
Twisted Existence Glad you are happy. The right gear has more to do with your needs - both of these lenses are exceptional!
im in the same doubt between choosing these 2 lenses . please help me . would you recommend the same you just have done ?
Thanks for another great review. If you could only pick one telephoto zoom for wildlife and landscape photography, would it be this lens or the 70-200mm?
It would be this one. A 70-200 just doesn't have the kind of reach for wildlife photography that you need. Now if you need to do event work, that is a whole other story. The 70-200 f/2.8 every time!
Hello Dustin ‘ great review ‘ where did u buy that carrying harness for the camera u are wearing
Hi there - I covered it here: th-cam.com/video/_VmI3rTBGmQ/w-d-xo.html
I traded in my 100-400mm l Canon for the 100-400mm ll and am extremely happy with the improvement in the image quality. I was wondering with the 2x extender what the hit on quality would be relative to the 1.4 extender. Does AF work with the 1.4 extender?
I didn't use a 2x extender myself. The lens will AF with certain bodies with a 1.4x (5D3, 1Dx, 7D2) Canon extender. It AFs fine with a Kenko 1.4x on a broad range of bodies
Awesome review Dustin Abbott , thanks so much for doing this timely review. I was thinking of selling my 70-200 L IS II and putting the funds towards this lens.
That's a great idea so long as you need the extra reach more than the wider aperture
So in your opinion, which teleconverter works best? The 1.4 or the 2.0..I have a Canon 5Ti which i generally use a Canon 24-105 lens but i also have a Canon 100-400 zoom which i recently traded my Sigma 120-400 for. I am wondering if i neede to buy a converter to use in addition to the zoom. I have an after mkt 2x converter, but it seems the focus is slower. Would a Canon converter work better with the Canon lens, or is it a shooters choice?..Just watched the video on the Canon 100-400 zoom. Nice video
+JEROME MUNDY I don't often use 2.0 converters. It's too much of a hit on both image quality and autofocus. You also should know that even the 1.4x TC from Canon combined with this lens will only work with certain bodies, and your 5Ti isn't one of them. You could use something like a Kenko 1.4x TC, though.
תודה רבה על ההסבר המקצועי
Sorry, one small piece of "nitpicking" on a review I found really useful!
At 9:18, which axis are stabilized:
When panning, I'm quite shure it is only the VERTICAL axis that should be stabilized. After all, one is moving the lens along the horizontal axis, thus the IS-system must be prevented from trying to counteract movement along that (the horizontal) axis?
Or?
You may be right. It wouldn't be the first time I've gotten those two confused ;)
Nice video..as usual!...but. are there lemons,...especially the ones for sale ? I had the old version, and was not at all happy with it.
That's not really a question I can answer, but I've never heard anyone complain about the MK II. Not one.
Great review, thanks!
Any comments on how the lens works on the new R5 (I have R6)? Is the autofocus 'flawless'? I'm also considering the 70-300 L that you loved, its more compact size being one point for travel. If you compare the image quality and AF between 100-300, any comments on which you regard better, or is there a notable difference? My main motivation is to photograph kids soccer, outdoors mainly, and the 70-200 reach isn't quite long enough in all game situations.
And greetings from Finland, I hope we get a good winter (like you on the video!) this year to southern Finland, last year was exceptional, we had hardly any snow at all (northern Finland took it all I guess...)!
The AF is flawless on the R5. It's easier to use than what it was on my 5D Mark IV
Hey, what camera are you using with the Lens? I'm in the market for a new camera and I'm torn between a canon 5d mark 3 and the 7d mark 2. I'll be doing all kinds of photography with these and plan on getting several lenses. Which would you suggest? (Money not really an issue)
Christopher - I would go full frame. The 5DIII is a great all around camera and the price on it has never been better.
I purchased the Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS USM II along with a Hoya uv filter. I was wondering why my images where a little soft until someone suggested to remove the uv filter to see if it made a difference. After removing the uv filter my images are now exceptionally sharp. My question is what make of filter works best with this lens?
