Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS USM

about | support

Weight, Size, AF Hunting in Low-Light, 1.8m minimum focus distance, push/pull/tension ring combo, price.

This review is based on a rented lens.

I used this lens primarily at the zoo, an obvious application of such a lens.

Straight up, I found the tension ring/push pull zoom combo hard to get used to, and definitely slow to use in a pinch. Typically you will use the ring to lock the zoom when carrying around the lens, and loosen the tension when you go to shoot - however, if you need to take a quick shot, the necessity to change the zoom tension to adjust the focal length can invariably make you miss the shot (unless the position that you lock your lens in is exactly the position that you need to shoot, which in my opinion is rare). Also, the potential of forgetting to tighten the tension ring will cause the lens to drop very quickly if put in a downward position - definitely something you don't want to happen to such an expensive lens. Also an annoyance was the fact that the tension ring sits flush with the focus ring - meaning that you're quite apt to accidently knock the focus around when adjusting the zoom tension. This comes into play often if you are finely adjusting focus thanks to full time manual focusing, hit the zoom tension by accident, which may cause the zoom to shift. At its tightest setting, it is very hard to unlock/loosen without using two hands. Understandable, since you dont want it over-easily unlocked, but it is definitely something that you have to get used to using. I find holding the focus ring with your middle and ring fingers and adjusting tension with your thumb will often get a good result - but the fact you have to develop a technique to use just this specific lens is a tad questionable.

For the application of a Zoo lens, this had particular trouble focusing through some glass and especially mesh. Of course this represents a difficult AF situation, but I was hoping that the lens would be able to behave better than it did in this regard. This also happens if you are shooting with foreground elements in the composition... focus will swim back and forth and not always lock on the subject you intend on.. you often need to specify an AF point in this case.

Keeping on the subject of AF, shooting indoors with this lens definitely caused the USM to swim back and forth, causing me to miss a shot here and there. It was silent, however.

For those shooting animals, I figure it's important to mention that focusing on darker subjects such as black panthers or gorillas confuses the focus plenty, it seems... the AF needs enough contrast to lock a focus on, so shooting such animals with AF can be problematic. Expect to use MF or AF with some manual focus adjustments.

I also found the minimum focus distance to be a tad long @ 1.8m... there were definitely times where a subject was closer than this and the lens was unable to lock focus. Extension tubes can be bought to aid this but I typically shoot natively with the lens.

For shooting animals, I found the 4.5-5.6 aperture a tad slow for moving subjects, with both the AF and the aperture often missing and losing out on many good shots. This was especially true indoors.

IS was a definite help.. I was able to often shoot at shutter speeds of 1/30 @ 400mm indoors and still get some shots in.

Wide open, the shots when the AF did lock were quite sharp. I did not have time to do any resolution chart testing, only real life shots, and was generally impressed by the sharpness. That being said, my shot ratio of hits was rather low because of the combination of problems listed above. My feeling is if you are shooting outside, with slower moving far-away subjects that are unobstructed, this would be an ideal lens. However, if the subjects start to move closer, if you're shooting through fences or glass, or are fast-moving, you're likely going to get a low hit ratio with this lens. Of course, the more you use it the more you can learn to expect what it will do, so my assumption is that this ratio would get better over time. But being an L Lens I am being extremely critical...

The overall image quality was quite good. Bokeh is definitely very pleasing, colors very neutral, contrasty, with an appropriate amount of saturation. Vignetting and CAs did not show up in my field pictures enough to really be a factor. I think it is important to note that owning mainly non-L Lenses, I was not especially blown away by the images taken with this L Lens (especially as much as I had come to expect).

A small niggle - I found the distance window almost obstructed by my built in flash... it is very close to the lens mount which definitely makes it harder to see.

Handholding the lens with the tripod mount is not recommended.. the distance between the lens and the mount is very small and getting your hand in a comfortable position is a tad difficult (but not impossible). In fact, the ideal spot to grip the lens is squarely where the tripod mount sits. Also, You also must remove the lens to remove the tripod mount. A minor nuisance, but a concern nonetheless.

The build quality is very good. Being built of an all-metal chassis definitely makes it make like it was built to last. The plastic lens hood definitely feels like it would not hold up to as much punishment as the lens would though...

The included lens case was more than adequate for carrying this lens around. It's too bad Canon does include all these accessories with their other non-L lenses.

Through all this, my overall impression is the 70-200 L lens is a much more versatile lens, especially with being able to combine this lens with 1.4 and 2x extenders. The usability of that lens seems to be much more typical and the f2.8 aperture with a slightly closer focusing distance means that this would probably be a much more used lens for me, of course, your mileage may vary.

No weather seals, and a wee-bit soft wide-open, prefer stopped down 2 stops.

If you can't be the "purist" photographer and drop even more money for an L 300mm or 400mm prime, then this is the next best thing hands down!

Fun lens! Here are some sample photos:
Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 L IS Lens photo samples.

-Roy

Not too fond of the push pull zooming. This lens on a 40D is heavy but the results justify the pain.

