# EOS 7D + 100-400mm & 400 F5.6



## HaveVoid (Feb 28, 2012)

Hello all,

Last night I finally pulled the trigger on a new 7D (and only 14 minutes before the Adorama discount ended, for a final price of 1,399 body only). As far as my regular shooting is concerned, it is majority (say 85%) aviation, with birds/wildlife covering the other 15% or so. As such, my lens "array" consists of the 100-400mm, the 400 5.6, and then some kit lenses inherited from my Xsi from a while back. While I've already identified what will likely be my replacement for the 18-55 kit lens, I had a couple of questions for people who have used the 7D with either the 100-400, or the 400 5.6.

What were your general impressions? I've heard some people say that the AF literally does not work with the 100-400, and I've heard people say that it is perfectly fine. Same goes with the 400 5.6. I am coming from a 50D, albeit a fairly problematic one, and would consider that my baseline as far as AF performance, etc is concerned. I've had many people tell me that I may need to sell the 100-400 and pick up something like the new 70-300L or a 70-200 to get acceptable IQ, in your experience, is this the case?

I'd greatly appreciate any input y'all could give me. I look forward to the new body getting here soon 




HV


----------



## Kernuak (Feb 28, 2012)

Before I got my 7D, I had the 40D, basically the same AF as your 50D. One of the drivers (besides improved noise) was to get improved focusing. It proved it's worth in the first week, with this shot of a kingfisher.




Kingfisher Between the Leaves by Kernuak, on Flickr

The 40D wouild have struggled, as it was a very windy day, with the branches blowing backwards and forwards. While I now use the 300 f/2.8 with a 1.4x extender, this shot was just before the 300 arrived, so was taken with the 100-400. While the 100-400 is quite slow with the AF, the 7D drives it better than any DSLR but the 1 series cameras and it is certainly usable. However slow it may be, it will be quicker than what you're used to.


----------



## KeithR (Feb 28, 2012)

HaveVoid said:


> What were your general impressions? I've heard some people say that the AF literally does not work with the 100-400, and I've heard people say that it is perfectly fine... I've had many people tell me that I may need to sell the 100-400


My website. Nearly everything on it over the last two+ years except the latest post is with the 7D and 100-400mm. 

"'Some people' talk out of their fat backsides", is my impression...


----------



## Kernuak (Feb 28, 2012)

KeithR said:


> "'Some people' talk out of their fat backsides", is my impression...



My similar thought didn't make it beyond my brain .


----------



## KeithR (Feb 28, 2012)

Some things just need to be said!


----------



## HaveVoid (Feb 28, 2012)

Thank you all, and I cannot agree more. I find that people are very quick to criticize something, or share a negative point of view on something with which they may not have the most experience in the world.

All of the shots y'all have posted are phenomenal! I'm not expecting 1 Series performance, just an incremental improvement over my 50D, as it was relative to my old Xsi.


Thank you guys for your input.



HV


----------



## neuroanatomist (Feb 29, 2012)

HaveVoid said:


> I've heard some people say that the AF literally does not work with the 100-400



It certainly did a _terrible_ job at AF tracking this fellow as he flew from the tree in the background stratght towards me for a landing... :




EOS 7D, EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS USM @ 400mm, 1/1600 s, f/6.3, ISO 1600

You can flip through the rest of the birds on my Flickr site (click the image above for the set), most are with the 7D + 100-400mm. Many shots are at relatively slower shutter speeds and really benefit from the IS, which is a main reason I chose the 100-400mm over the 400/5.6L (the other reason is the much shorter retracted length).


----------



## smirkypants (Feb 29, 2012)

Have no worries. As long as there's light, you'll get some great shots. I've shot tons of polo, which is extremely demanding, with that combination and generally the results have been good. 
*edit* even though it looks too red here.


----------



## Jim K (Feb 29, 2012)

My first DSLR kit was a 50D and 100-400 (and the 28-135 kit lens) and I was shooting birds. Added a monopod and could hold it on target much longer waiting for that perfect head position. Later added a 7D and love the improved autofocus, much better on BIF. Added a second 7D later and semi-retired the 50D but still have it and use it. 

Always been happy with the results from the 100-400. It is an older lens and likes more light than my 70-200 f/4L IS but it works well in daylight. Never used the 400 f/5.6L.


----------



## jm345 (Feb 29, 2012)

The 7D does excellent autofocus. There are alot of custom settings and it helps to get familiar with them to maximize the 7D's autofocus capabilities with moving subjects. While the 400 f/5.6 is known for it's fast focussing the 100-400 with a 7D is no slouch and should provide very reliable and fast auto-focussing.


----------



## jasonsim (Feb 29, 2012)

The 7D works great with my 100-400mm IS. When set in AI Servo, the focus is fast. It is even sharper on my 5D II, but the AF is not quite as fast with that combo. I've never used the 400mm f/5.6, so cannot comment. But I think I'd want to have IS at that focal length. We can only hope that Canon will refresh the 400mm f/5.6 with IS. But who knows...they seem to be focused on putting IS into wide angle primes. Go figure. Best of luck with your new 7D!