Ahh, I've seen that before. Stores package a cheap UV filter, and it seems great, until you discover it is actually ruining your images! Try this: bhpho.to/2omLByQ
Hi Dustin, thanks for the interesting reviews. I'm looking at either the 70-300mm L or this 100-400mm lens, i'm leaning towards the 70-300 because of the lighter weight and smaller size and i'm interested in your thoughts on this. It seems like the 70-300 (with my 6d2 camera) would be easier to take along on a walk etc or travels when a bigger lens would be more likely to be left behind. On the other hand 300mm is generally described as a bit small for wildlife. How have you found the two lenses, have you noticed big differences in portability between them? And how much of a quality sacrifice is there between them, eg with cropping from the 300mm lens? I'm doing it for enjoyment not commercially. Thanks
There is not a big difference between them optically. I would choose what you want based on your needs and priorities without worrying about IQ. They are both great!
@@DustinAbbottTWI thanks, yeah I think portability is the priority for me, and i'm sure I can work with the range, i watched your 70-300mm review again and I think you're right that it makes a nice portable kit
Hello Dustin, I have since upgraded camera to the 90d. In viewing this video again, you mentioned it works well with the 1.4 extender, yet remains in focus. Is this is AF or MF with the 1.4? I have yet to try with the 1.4 extended.
On your 90D you will have autofocus with the 1.4x
It's the part that connects the lens to the body. Other cameras are bigger mine is a smaller square. Or are you saying I can use but I would have to use a tripod all the time?.
No, but I am saying that when you mount a camera on a tripod you need to use the tripod foot, as that is the time there will be the most stress on the mount. But Canon designed your camera to accommodate its larger lenses.
Hi Dustin, Went through your video and thought of getting one. But something still bugs me. How dust proof is it?
Ong Kelvin The build on the lens is exceptionally high. Roger at LensRentals broke one down and feels like the construction is near to the level of the super teles from Canon.
does DUST come IN, DUSTIN? 😂
Thanks for your excellent review. I am a bird photographer and have had the prime 400mm f 5.6 for years. It’s about as sharp if not a little sharper than this lens according to some tests. I have also the 70-300mm L lens for landscapes shooting. I am debating selling that lens for this new zoom. Have you had any experience using teleconverters with the 70-300 L in order to mimic this lens so I don’t need to buy a new wildlife zoom? I know canon doesn’t recommend it, but I heard that it works? Have you tried that? Do you think selling the 70-300L is a good idea to replace with this zoom? I know I lose a little on the wide end. Thanks.
The Canon TCs won't fit. I did use a Kenko extender with some success, but those are hit and miss. It's not really a lens designed for TCs
Another great review, thanks Dustin.
Thank you!
hi! My 100-400 is ii has a sound that is near "clicking" after shutter released for around half to one second. When turn image stabilizer off, this sound goes away --- so I am guessing this is something related to engaging the IS. Though the sound is not very load, I am wondering if this is just normal? Thanks!
Xiaolong WANG Hmmm, I don't recall ever hearing anything like that, but unfortunately I don't have the lens in hand. I do plan to buy one myself, just haven't done it yet.
Xiaolong WANG my 70-200 2.8 is ii does that too. It's the image stabilization
Dustin I am in Africa and have been saving most of my life (Well it feels like it anyhow) for a long lens. I have been looking at the canon 200-400 x1.4extender which is a seriously big investment but find now that I am having second thoughts. I have now had a look at this 100-400 and the prime 500mm f4. Both these lenses will cost about the same as the 200-400 x 1.4. I would really appreciate your thoughts on this. Most of the time it is for wildlife in one of the national parks and one is restricted to your car or a dedicated hide. I also do like my birds. I think my hesitation comes from the fact that it has taken so long to save the money and now that I have it in my reach I am afraid of making the wrong move. Unfortunately it is not possible / easy to hire lenses down here.
