Tweet
I want one really bad hahaha but I just don't want to think about spending the money. Here's a challenger: figure out a way to justify $1400 on a lens for my 350D!
-
-
I'm here in an official capacity to make you NOT buy one!!!!!
DO NOT BUY ONE!!!!!
DONT....BAD MOVE!!!
Go for a 70-200 F2.8LIS and 1.4x instead!
-
Even more expensiveOriginally posted by B7772ADLI'm here in an official capacity to make you NOT buy one!!!!!
DO NOT BUY ONE!!!!!
DONT....BAD MOVE!!!
Go for a 70-200 F2.8LIS and 1.4x instead!
. I wish I could.
Comment
-
Hehe, sorry.....i've told my 100-400 story on many occassions in this forum so I wont do it again....but let's just say i'm selling mine.Comment
-
Its the workhorse of almost every Canon shooter...it must be worth it. Unless you do have to money for the 70-200 2.8 IS and 1.4x....or even better, do yourself a huge favor and go Nikon!!!!
"Sorry Goose, but it's time to buzz the tower!"
Comment
-
Originally posted by sluger020889Its the workhorse of almost every Canon shooter...it must be worth it. Unless you do have to money for the 70-200 2.8 IS and 1.4x....or even better, do yourself a huge favor and go Nikon!!!!
Joey, Joey, Joey......Nikon is a swear word in these parts....Canon rules and eveyone knows it!!!!!
Comment
-
Well thank you very much James!!! I was just about to purchase the 100-400mm IS L USM Canon, you have just put doubt in my mind!! LOL, now I am back to square 1. I could have a brand new 100-400mm for £770 (after canon rebate), now I gonna have to think again......Originally posted by B7772ADLI'm here in an official capacity to make you NOT buy one!!!!!
DO NOT BUY ONE!!!!!
DONT....BAD MOVE!!!
Go for a 70-200 F2.8LIS and 1.4x instead!
Comment
-
Anyone have opinions about the Sigma 80-400?Comment
-
Lol, i thought we'd solved this one already mate!!!!Originally posted by turbotraker
Last time you posted you were up for a 70-200??
What happened?
Originally posted by CrismEven more expensive. I wish I could.
Ah ok, fair enough...if that's your budget it'll be fine. It's a step up over any standard consumer lens.
I've been spoilt by the power and magic of the 70-200, so ignore me
Comment
-
LOL I was up for it, but I wanted a longer zoom. To replace my 50-500 sigma. I already had enough lenses to cover from 18-200mm. So decided on the 100-400mm. Someone then metioned Nikon do good lenses.....I had to correct them that 'nikon' and 'good' in the same sentence just doesn't sound right (the words can and worms come to mind now).Originally posted by B7772ADL
I have a voucher for £105 from Canon so decided, until your last post, to try the 100-400mm out for a year or so. but you have just put paid to that!! LOL
Comment
-
If you can pick up a 100-400 cheap then go for it. It's the choice of many, many happy photographers. Mine just managed to annoy me.Comment
-
Don't get the 100-400. Go with the 70-200 2.8 and 1.4. You don't need the IS, how many times will you be using a 70-200 2.8 at 1/20 of a second? I was going to get it but realized that IS would not be that useful and went with what I just suggested and I shoot pretty much everything but aviation.
I believe you'll be much happier with the 2.8 especially when shooting indoors, the 100-400 would be crap indoors, and I wasn't impressed when I even used it outdoors. Other than people shooting aviation, I don't know anyone who uses it.Tanner Johnson - Owner
twenty53 PhotographyComment
-
The only objects I shoot are aircraft, I have had better results shooting indoors with my instant camera. I will only be using the 100-400mm for outdoor use either aircraft or scenic shots. I was hoping to trial the 100-400mm for approx a year then if need be, upgrade to either 70-200mm or 28-300mm.Originally posted by Tanner_J
Comment
-
Why do so many of you dislike the 100-400L? Not that it matters to me, because I use Nikon anyway.
Just curious though.
Comment
-
I am looking forward to the replies on this one!!! Cheers JordanOriginally posted by JordanD
Comment
Comment