Join our zoo community

the perfect zoo lens

Discussion in 'Animal Photography' started by Arizona Docent, 8 Nov 2014.

  1. callorhinus

    callorhinus Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    6 Jul 2012
    Posts:
    318
    Location:
    Izhevsk, Russia
    New lens has "smooth - tight" ring so it is possible to use it in push-pull style probably.
     
  2. Arizona Docent

    Arizona Docent Well-Known Member Premium Member

    Joined:
    10 Feb 2009
    Posts:
    7,663
    Location:
    Arizona, USA
    No, it is a conventional zoom ring (like all other Canon zoom lenses) and not a push-pull. The tension ring (smooth-tight) is to control the tension of the zoom ring. In other words, you can make it harder or easier to spin, based on your personal preference.
     
  3. Jackwow

    Jackwow Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    25 Nov 2012
    Posts:
    452
    Location:
    In Scotland at the moment
    If you hold the lens hood you'll be able to push and pull.
     
  4. Arizona Docent

    Arizona Docent Well-Known Member Premium Member

    Joined:
    10 Feb 2009
    Posts:
    7,663
    Location:
    Arizona, USA
    :D:D:D
    That is something I had not thought of!
     
  5. callorhinus

    callorhinus Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    6 Jul 2012
    Posts:
    318
    Location:
    Izhevsk, Russia
    I thought it is obvious because there are many zooms with so easy moving lens tube that engineers had to make special locks :)

    And I've seen one or two times how photographers used usual zooms as push-pull. I wonder is it the way to wear down lens faster?
     
  6. NigeW

    NigeW Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    20 Jan 2011
    Posts:
    233
    Location:
    Chester
    Sounds like a recipe for mechanical failure to me - I wouldn't like to make a habit of it. Simply not engineered that way.

    Its not a deal breaker that the new lens is a twister. In fact, I'd love one. That push-pull did suit me though.

    I remember manual focus days when a 'one touch' zoom action was cutting edge technology. :)
     
  7. Arizona Docent

    Arizona Docent Well-Known Member Premium Member

    Joined:
    10 Feb 2009
    Posts:
    7,663
    Location:
    Arizona, USA
  8. Jackwow

    Jackwow Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    25 Nov 2012
    Posts:
    452
    Location:
    In Scotland at the moment
    I must have it to and will gladly dispose of my Sigma 150-500 to accommodate it. Later I will decide if I also keep my 70-300L.

    Of course it's not strictly true to call the 100-400 the perfect zoo lens because there are plenty of shots that you won't be able to take with it because it is too long at the short end, such as larger animals and enclosure shots. I always carry either a second body with an EF-S 15-85 or a compact zoom for these shots.
     
  9. Arizona Docent

    Arizona Docent Well-Known Member Premium Member

    Joined:
    10 Feb 2009
    Posts:
    7,663
    Location:
    Arizona, USA
    If you get the 100-400, there would be zero reason whatsoever to also have the 70-300. If the latter were a 2_8 aperture it would make sense, but since it is the same aperture as the other, no reason. Plus the 100-400 will take a tele-extender and the 70-300 will not.
     
  10. Jackwow

    Jackwow Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    25 Nov 2012
    Posts:
    452
    Location:
    In Scotland at the moment
    Agreed.

    If the 100-400 performs well with a 1.4x extender then it will be an even better lens (assuming of course that it is as good as I expect).
     
  11. Jackwow

    Jackwow Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    25 Nov 2012
    Posts:
    452
    Location:
    In Scotland at the moment
    Actually, having just read the specs the 100-400L is significantly heavier than the 70-300L (to be expected) by 1lb 4oz so I might just want to keep the 70-300L for when I don't need so much reach / don't want to carry so much extra weight?
     
  12. Jackwow

    Jackwow Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    25 Nov 2012
    Posts:
    452
    Location:
    In Scotland at the moment
    I've just ordered one. :)
     
  13. Hix

    Hix Wildlife Enthusiast and Lover of Islands Premium Member

    Joined:
    20 Oct 2008
    Posts:
    4,489
    Location:
    Sydney
    Let us all know how it goes!

    :p

    Hix
     
  14. Jackwow

    Jackwow Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    25 Nov 2012
    Posts:
    452
    Location:
    In Scotland at the moment
    I'll do that for sure.
     
  15. Jackwow

    Jackwow Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    25 Nov 2012
    Posts:
    452
    Location:
    In Scotland at the moment
    It's arrived and it's beautiful, so hopefully I'll get to try it out at the HWP over the weekend.
     
  16. Jackwow

    Jackwow Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    25 Nov 2012
    Posts:
    452
    Location:
    In Scotland at the moment
    Well I can confirm that the 100-400L Mk2 is a fantastic lens, much like the 70-300L but with more reach, although heavier. It is now attached to a Canon 7D Mk2 and sometimes, for extra reach, a Canon 1.4x III extender, a combo which works very well.
     
  17. Arizona Docent

    Arizona Docent Well-Known Member Premium Member

    Joined:
    10 Feb 2009
    Posts:
    7,663
    Location:
    Arizona, USA
    I am not jealous, I am not jealous... ;)

    My cousin just ordered one and I will be meeting him very soon at Fossil Rim, so at least I will get to see one firsthand. I will not be able to get one myself, at least not anytime soon, as I spent that amount on a (much more enjoyable) European trip.
     
  18. Jackwow

    Jackwow Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    25 Nov 2012
    Posts:
    452
    Location:
    In Scotland at the moment
    Just to make sure you're not jealous AD.

    [​IMG]

    In most zoo situations the 1.4x extender wouldn't be needed although could come in handy at times in somewhere like HWP.

    The difference between this lens and the original version is absolutely night and day.
     
    Last edited: 24 Apr 2015
  19. savethelephant

    savethelephant Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    12 Jan 2015
    Posts:
    1,251
    Location:
    New York
    That thing is HUGE
     
  20. Jackwow

    Jackwow Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    25 Nov 2012
    Posts:
    452
    Location:
    In Scotland at the moment
    Not that huge, the plastic hood is about a third of the length. Although this is at 100mm focal length so a lot longer at 400mm.