I would really appreciate your thought and advise.
sorry that i reply but as you worked hard to save money i thought maybe i would be good if i propose my idea , just go with 100-400 no hesitations here .
sure 200-400 in my idea is the best canon lens ever made but in that price rane(which is correct pricing for such glass) you really cant gain back what you demanded for
Would you say the sharpness holds up on FF with the 1.4x III extender? I'm using a 1DX II and just bought this lens but wondering if the £300 for the extender will still render very sharp images.
It definitely does!
Dustin - All right, you convinced me. I was wavering between this one and the RF Canon 70-200 for my EOS R. I'm going to get the 100-400 and use the EF/RF adapter. If I can find some money in the sofa cushions, maybe I'll get the 2x extender, too.
Hi Bil, I'm not sure I would try the 2.0x extender (that's a maximum aperture of F11 on the long end) The 1.4x works fairly well, however.
@@DustinAbbottTWI good to know. ThNk you. Would you try a 2x(mk iii) on the EF L series 70-200, mk ii to get a 400 5.6?
great review, thanks and Canada looks beautiful.
Thank you, and it is a beautiful country.
Here I am in 2023 watching your review on a lens 9 years old and still holding its own it seems. In your opinion, is it still worth it today?
Truth be told I have really considered picking one up again to use on my Canon EOS R5. The RF mount telephotos are very expensive, and this lens is still a very good lens.
Should I get this lens or the 70-200 2.8 with 2x extender? I like the internal zoom of the 70-200 better for gimbals but idk if the quality is as good as this lens
I'm not personally a big fan of 2x extenders. My typical advice is that if you plan to regularly use a certain focal range, it is best to purchase a lens that actually covers that focal range. If you need 400mm, say, very rarely, then go with the 70-200, as it gives you more flexibility over its zoom range.
@@DustinAbbottTWI what do you have against 2x extenders out of curiosity?
They tend to compromise image quality and autofocus the most.
Just picked up one of these lenses. Wow. How good is it? My EF400mm f2.8L I.S. is now on Craigslist.
That's pretty high praise!
Could you do a video on the 70-300L I'm interested in buying one of those in the future and would love to get your take on it.
Brandon, I need to at some point. It has been one of my most used lenses over the past three years. It never gets reviewed because I have so many new lenses to constantly review!
i would also enjoy seeing a video on the 70-300mm L .........Great reviews Dustin
19davo57channel
I've been asked that on multiple occasions, and I do really need to do one. I've used the 70-300L for years and love it.
Hi Dustin,
Will you update this review with the arrival of the Tamron 150-600mm G2? Obviously, you need to review that first and when you do, I am pretty sure a lot of folks are interested to see that comparison.
But as always, your reviews are excellent and unbiased.
'
Thanks,
Lyndon
Thanks for the feedback. I have reviewed the Tamron, but I will be getting it back to test it on APS-C, with converters, and to do a direct comparison with the Canon. This video will not be updated, though.
Hi Dustin, someone said the lens' tele-end is shorter than 400mm by significant percentage, may I have your comment please.
Not technically true. The 100-400L II does suffer from focus breathing, so it doesn't behave like 400mm at close distances, but at further distances it is a true 400mm.
I have been watching your tutorials. Thanks. I have the 7D Mk11 and I have the 70x300 L series and it takes great shots. But I want to step up to the 100x400 ll. I shoot from an airplane at ocean wildlife. I use a polorizer and mainly shoot on auto. lol. Every moment the light is changing. Overcast to sunshine. I have very little photo exp. plus I don't have time or knowledge to set the camera up for changing conditions. Will this be a big enough change from my 70x300?
I personally made that upgrade and have been very happy with it. Exceptional IQ (as does the 70-300L, of course), but a bit better autofocus and stabilizer, too, plus a little more ability to customize the lens.
