I have the Canon 100-400 L IS USM and I love it - have had it nearly a year.
Reviewed all other in same price range and thought this was the best for me.
thank you @ericaw took a photo of a Woodpecker today and it just lacked the clarity and closeness i wanted. Looked at the exact same subject that YOU have taken and this spurred the discussion actually!
The Canon extender is not compatible with the 75-300. The Kenko extender might be, although you will lose autofocus due to the f-stop restriction. I have 2 recommendations depending on how much you want to spend.
Option 1: 100-400 L IS as you suggested. It's a sweet lens by all standards.
Option 2: 70-200 f2.8L IS coupled with the Canon 2x Extender.
I went with Option 2 since, for normal shooting, getting f2.8 with IS really extends what you can do with the lens. Adding the 2x Extender brings it to f5.6, which is where you'd be with the 100-400 anyway. This option costs more, but it gives me an effective range of 70-400 and it provides f2.8 capability up to the 200mm mark.
The 100-400 is awsome with incredible IS, but it overlaps too much with your present lens, unless the old is not an L series lens or does not have IS. But, if you use an extender (yes it is compatible) , you lose 1 stop with the 1.4 and 2 stops with the 2.0. The other bad news is that you maintain autofocus only if the tele lens original maximum aperture is f4 or larger for the 1.4 tele extender, and f2.8 or larger for the 2.0 extender.
At the moment i have on loan from a friend a canon 100-400mm L serise IS lens and a 1.4 converter. It is a great lens my only problem is on my canon 500D with the convert attached I can not get auto focus.
I think a lot of the auto focus issues have been sorted with the series III of the extenders but you would check against the Canon website.
I have the 100-400 L IS and it is fantastic. It has to be my most favorite lens ever, but I dont have the 70-200 f2.8 L IS as I hear that is very impressive.
I went down this path some time ago and thought about the idea that Ron is suggesting in option 2. The only reason why I purchased the 400 over the 200 is that I like a longer reach so if I put on a extender I get 800mm for the lost of one stop. This is a long way and on your 4D it will be even longer as I do believe the 4D has a cropped sensor.
I also didnt want to have to mess around with not having auto focus when I am tracking subjects out at 400mm.
I will be buying the 200 f2.8 but not for wild life, more for portraits and event photography where I need the faster lens.
Have you looked at the Sigma 150-500mm lens?
A friend of mine has it & reckons it's great & it's cheaper than the 100-400.
I have the 100-400 & love it.
As previously mentioned you do lose autofocus with an extender fitted, so it's really only suitable for static subjects in this instance.
Tweets ahoy!
Join the Group
Pin With Me
Reviewed all other in same price range and thought this was the best for me.
Option 1: 100-400 L IS as you suggested. It's a sweet lens by all standards.
Option 2: 70-200 f2.8L IS coupled with the Canon 2x Extender.
I went with Option 2 since, for normal shooting, getting f2.8 with IS really extends what you can do with the lens. Adding the 2x Extender brings it to f5.6, which is where you'd be with the 100-400 anyway. This option costs more, but it gives me an effective range of 70-400 and it provides f2.8 capability up to the 200mm mark.
I have the 100-400 L IS and it is fantastic. It has to be my most favorite lens ever, but I dont have the 70-200 f2.8 L IS as I hear that is very impressive.
I went down this path some time ago and thought about the idea that Ron is suggesting in option 2. The only reason why I purchased the 400 over the 200 is that I like a longer reach so if I put on a extender I get 800mm for the lost of one stop. This is a long way and on your 4D it will be even longer as I do believe the 4D has a cropped sensor.
I also didnt want to have to mess around with not having auto focus when I am tracking subjects out at 400mm.
I will be buying the 200 f2.8 but not for wild life, more for portraits and event photography where I need the faster lens.
A friend of mine has it & reckons it's great & it's cheaper than the 100-400.
I have the 100-400 & love it.
As previously mentioned you do lose autofocus with an extender fitted, so it's really only suitable for static subjects in this instance.
Now have to try and decide if i buy a new lens or spend the money on finishing my track car