[Arsonism]

I wanted to make this thread for three reasons:

1) To see if anyone on the forums has the version I or II of this lens and their experiences with it.

2) Would this be an exorbitant amount of lens for a Canon T6i

3) I didn't see another thread of this kind through a good bit of searching, and I wanted to double check myself before investing.

Currently I only have two lenses in my arsenal, Canon's 18-135mm (which has shot amazingly and I'm very happy with) and Canon's 50-250mm which has resulted in a nightmare worth of chromatic aberration. Personally I'm looking at jumping further into nature and sport photography and I really don't see the point in short changing myself. I have an option to purchase this lens under a no interest financing option and it seems more than feasible even in a slow income time for me. I just wanted to check other's thoughts and opinions on trying to reach the "next level" world of nature/sport/active photography.

[Itsed65]

1. I have both.
2. No

They are both great, but the v2 especially has great stabilization, and is a big step up from v1. I think you would be very happy with the results paired up with your T6i.

[apexlocator]

As long as it's not indoor sports, you're good. I have the v1 and when paired with my 1ds3, got amazing results. Sold the camera but still have the lens, although rarely used now.

[Arsonism]

Thanks guys.

apexlocator can I ask you what you use now instead of this lens?

[M_Six]

The lens is killer sharp and locks on rapidly, at least with the 7D MkII.


Pics from the Quad by Mark Johnson, on Flickr


Airshow 2016 by Mark Johnson, on Flickr

[apexlocator]

Originally Posted by Arsonism

Thanks guys.

apexlocator can I ask you what you use now instead of this lens?

I have not replaced the lens with anything yet. I use to shoot marathons, as a hobbyist, so the zoom telephoto worked out. I now shoot my kids' sports and am pretty close to the action, so have been using my 70-200 II. But once I get relegated to the bleachers, I'll probably look into a 300 prime and use TCs.

[Arsonism]

It sounds like you've got things figured out Apex, hopefully I'll have a similar assortment in the future. Just moved on this lens and I'm super excited. Hopefully some really fun wildlife to see in the next couple months!

[Weebl]

Version II and the sensor can only record what the lens gives it. I feel lenses over bodies and that train of thought has done me well.
This will do well for nature and sport, I like the contrast and color. I used to use a 300/4is and now it sits lonely and neglected. My uses for the lens are theater and military jets.

[Arsonism]

I have to agree with you there. It's the same principle in rifles/shooting, glass over gun. I also follow the philosophy of "Buy Once, Cry Once". I'll have to check out some of your photos sometime weeble.

[lowside67]

The 100-400 Mark II is a great lens. Short of a $7k+ super telephoto, you are not going to better it.

This is a generic crappy ISO 640 random shot from bird in flight testing yesterday at the duck pond on a crop body. You can see how sharp the lens is, the new 80D camera is falling apart faster than the lens is.

Full Image:


50% of original image:


25% of original image:


Mark

[Arsonism]

Mark, that's freaking awesome. I'm going to have a lot of time around Thanksgiving hopefully to put this lens to the test. I may report back here or just in the daily thread. I really look forward fielding this monster.

[lowside67]

For the fun of it, you may enjoy some of the stuff on my Instagram:
https://www.instagram.com/markuhlmann/









Mark