Dustin,
Here’s a good one for you :). Ken Rockwell reviewed this to be a better lens than the 70-200 2.8 is ii in every situation other than indoor sports. He states that ISO tech advancements negate the need for a 2.8 lens in most cases. I am struggling because I was just about to pull the trigger on a 70-200 is ii. For general professional photography, where you would be doing portraits, have moving subjects, outdoor and landscape shots, some low light outdoor work, and a very small amount of focused wildlife photography which lens would you say is a better?
If you are going to be doing portraits and events, go with the f/2.8 lens. This is a fantastic lens, yes (and I own it!), but there's a reason why the sidelines of every major event has lots of 70-200L IIs on it!
Dustin Abbott Thanks for the insight.
Love your temperature conversion...lol. Good review.
Thanks 👍
Hello Dustin. Wanted to know how it delivers by using Canon 2x- teleconverters with the lens? What is the range it gets with 2x-Teleconverter and are the results better than 1x- teleconverter?
I'm not sure you would get autofocus with an Canon body and a 2x converter. My experience is that 2x converters also provide much more of an image quality hit than 1.4x.
Awesome review, very helpful!!
Thank you!
Great! tutorial Dustin. I can't wait to purchase one....
Thanks! Love mine
What a great review. I’ve been struggling to decide what lens to buy to go with my Canon 5Div to have a try at wildlife photography. Almost went for the Sigma 150-600 Sport but the weight issues caused me to hesitate.
This great review has made my mind up. Canon 100-400mm is for me. Along with my 70D looks like I should be a happy amateur. Thanks so much from a mildly chilly U.K. compared to Canada.
I'm glad to help out.
Thank you. Just wondering if you’re still shooting with the Canon EOS-M system?
No, I switched to Sony APS-C mirrorless about 2 1/2 years ago because I needed the 4K video.
@@DustinAbbottTWI would you recommend thus lens over the 70-200 2.8 with 2x converter?
What about focus breathing on this lens? By some reports I hear this results in about 350-370 mm real telephoto length. Please comment. Thanks.
That's true only at close distances. At most telephoto distances it is a true 400mm. It is an excellent lens.
Dustin, love the review! I'm slowly building my gear up after starting many years ago with a T2i (crop) w/ kit lenses. A few years ago, I added the EF-100mm f2.8 Macro USM and LOVE it! Now, I'm looking at telephotos, and the 100-400 is on my wish list. So, here's my question for you: any downsides of this with a crop sensor body? I believe you recommended the 70-300 for crop and 100-400 for full to an earlier poster and was wondering why. Thanks for any sage words you have to offer! :-)
+Robert Cho My only reason for saying that is that 100mm (wide end) on the 100-400L II becomes 160mm equivalent, which is pretty long and might feeling confining for some shooters. Depending on the crop sensor body the balance of the 70-300L might feel a little better. I have a 70D along with full frame bodies and love the lens on both, though.
Great review and very helpful Dustin. I have recently bought a 5d mk 3 and am debating this lens for wildlife and aviation shots. Against the flow I am reverting back to dslr from micro four thirds, love the compact size but the ultimate image quality is sadly compromised in comparison. Keep up the good work
My pleasure. It's an excellent lens.
Hello Dustin....firstly let me thank you for your excellent candid reviews. I currently own a Sigma Sports 60-600mm f/4.5-6.3 DG OS HSM with Canon 5D Mark 4 and 7D Mark 2. While I am able to capture decent wildlife images, hand holding this combination over long hours is a bit strenuous. I am deliberating if I should invest in a Canon 100 400 IS USM II. Will it help in the overall performance improvement w.r.t. Auto Focus, Low Light and image quality. Thanks again
I like the lens at a lot. It has been a constant in my kit since acquiring it.
@@DustinAbbottTWI thank you Dustin. As always appreciate your prompt response. Thanks Murali
@@DustinAbbottTWISorry Dustin one clarification. Any comment on its low light performance. Thanks in advance Murali
It's not a substitute for an F2.8 zoom in low light, but it seems to work fine.
Noted and thank you Dustin.
Hi Dustin, it looks like the 100-400mm mk 2 does a decent job with eviromental Portraits as well.......great information in this video !! i was considering the 70-300mm but will spend the extra money on the 100-400mm instead.
