I am planning for a possibly imminent purchase. I probably will have a budget of approximately 2k USD. That's where the problem is introduced. I want to start by buying a used 100-400mm IS, for sure. Then I'll want to get either a CF tripod/ball head (as my current tripod is totally unsuitable for the 100-400) OR an 85mm f/1.8 and BG-E2N.
Here's my real struggle: Although I know the importance of a tripod, the 85mm f/1.8 would be more practical. To clarify, whenever relatives or friends want me to photograph something, more likely than not it will require a portrait lens. But I really want the sturdy tripod too.
I will not be able to make an additional purchase until next year, so this is important.
I rarely use the 100-400L on a tripod except for some close-up work occasionally. It's an easy lens to hand hold all day IMO. I'd get the 85 and grip for now. Get the tripod for landscape work if you are into that.
Pixel Perfect wrote:
I rarely use the 100-400L on a tripod except for some close-up work occasionally. It's an easy lens to hand hold all day IMO. I'd get the 85 and grip for now. Get the tripod for landscape work if you are into that.
I was also going to ask you what you shot that you thought required a tripod with the 100-400. I like to mount it on a monopod to shoot soccer, but for everything else (baseball, softball, nature, air shows, auto racing, and even macro) I will handhold.
Depending on what you're shooting, I'd look at a monopod before a tripod if you think you could use some extra support. You can get a nice sturdy monopod for about $60.
Personally I started with a tripod/ball head and the 100-400 lens. I bought the 85 f1.8 lens later. As Whayne mentioned above, I also use the 100-400 mostly handheld with IS. I use the tripod for landscape, T/S, and portrait photos, sometimes for macro stuff. The 100-400 is great for wildlife/bird photography - to have the lens flexible in your hand is just more convenient.
So, overall neither of your options is wrong - it just depends on your needs. If you do e.g. a lot of landscape photographies, I highly recommend a tripod anyway.
Breitling65 wrote:
I would buy 400/F5.6L instead and get grip and 80mm for same amount
If I am going to get a prime, I'd prefer to get the 300mm f/4 and the 1.4x extender. I am mainly looking at the 100-400 because of how versatile it is. I would probably need more FLs than just 400mm.
I would be shooting nature mostly (i.e. with the 100-400mm). Only ocassionally landscape at this point in time. Since I have never used it, I wasn't sure if the 100-400mm IS improved with a tripod at long FLs. Thanks for answering that question too (even if it was unasked ).
To answer the first question, I have one lens, but it is so kit lens quality that I will want to replace it eventually anyway. Count it as though I'm starting from scratch.
I'd go with option #2, personally. You should find shooting handheld with the 100-400 easy enough and with the added grip it'll feel much better as well. The 85/1.8 is icing on the cake--great little lens.
Dpic_arctic wrote:
I would be shooting nature mostly (i.e. with the 100-400mm). Only ocassionally landscape at this point in time. Since I have never used it, I wasn't sure if the 100-400mm IS improved with a tripod at long FLs. Thanks for answering that question too (even if it was unasked ).
The IS on the 100-400 is the earlier generation that requires you to shut it off if you're on a tripod. So it might as well be a lens without IS if you're going to shoot that way. You can leave IS on if you are using a monopod.
With practice, you can definitely handhold the 100-400 at very low shutter speeds. Both of these were at 400mm, the first at 1/80, f/5.6, the second at 1/50, f/16.
Dpic_arctic wrote:
I thought the IS was tripod-sensing.
Not the early ones. I found this:
Q: What about IS and tripods ?
