Friday, April 9, 2010

Tests on Lenses (for Phil!)





Taken with the 100-400 X 1.4. 300 X 2 and 100-400 with no extender. I fear you can see the difference!

4 comments:

Anonymous said...

Oh dear, that sounds expensive!
MartinB

Phil Miles said...

Phil agrees with Martin! Brian's 300mm f/2.8 Canon lens is just brilliant.

Ian Wilson said...

From my experience, the 100-400 needs very careful handling to get good results. It can be very sharp indeed, but doesn't seem to like being used "quickly". I suspect the IS needs time to settle as I've had quite a few shots which show a kind of "shimmering" effect. It also varies throughout its zoom range, being noticeable sharper at the shorter end.

It's obviously not a patch on the 300/2.8, but then it's much cheaper and you don't need to be a weight-lifter to operate it!

I'll try to post some examples at 100% on my blog for comparison, as the 100-400 with no extender is certainly capable of some excellent results. Watch this space. :-)

Ian Wilson said...

Comparison pictures now on my blog, so see what you think. It would also be interesting to pit the 300/2.8 against the 300/4, while you have both in your possession!

Ann Miles Photography - My Favourite Images of the Past10 years or so