It does a nice job, as do the 70-300L. If I were in the market for a new lens right now, I would go with the 100-400.
Thanks for you're reply Dustin. i think i have made my decision & will be going for the 100-400mm. keep your videos coming mate they are very informative.
Dustin Abbott Just an update.......i have now received my brand new canon 100-400mm mk2 lens & i have to say i'm loving it.:) thank u again for the info within this video
19davo57channel Glad to hear it. It really is an exceptionally good lens.
Hello Dustin Abbott. What is this lens like in low-light? I have also been looking at the Canon 70-200mm L f/2.8 IS II. I have read that the 70-200mm L IS II is great in low-light. Can you tell me what the 100-400mm L II is like please...I am torn between the these two lenses.....
Jamie Gibbons I would say that this is not a strength of the lens. The 70-200 f/2.8 lets in about 2.5 times as much light, and is obviously going to be better in low light conditions.
Dustin Abbott So are you saying that the 100-400mm L II is useless in low-light? I will probably be using the lens mostly in good light, and just occasionally in low-light. My Canon 17-40mm L f/4 is very good in low-light. If ever I needed to use in low-light conditions it will be tripod mounted.
Jamie Gibbons I didn't use the word "useless". I did use it effectively in low light situations, and it focused accurately, but just not as quickly as what my 70-200 f/2.8 would have in the same situation. It isn't a wide aperture lens, so it is battling against physics when its largest maximum aperture is f/4.5.
Jamie Gibbons P.S. The amount of precision in AF needed for a 400mm lens compared to a 40mm (or less) lens are two very different things.
Dustin Abbott Thanks very much for your replies. I have been stressing over which lenses to buy for about 2 weeks now. I have about £2000 as a budget. Originally I was thinking about buying 2 lenses; a macro and a telephoto. I already have the Canon 100mm L Macro lens. This is a great lens, and I didn't want it to go to waste. I wanted to be able to make things much bigger. Anyway, I bought a extension tube. This enables me to get much closer, and therefore get bigger images. Also I have ordered the Canon 1.4x iii extender. I have heard how I can use this with my 100mm L Macro, if I use a Extension tube as well. This will give me more magnification at a greater distance. So, this leaves me with the whole £2000 to spend on a telephoto. I have heard how the Canon 100-400mm L IS II can be used as a 'sort of' macro lens for large butterfly's etc. Also I want this telephoto lens to be used for street photography. It is good to photograph life in the street at a distance, that way the photo doesn't look contrived. I am very much drawn to the 100-400mm L IS II, I have heard great things about it, one well known photographer said "The 100-400mm L IS II, is a superb lens". However sometimes I do like to photograph at night, things like car trails etc. Also I was concerned if it was a very cloudy day or early dawn or late dusk if the light was low whether the 100-400mm L IS II would be able to cope. Maybe buying something like the 70-200mm f/2.8 II, could be something for the future, or maybe the Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8. Don't forget if I do use in low light I will be using a tripod. Generally speaking I don't really shoot action or movement........Anyway does this sound like the 100-400mm L IS II will be good for my requirements.....??? My plan is to order this lens tomorrow, so I am just trying to make sure I am buying a lens which will suit my needs.
Thanks for your help.
You're welcome.
Sir , if i can ask you from what farthest distance a parrot or a sparrow can be focused to its detail using this lens with canon camera 70d.
Hmm, I don't know if I can answer that question. I don't really know what your expectations are. What I can tell you is that you won't get a better performance at 400mm outside of lenses much more expensive than this one.
Dustin Abbott Thanks sir , i meant the distance. Is it 100 meters or more or less from where the a small bird can be focused to its detail using this lens with canon camera 70d even at 400mm. Please explain. Thank you.
great review...once I got past the wide angle view of your video. You may want to work on that.
Rob Burke That was a stylistic choice. Thanks for the feedback.
haha...okay :)
you said auto focus works with the 1.4x ?
