After using my 100-400 with the 1Ds II yesterday, I noticed I'm tending to put quite a lot of strain on the lens mount compared to when I was using the 300D. This is because of two factors:
1. The 1 series two handed user interface.
2. The fact that all the settings are shown on the top of the camera rather than the back.
So, when using the 300D and 100-400, if I wanted to change the ISO, say, I would keep my left hand supporting the lens, push the ISO button with my right hand, and twiddle the top dial to change it, whilst looking at the lcd on the back. If I ever tried to support the weight of the 100-400 whilst holding the 300D with both hands, it would strongly discourage me by audibly creaking.
Now, with the 1Ds II, what happens is I lower the camera down to look at the settings on the top lcd, then decide I want to change something, typically metering mode or ISO, then I have to remove my left hand from the lens, and I'm finding I tend to hold the camera vertical with the lens sticking out in front so I can see what I'm doing on the top lcd. It doesn't feel like I have to exert all that much force to hold it in this position, probably due to the bigger camera body giving more grip.
So, the question is, is this a bad habit I need to break, or is it no problem to hold only the camera body with a moderately heavy lens sticking out in front, like the 100-400? Has anyone ever heard of a body developing a warped mount, which I assume would give rise to pictures where the top and bottom are focused differently?
I walk around for hours with a 300mm f4 IS attatched to my 1D and I just hold the camera using the handstrap, no support on the lens. My other hand has to hold the girlfriend
I've never had any problems with it, but I would not reccomend it with anything bigger, but as EB mentioned it can handle the 300 f2.8. For short periods of time where you are changing settings on the camera, I wouldn't get too worked up about it
My 1D has a 70-200 2.8 IS hanging off it most of the time and there have never been any signs of the mount or lens being damaged. I also use it with the 1.4 extender so there are two 'weak' spots -- the join between the body and the extender, and the join between the extender and the lens. Again, no signs of any damage being done to body, extender or lens.
For a while I used the 100-400 on the 1D and I would frequently change settings with the lens horizontal and unsupported, so I don't think you have anything to worry about.
Check out some of those candid shots of sports shooters and you'll see that they often have large lenses -- presumably the 300 2.8 and maybe even the 400 2.8 -- hanging off 1-series bodies.
The lens mount on all of these camera's is far stronger than you might suspect.
I have proven this recently in a manuver i hope to never have to repeat. A screw backed out of a lens's mount and the lens was stuck on the camera. The lens had to be removed by force. This was on a 20D, not a 1D.
I would be more concerned with the mount on the lens which is by design, a weaker link than the mount on the camera. The mount on the camera is stainless steel where the lens mount is plated brass.
If your going to have a problem it will be with a lens.
Thanks for all the reassurances. The 1 series certainly feels extremely solidly built. I'm guessing that if the lens was heavy enough to strain the mount, you'd struggle to hold the camera with the lens unsupported horizontally anyway.