A: There are some rumors about there that state that the IS gets damaged when activated on a tripod. This is obviously just nonsense. This is what you can read in the manual: "Do not set the image stabilizer switch to 'I' when using the camera on a tripod. Doing so may cause the image stabilizer to act erratically. Turn the image stabilizer off before using the camera on a tripod.". Further more this is only true for the following lenses:
* EF 28-135 mm f/3.5-5.6 USM IS
* EF 75-300 mm f/4-5.6 USM IS
* EF 300 mm f/4 USM L IS
* EF 100-400 mm f/4.5-5.6 USM L IS
Here is the explanation from Chuck Westfall (Canon USA):
"The IS mechanism operates by correcting shake. When there is no shake, or when the level of shake is below the threshold of the system's detection capability, use of the IS feature may actually *add* unwanted blur to the photograph, therefore you should shut it off in this situation. Remember that the IS lens group is normally locked into place. When the IS function is active, the IS lens group is unlocked so it can be moved by the electromagnetic coil surrounding the elements. When there's not enough motion for the IS system to detect, the result can sometimes be a sort of electronic 'feedback loop,' somewhat analogous to the ringing noise of an audio feedback loop we're all familiar with. As a result, the IS lens group might move while the lens is on a tripod, unless the IS function is switched off and the IS lens group is locked into place."
A tripod is a nice addition to 100-400, and may be necessary if you shoot in low light, but you can get by without it.
I thought about getting a monopod, but as I shoot more with 100-400 and work on my hand holding technique, I find that I can handhold the 100-400 at the long end (300-400 range) without any problem. Keeping the shutter speed at least 1/400 helps a lot, if it's lower than that than IS will help.
Dpic_arctic wrote:
Thanks. I was just going to get a lens plate with the tripod/ball head. Is the sidekick a lot easier than the alternative mounted setup?
It's not a matter of "easy", just different (and much better).
You would still need a lens plate (Arca Swiss compatible) in addition to a ball-head. The Sidekick provides a gimbaled adjustment for pitch. With both the pan (ball-head) and pitch (Sidekick) adjustments set loose you can use the 100-400/camera just like a tripod mounted machine gun. Additionally, if you also set the tripod collar on the lens loose then you can quickly switch between landscape and portrait orientations for composition. FWIW this (all three adjustments set loose) and AI Servo AF enabled is how I operate for 99 percent of my static wildlife pictures (it's a rare event that offers me guaranteed time to actually lock everything down tight).
Thanks Joe. It sounds like a very versatile setup. I probably wouldn't be able to afford it this year, but I'll definitely look into it. Should I use a Wimberley P20 plate?
Dpic_arctic wrote:
Thanks Joe. It sounds like a very versatile setup. I probably wouldn't be able to afford it this year, but I'll definitely look into it. Should I use a Wimberley P20 plate?
The P20 fits the 100-400.
Regarding cost, occasionally you can pick up used Wimberley gear at a reduced price. Used gear is available if a customer changes his/her mind within the 60 day refund period ... yup, a full 60 days, that's not a typo.
Call Cynthia at Wimberley (888-665-2746); she is a photographer, very knowledgeable about the product line, and uses the gear herself (though she uses a full Wimberley rather than the Sidekick). Please be aware the full Wimberley has a built-in head and is robust enough to support the heavyweight 600mm and 800mm lenses ... but because the head is built-in to the full Wimberley, and unlike the Sidekick plus any-brand ball-head, you can't just remove the gimbal and expect use the head in a normal fashion.
FWIW I use a Sidekick plus ball-head for my 100-400, but switch to a full Wimberley (plus a heavier tripod) for the much heavier 800mm lens.
Thom makes the point that a support system consists of a tripod, head, and plates and is only as good as the weakest part of that three part system.
He also addresses the Sidekick full Wimberley issue. I have a Sidekick and really like it on my 400/5.6, for lots of stuff including macro shots with the 400 and stacked ETs. It is also nice for macro stuff with my Sigma 150/2.8. For a while I used it on a monopod with a several lens, but have switched to the RRS solution for using a monopod. You don't have to buy their stuff, some Bogen stuff will work; but the idea is a good one. Here is the link
I also have a Feisol CF tripod that I use with the legs collapsed sorta like a bulky monopod that has the ability to be opened up into a light duty full tripod.
I know Wimberley has a good rep, and while I really like my Sidekick early on I was influenced by a guy who I consider one of the best bird photographers around and he use a Manfrotto 3421 gimbal head which to me seems much more industrial strength than the Wimberley. Here is the link to Romy's site and the gimbal head he uses, and the one I also use.