On a 5d3, 1Dx, or 7d2 with a Canon 1.4x. The Kenko 1.4x works with all bodies that I've tested it on, including 70D, 6D, and Rebels
Excellent thanks to review great job🎉🎉🎉🎉
Hey I have a £2700-3000 budget what camera do you suggest getting with this lens for £1200 or below ?
I'm a birder btw
I would say with that budget your two options are probably the 80D or 6D2 - depending on if you want Crop or FF.
@@DustinAbbottTWI Thanks. I'm also looking at getting the Nikon D500 with a 200-500mm lens for £2700 overall. Would that be better as I've heard a lot of good things about that combo!
I was told at one store that if I put it on my camera due to the way it mounts it would damage my EOS Rebel sl1. Something about how long the end is.
That's not true. If you put it on a tripod, use the included tripod foot, but Canon designed your camera with lenses like this in mind.
A question: as it is an extending lens, it does not like dust and sand, is it a big problem?
I've owned the lens for many years and haven't had a problem with it.
@@DustinAbbottTWI Thank you!
Like the demonstration
Orlay Gutierrez Thank you, Orlay
the million dollar question, even thou I doubt this version is anywhere near the 400 prime, do you know which one is sharper vs the 400 5.6 prime?
Photoshopuzr - the prime is very marginally sharper, but the difference is hardly discernible.
just as I assumed, thanks for that info. I will stick with the prime.
How does it compare to the sigma 150-600 if you shoot from the same distance and crop the image of the 100-400 to 600mm?
+Marius The Canon is the sharper lens, to be sure, though this technique works better with pixel dense bodies (5Ds (R) or 5D4). Even with a 1.4x teleconverter attached the Canon is [slightly] sharper.
Dustin Abbott so with a 80d it wont be as good as the sigma? (canon cropped to 600 and upscaled, sigma native) Or would it be even?
very good review! subbed! here is something i wanted to ask: i want to take photo of birds and i have a 7DMKII. which lens should i choose? sigma 150-500C or CANON EF 100-400 is ii?
+TF gameplays I personally bought the Canon, myself, and feel like the AF performance will be much stronger with the Canon. On a crop sensor it has plenty of reach, too. If you choose to go with the Sigma, though, you will have a very good lens. There isn't a bad choice.
+Dustin Abbott thanks for replying is now easier to consider:3
+Dustin Abbott how about 70-200 f/2.8 IS II USM with a 2x extender? 100-400II or 70-200 2x?
+TF gameplays I'm personally not a big fan of using a 2x extender. I feel like it compromises image quality too much. Still, its a viable option as the 70-200L does better than most with extenders.
+Dustin Abbott wow thanks alot (again :3)
Great review, thanks.
+Ian Maw My pleasure
What is called the strap that Dustin has?
Michał Szurowski It's called a Cotton Carrier. It can be found here: www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/836946-REG/Cotton_Carrier_635_RTL_S_Cotton_Carrier_Camera_Vest.html/BI/19614/KBID/12112/kw/CO635RTLS/DFF/d10-v2-t1-xCO635RTLS
I bought this lens when it first came out and put it on a 7Dii. Both replaced the original 100-400 on the 7D. Four plus years later I am wondering if I got a bad copy. Never have I gotten what I would call sharp photo's. In fact, the ODD photo with the 7D and original 100-400 is tack sharp. I have been threatening to purchase the 60-600 sigma due to reviews and seeing the photo's taken with it. However, today I called B and H and they tell me the 100-400ii (that I own) with the 1.4iii converter (that I own) is (STILL) a better choice than a new in 60-600 sigma for sharpness. NOW I seriously think my lens is just the odd one in the bunch that is not sharp. I have done fine focus adjustments on the 7dii. Professionals use this lens, but my results are severely lacking. To put it in perspective, I use it once a year in Africa, and once a year in Alaska and it sits in the case the rest of the time. One might say practice practice practice (and admittedly, that is true) but how bad can you screw up a photo when the camera is on a tripod and using the 2 second timer to snap photos of elephants drinking water at 1/320 of a second. Just not sharp. Anyone know if there is the odd "bad lens".
