- Post score: 1
- #26
That’s really impressive.
Insects and a snail
- Thread starter sh1209
- Start date
If you would like to post, you'll need to register. Note that if you have a BCG store account, you'll need a new, separate account here (we keep the two sites separate for security purposes).
- Post score: 13
- #27
I’m telling you man that is a fantastic lens even with a teleconverter are use it just about as much as the 90 mm macro forensics and the image quality is fantastic. It’s super light as well.
- Post score: 1
- #28
D
Do you have the 200-600? I’ve got one and I’ve been wondering which one would be better for non macro insects but fill the frame with some working distance.
- Post score: 13
- #29
I have both and I can tell you for certain that the 100–400 is far superior in image quality and versatility. Whenever I go out for purposeful macro shooting I have one camera with that lens and one camera with a 90 mm macro. I normally take my smaller getting so tripod that has a center column, which works better for macro and a flash and diffuser of some sort I just ordered the pope shield diffuser and hope to have it fairly soon. It looks like a great diffuser similar to the one you have, the only drawback I see you to the 100–400 as you have to keep it on the tight setting because of the lens will creep pretty bad. I don’t like to encourage someone to buy something but I promise you you would not be disappointed with that lens and honestly you could probably sell the 200 and 600 because the 100–400 with a TZ still has better image quality than the 200 600 I think.
- Post score: 1
- #30
Thank you that’s the feedback I’ve been looking for. My other issue with the 200-600 is it sucks for packing. When packing a companion to say my 600GM the 200-600 just takes up a crap ton of space. My spouse likes to shoot as well and prefers the zoom over the 400 or 600. So I’ve been thinking for travel via air and for bugs like butterfly’s the 100-400 might be pretty handy.
- Post score: 13
- #31
The 100 -400 uses the same case as the 70–202.8 it is super small and collapsed and very quick to focus as well. It’s probably the most used lens I have to be honest.
A local seller had one for $1,200 a few months ago. I should have jumped on it. Errrrr
- Post score: 13
- #33
- Post score: 13
- #34
As you can see, the size is almost identical, but the 100–400 is a little heavier and the nice thing is they use the same feet
Wow! Have you compared it to the 70-200 with the TC?
- Post score: 13
- #36
I have and I still prefer the 100–400 if I’m going somewhere to photograph flowers or insects that don’t move very much at all then sometimes I will take the 70–200 but at least 85% of the time when I’m going out for macro, I grab the 100–400.
I was just curious as I already own the 70-200 and both converters.
- Post score: 13
- #38
Not sure if you can see here, but even with a teleconverter on the 100–400 the 70–200 is still a longer lol
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.
- Post score: 13
- #39
It’s an incredible lens but sometimes that 560 mm at F8 is a combination hard to beat lol you’re never gonna be able OF8 anyhow shooting in sex. Normally I stay between F8 an F 1195% of the time and occasionally it will creep up around F 16 but never go past that honestly
- Post score: 13
- #40
If they ever come out with a macro lens that takes teleconverter that will buy it yesterday lol
Dido!
- Post score: 13
- #42
If I had to choose between getting rid of one of the lenses as far as the 200–600 or 100 400 I would absolutely let the 200 600 go since I have the primer but I do like the 200 600 a lot as well when I just want to grab a lighter lens and go out and hike or something so it’s nice having all three of them honestly
- Post score: 13
- #43
There has been rumors of a second generation version of that lens, but I don’t know why in the hell they would need it because other than the lens creep I can’t think of a single thing I would change about it, and if they made it, internal zoom is going to be quite a bit longer. You can fit this lens in camera and just about any bag I’ve ever tried.
Yeah I’m not sure what they would change. One of the appeals to me is it is shorter and would pack a lot easier especially as a partner to a large prime. I’ll have to keep an eye out on the used market and see what I can find.
- Post score: 13
- #45
B&H has an open box for 2100 lol
- Post score: 1
- #46
Adorama has one for $1900 range. lol oh I have been looking. I leave Thursday to CA for a week of work and shooting and had considered getting one before the trip but the 600 and 200-600 with converters will make this trip. Oh and the two outdated a1's
I hope I will be able to get some shots .- Post score: 1
- #47
WOW incredible detail. Love them all!!Sony A1 Sony 100-400GM Godox AD200 pro Altura 9 inch soft box Godox
Goldenrod soldier beetle by Steven Haddix, on Flickr
Northern pearly eye by Steven Haddix, on Flickr
Northern pearly eye by Steven Haddix, on Flickr
Northern pearly eye by Steven Haddix, on Flickr
Little wood satyr by Steven Haddix, on Flickr
Assassin Bug by Steven Haddix, on Flickr
Snail by Steven Haddix, on Flickr
Giant Ichneumonid Wasp by Steven Haddix, on Flickr
Scorpion fly by Steven Haddix, on Flickr
Ammophila sabulosa-Red sand wasp by Steven Haddix, on Flickr
Housefly by Steven Haddix, on Flickr
- Post score: 13
- #48
Thank you
- Post score: 1
- #49
All of 'em breathtakingly beautiful and technically stunning! Nice work!!
- Post score: 13
- #50
Thank you