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!
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Convince Me To Buy A 100-400L
Collapse
X
-
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
-
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
-
Originally posted by turbotrakerWell 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......
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
-
Originally posted by B7772ADLLol, i thought we'd solved this one already mate!!!!
Last time you posted you were up for a 70-200??
What happened?
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
-
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 Photography
Comment
-
Originally posted by Tanner_JDon'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.
Comment
Comment