I agree with B&H, so either you've got a focus issue or a bad copy. My 100-400L II has held up very well against basically every lens I've compared it to.
Do you put any filter on the lens? It might have negative impact to the image quality.
Is this lens good for vlogging?
Not really. That's a very long focal length and a very large lens for vlogging.
Dustin what carry system are you using here?
I was using the Cotton Carrier: bhpho.to/2V1Mj9X
Quite informative👍🏻
+neha Kshatriya Glad to help!
hi sir I have seen your review of both tamron 150-600 and this Canon 100-400 at least a dozen times, the more I see the more confusing it's for me to decide the purchase,i am a doctor and amateur photographer,i own Canon eos 760d, with 19 AF points,i have canon 50mm prime ,canon18-135 efs, tamron 90mm macro, want to buy telephoto , please help
+Guruprasad Baba If you are going to shooting a crop camera like the 760D I would recommend the 100-400L II. It will balance a little better, has plenty of reach on crop, and 100mm is easier to manage on the wide end than 150mm on a crop.
thanks again sir for that wonderful piece of advice, 100mm on a crop sensor plus short min focus distance of 3ft of canon will help me to use the lens for various other purposes than just wildlife...
Dustin i installed the 1.4 extender on the canon 100 to 400 4.5 to 5.6 and it did not work with AF what are you doing to make it work
You'll have to be more specific, Wayne. What camera body are you using and what version of the 1.4x extender are you using?
Dustin the body is 5d mark 3 canon with a canon 1.4 ,how ever i found out after i left the camera store that the camera needed a firm ware update so all is well sorry to question you .
Wayne Peters I'm just glad it worked out. Yes, the 5DIII will allow center point f/8 focus after a firmware update.
is it normal to hear a soft click-like noise when IS is activated and deactivated ?
Yes. Some units are quieter than others, but it's not unusual to know when the IS comes on and off.
@@DustinAbbottTWI thank you very much, I was a little scared about that. I've just purchased this lens and because of that noise I started thinking the worse. thank you.
Also what brand/model camera chest hanging strap are you using?
bhpho.to/1LLdZ5m
Thanks
What if I keep my 70-200mm f2.8L and buy a 2x teleconverter for a lot less money than the 100-400 ?
The IQ isn't going to be nearly as good (and I find that the bokeh gets a little weird), but it certainly is a workable solution if you already have the 70-200L
thank you it was a good review
+James Idoni You're welcome!
Great review!
Thanks, Ivo.
This lens blows my mind.... sooooo much better than my sigma 150-600 C......
I'm a big fan of it, too.
Is it working with canon 70d ?
Sure
Just bought this lens, replacing a really poor copy of its predecessor. It's an amazing piece of kit.
It definitely is!
i am now confused to wildlife photography for budget.. either canon 100-400mm mk I or tamron 150-600mm G2
I'd go with the G2 over the MK 1. I love the 100-400L II, though.
thanks alot~!
Very good...very well ...
I want one!
I just bought one myself and love it
I got the canon 70/300MM F4/5.6L Lens and is good
It is an excellent lens.
Does this lens work on a Rebel sl1?
Yes it does.
Excellent review.
Thanks, Ricky
Dustin Abbott
Dustin, I picked up one these amazing lenses! If you don't mind me asking, now that you've been shooting with it for a bit, what aperture are you finding yourself shooting at when you're at 400mm? Thank you ahead of time. Keep up the great videos!
Ricky
Ricky L Jones It is optimized to be sharpest wide open at f/5.6 - that's where I shoot it!
Dustin Abbott
Thank you very much Dustin, keep up the great work!
Well done!
Thank you.
Fantastic review :) I'm sold :)
Thank you. It is a pretty compelling lens!
I was considering the version one, but will definitely save the extra and get latest one. Look forward to more reviews now I have subscribed :)