I have owned this lens about 1 year and a few months. My first results were disappointing, then after learning how to use a 400mm lens my results became better and better. It takes patience and desire to master this lens.
My finest photographs have come from this lens. I print very large and it seems to me that printed images really show the quality of this lens.
I also had to post process differently, this lens takes USM very well.
The only real negative is the weight of this lens. The push pull zoom is strange but acceptable.
I look forward to events where I can use this lens, its just nice to have the range this lens offers.
Best money I have ever spent on a lens.

Heavy after long periods

After 2 years use, I am very happy with this lens.

Great lens in good light

Weight, after holding for hours...nothing else!

I have been using this lens for 2 years, soccer, surfing, kiteboarding.

Fantastic colours and sharpness. However, I find this lens requires decent light to get the most from it. Luckily, I live in Fuerteventura where the sun shines every day :-)

Flimsy hood design, and I prefer twist-type, rather than push-pull zooming.

I'm very lucky to have a prime-like copy of this popular telephoto zoom. Mine is as sharp at 400 mm wide open as my 400 5.6L.

Here's my user-review posted in our local bird photography forum:

http://birdphotoph.proboards107.com/index.cgi?board=review&action=display&thread=352&page=1

And here's how my 100-400 measures up to my 500 f4 IS:

http://birdphotoph.proboards107.com/index.cgi?board=review&action=display&thread=353

Romy Ocon

Early generation IS.

I bought this lens new in December. It has become my favorite lens. It has great range and the image quality is surprisingly good. It compares favorably with my 70-200f/L is. It focuses quickly and accurately in good light and even in marginal light the focus speed is reasonably fast. It is also built like a tank.
This is a terrific lens that has numerous uses. Highly recommended.

My copy was soft wide open and at 400mm

I owned this impressive lens for a week, but decided to return it and use primes for now.

I enjoyed using the zoom immensely, but the pictures taken with it always left me a tad disappointed, even in great light and with minimal cropping. At 400mm, my copy was surprisingly soft at f/7.1, and unacceptably soft at f/5.6. So to me, it was a bit like owning another 70-300mm IS, with the same weaknesses regarding using it wide open at full zoom. The tone and colour was better, and the reach 100mm further, but I only felt confident in its performance using it stopped down and only partially zoomed (around 200-340mm).

In the mid range (around 200-260mm f/7.1) it was extremely sharp and gave excellent results if the subject filled the frame.

I have heard that there are very sharp copies of this lens `around', and that its best to test it prior to purchase. My copy was definately a `so-so' copy. I would buy it again for general use, but only if I could test it prior to purchase.

Here in Australia, the lens retails for $2550 new, so i feel that it is highly over-priced for the wide variations in quality between copies.

Hunts in poor light & busy backgrounds on 20D.

A sound all round performer in reasonable light. I purchased this lens for birding sold it & now have 400 f5.6 prime.In less than than perfect light my copy had difficulty locking on to small birds in trees on the 20D even after being sent in to Canon. A fellow shooter had 300IS f4 with 1.4 TC which had rattled off a few frames before I acquired focus. However I loved this lens for candids in India especially on the Ganges. Push pull zoom not an issue & neither was dust in the 12 months I had this lens. If a pro I would have one as part of my arsenal along with a 70-200 &/or 300 f4/2.8. As a hobbyist I prefer my 70-200 f2.8 & 400 prime. My only regret is that I did not give this lens a go when acquiring my 40D & prime as I sometimes wonder if it would have performed as well for me as it does for others.

Sharpness of different copies vary Focusing speed not as fast as 400mm f/5.6

I bought my 100-400 lens used from uz2work here on the B&S forums last April. I must say that the biggest strength of this lens is the versatility and its ability to cover such a wide range of subjects. If you are on a budget and will only be able to afford one lens for wildlife or sports I would recommend this lens. But if you can afford more, I would recommend that you go with the 400mm f/5.6L plus whatever. The reason is that in my case, the 400 prime has been sharper across the board than the 100-400. Also, the prime has much better focus speed and tracking ability than the 100-400. My keeper rate for action photos has dramatically increased since I purchased the prime. The zoom is no slouch, but I just think that the prime is better. If you look at FM members like: Imagemaster, PixelPerfect, and Trenchmonkey, you can see the great images that this lens is capable of.
I have not looked back since I sold this lens for the prime, but I still will have my strong opinion that this is a good and solid lens capable of creating good images.

Adjusting the Manual Focus or Zoom Tightening ring moves them both together.

Having owned this lens for 4 years I thought I would post some of my comments.
I bought the lens to photograph wildlife and motorsport events and I'm very happy with the images I've taken with it.

For a zoom lens the image quality and sharpness is very good. At 400mm wide open (F5.6) it is a touch soft but nothing that a small amount of sharpening in an image editor can't fix.
Focus speed is pretty decent; I've managed to photograph Superbikes and Formula One with effective results on a Canon 20D. Colour and contrast are both excellent - images 'pop' out of the screen and photo prints.

A lot of people complain about the weight (1.3kg) but considering this is a 400mm zoom lens with IS it's actually not too bad. Similar lenses from Sigma weigh more, or the same but without their stabiliser system.

