Hi ashok underscore. At 2008-05-02 19:43:22 +0300, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > I am looking for a L Series lens for my Canon...
(I'm assuming you mean an L-series telephoto lens.) > Canon EF 100-400mm f4.5-5.6L IS USM > http://www.amazon.com/Canon-100-400mm-f4-5-5-6L-Telephoto-Cameras/dp/B00007GQLS/ > > any first hand opinions ? I've used it. It's decent. The handling took a bit of getting used to (it's a push-pull-type zoom, with a separate ring to adjust the tension of the zoom mechanism), but it worked pretty well. Other lenses in the same price range are the 400/5.6L (very sharp, very fast autofocus, quite small and light, no IS) and the 300/4L IS+1.4x, a surprisingly handy combination. Both are significantly better than the 100-400 in terms of image quality and handling (but of course the zoom comes with its own advantages). What are you planning to use the lens for? If it's birds, I'd recommend the 400/5.6L over the 100-400 (it's even cheaper than the latter). If it is for general photography, I'd pick the 100-400 for the zoom range. > is this significantly better than a good Sigma lens ? Which Sigma lens in particular do you have in mind? They vary. The 170-500 is slow and has no IS (which Sigma calls OS, for "Optical Stabilisation") and is supposed to be soft. The 50-500 is much better optically, but is big and doesn't have OS. -- ams