Taken using 7D + 100-400mm:







Taken using 5D II + 100-400mm:


----------



## HaveVoid (Feb 29, 2012)

Alright, it is pretty clear that these so called "experts" were talking out of their posteriors. I am thrilled and blown away by the quality of images y'all are posting thus far. I had confidence when I made my decision, but this only reinforces that. I absolutely realize that the 100-400 is a light loving lens, but for what I do, that is more than alright with me. I have heard that navigating the many AF related CF's and settings can be somewhat labyrinthine, so I will probably end up consulting with some of y'all here before all is said and done.


Once again, I cannot thank y'all enough, it's hard to get anyone to share positive experiences with gear these days. You'd think nothing works as advertised...


HV


----------



## neuroanatomist (Feb 29, 2012)

HaveVoid said:


> I have heard that navigating the many AF related CF's and settings can be somewhat labyrinthine, so I will probably end up consulting with some of y'all here before all is said and done.



FWIW, my birds-in-flight is set up on C3 and is: M mode, 1/2000, f/6.3, ISO Auto, AF Point Expansion, evaluative metering, AI Servo, high speed drive; for this one I also set up the AF C.Fn's - the ones I changed from default are C.FnIII-1, slow and C.FnIII-3, Continuous AF tracking priority.


----------



## KeithR (Feb 29, 2012)

Assuming a fairly clean BG, I pretty much swear by Zone AF for BIFs - that, and the AF reacquisition time at its slowest setting.

Works pretty well (these are all fast birds, moving fast):


----------



## HaveVoid (Mar 3, 2012)

Thank you all who have shared experiences, and CF settings. Sadly the weather here in VA looks like it will preclude any shooting for the next 72-ish hours, but I have some solid time off this next week to get out and put her through her paces. I'll report back for more input, feedback, etc.




Many Thanks,


HaveVoid


----------



## HaveVoid (Mar 10, 2012)

Well, I finally got a break in the clouds to try her out. It ended up being a rather hurried thing, as I only had about an hour's head notice, so I used the settings recommended here and hit the road.

Actuation #1 on the 7D, and with the 100-400, it performed flawlessly!







Thank y'all for the info and advice, I couldn't be more thrilled with the 7D, and the photos 


HaveVoid


----------



## KeithR (Mar 11, 2012)

Nice!

Couldn't be any sharper, could it?


----------



## rj79in (Mar 11, 2012)

Works fine for me ... needs a reasonable amount of light though.


----------



## HaveVoid (Mar 12, 2012)

KeithR said:


> Nice!
> 
> Couldn't be any sharper, could it?




Well... it could be, but I won't blame the equipment for the heat haze :


----------



## revup67 (Apr 22, 2012)

I guess I'm jumping on this thread a wee bit late but I had checked out the 100-400mm and the 400mm. I had found with the web site called the-digital-picture.com in comparing the two lenses the 400mm prime was just a wee bit sharper. I also found myself always on 400mm when using the 100-400 in particular for bird and wildlife shooting. The lack of IS didn't bother me in the least as there are work arounds especially if you use a tripod with a nice swivel head or using Manual mode with Auto ISO. I ultimately went with the 400mm and also the latest 70-300 L lens as IQ was a priority. I'm not knocking the 100-400 as it is a great lens just the prime's are always a hint sharper. When shooting BIFS I sometimes use Partial Metering or if Evaluative, I bump up the EV by +1 as when taking those BIFS in the sky you may not get enough dynamic range - I've had good success with both methods as in the Red Tailed Hawk photo below where Partial Metering was used. Here's a few shots with the 400mm and the EOS 7D. These were shot in RAW and PP then resized to JPG 1920x1280. Press L when on the photo to zoom




Gimme Shelter Mamma by Revup67, on Flickr




Great Blue Heron in flight by Revup67, on Flickr




Red Tailed Hawk (Buteo jamaicensis) by Revup67, on Flickr


----------



## revup67 (Apr 22, 2012)

PS - Neuro .. nice shot of the Red-Winged Blackbird. I took quite a few of this bird today myself. They are a bit elusive but not nearly as bad as the Belted King Fisher..once of the hardest birds I've had to capture both in flight and stationary.


----------



## photophreek (Apr 22, 2012)

HaveVoid - 

I suspect that your "experts" don't own or use either the 100-400 or the 400 5.6. Most likely, they don't use either of these lenses on a 7d. I own both lenses and a 7d and I can assure you that the 100-400 does indeed autofocus on the 7d and is a very sharp and capable lens. I use my 400 5.6 on a tripod and shoot birds and offer the same praises and capabilities as I did with the 100-400. I might add, that my 400 5.6 is probably a touch sharper than my 100-400. The 400 5.6 auto focuses faster than the 100-400 and the lack of IS on the 400 5.6 is a non issue for me since I use the lens with a tripod.

My AI Servo settings are the same as neuro CFnIII-1 - one above the slowest, CFnIII-2 - 0 and CFnIII-3 - 1. I use both single point and expansion. I also have my depth of field button remapped so that when pressed and held, the AF switches from One Shot to AI Servo.

Good luck with either lens on your 7d, you will enjoy either.


----------



## revup67 (Apr 26, 2012)

> I also have my depth of field button remapped so that when pressed and held, the AF switches from One Shot to AI Servo.



excellent idea - I think I will restructure mine the same way


----------