The Image Stabiliser system is great - watching it stabilise the image in the viewfinder is amazing. I've managed to shoot at 400mm with a shutter speed of 1/80 and 1/60 with useable results - awesome !.

I like the push-pull zoom design because it's much quicker to change focal length compared to a twist zoom. I also like the ability to lock the focal length in position - I sometimes accidentally move the twist zoom on other long telephoto lenses whilst supporting the lens and find myself shooting at 250mm rather than 300mm (for example).
The one downside to the zoom lock ring is that it is too close to the manual focus ring, so when you move one you move the other.

Build quality is very good. I look after my lenses but they are not pampered; the 100-400 has really stood up well to 4 years of heavy use. Its endured wet conditions and being left on the ground whilst I use other lenses etc.
One of area of weakness during my time with the lens was the IS system. After one year it failed causing lockup error 99's on the camera with the system enabled. Canon replaced the IS system under warranty (Replacement cost outside of warranty is £200) and since then it's not missed a beat.

I've just sold my 100-400 now for a Sigma 120-300 F2.8 because I want a faster lens with improved image quality. However I still highly recommend the 100-400L IS for handheld long telephoto photography.

View some example shots here : http://www.ph-digitalphotography-motorsports.com/canon100-400_photo-examples.html

None. It is heavy but that is to be expected.

I said it all above, this is a great lens.

Push pull zooming system, no lock switch for push pull zooming, AF point not suitable for 2x TC

I sold my great Sigma 70-200 f/2.8, Tamron 11-18, and sharp Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 plus 400 US $ for getting this amazing sharp of Canon 100-400 L IS lens. I'm very happy with the result : very sharp, contrast, and good colour besides the zooming range.

In zooming range 400 mm, I tested with shooting a tower for distance about 1 km and compare with my Sigma 70-200 mm plus 2x TC. The result of this Canon lens is very amazing : very sharp and there is no CA detected. The Sigma 70-200 is great and amazing lens in 200 mm range but with 2x TC the CA was detected.

Combine 100-400 Canon lens with 2x TC is not good idea, the result is bad sharpness and rather blur colour, especially in low light. Sometimes I found that IS using is not better than without use it in sunny light.

heavy! omg! but pretty sure i will get used to it soon enough.

I tested this lens firstly on 400mm and wide open. It's amazingly sharp, when stopped down to f/8, the center sharpness is almost no improvement, but slight improvement on corner sharpness (doesn't mean that corner at f/5.6 is ugly). The sharpness is not a question, it is sharp at almost all focal length wide open. I haven't test everything extensively, but I reckon it is very sharp on my copy. I am impressed with the image quality. Focal length range is nice, somehow I want more 50-80mm extra, even I know I can reach it with my feet. I am being lazy. I only mount this lens on my camera when I really know what to photograph.

I was surprised with the weight of this lens - I didn't know that this lens is that heavy! Not a bad thing...but a heavyweight combined with push/pull zoom somehow challenged me.

There is a switch for a focus limiter - I do not know exactly what is this for, probably because the focus range is too long, but somehow I found it really annoying. I was aiming group of birds, they are moving, I can just shoot them but at that time I gotta change the switch first as they get closer to me. Not a big deal though.

It is white, as everyone knows. I did some test shoot on Saturday in the uni - because I don't want many people watching me photographing with big lenses. However, I still found some people looking at me, watching me from afar, maybe something to do with the lens Wink

Can be a tad soft at the extreme focal length, push-pull takes a little getting used to, push-pull may invite dust, Best results really require good lighting

Overall I have been very pleased with the EF 100-400. I chose this lens over the 300mm and 400mm primes. It was less money than the combination of the two primes and offers more flexiblity.

Unlike my EF 70-200 f2.8, which stays really sharp throughout it's entire focal range, I find that EF 100-400 starts to get a tad soft at the extreme end of the focal range ~380-400; but nothing dramatic. This lens really requires good light to work it's best. AF is fast and quiet...IN GOOD LIGHT. It can hunt a little when the lighting is not strong.

I have used it with both the 1.4x and 2x TC's (both are new copies), but I am unhappy with the results. Although fun to play with (this lens plus the TC's), I would never post any of the photos obtained by this combination.

On my 1.6 FOVCF, this lens has pretty good reach. I have some really exquisitely sharp and contrasty shots of a male and female cardinal taken @ 350mm (on a well lit day).

The push-pull design took me a few weeks to get used to but, in the end, I must admit that I ended up liking it. Although I do worry about the push-pull design sucking dust into the lens, after 7 months of use I haven't noticed any dust build up....yet.

I find the weight very manageable and IS makes it a very hand-holdable lens. It is too big for my wife to hand hold, but she is rather petite.

I have no regrets purchasing this lens and I feel that it gets a reasonable amount of use, making it worth it's purchase price. I only wish that I could borrow the two primes and do some comparison shots.

This is also a reasonably good lens for outdoor sports, as the autofocus can definitely keep up (again, if the lighting is good). I use mine "mostly" for wildlife and have been very pleased with it, so far.