where to Buy a 100-400 L

[Allan Ryan]

i clicked on the sponsors icon above to check them out, but it wasn't opening,,,
any suggestions on best place to buy a 100-400 L ?

[Xenedis]

Discount Digital Photographics has the 100-400 for $1,855.

http://d-d-photographics.com.au/prod...6L-IS-USM.html

[Tjfrnds]

DWI has it for $1578

http://www.dwidigitalcameras.com.au/...idProduct=1474

[Bennymiata]

Top Buy have it for $1505.75.

I bought mine form them, and it is a fantastic lens.
Mind you, I wish it was half the size and half the weight, but it's so good, the size and weight don't really matter.

If you do get it, be careful of the tripod head you use, and many of them won't stay still (especialy if you are aiming up at the moon) with this lens and a grip on the camera.

[Allan Ryan]

thanks guys
am looking around all the sites
i got my 24-105 from ddp in Brisbane - but they have closed, so i heard anyway.

I have a Manfroto all alloy tripod with 3 way head - Should be up to the job
Trying shots of the moon is one thing im looking forward to.... will i need a 1.4 extender or will the 400mm be enought?

Cheers

[fess67]

400mm will be enough.

Bear in mind with that lens you will lose autofocus with the extender. I have a 1.4 but have pretty much given up using it with the 100-400, manual focus at that range does not suit my style.

PS. On a nice bright moon you can go hand held without too much trouble

[gabby]

I decided to buy mine from Cameras Direct as their price was good cf other Australian stores ( $1, 895) and being at Labrador( Gold Coast) it was close enough if I have any problems later. I figured it was worth the tiny bit extra for peace of mind after much online comparison shopping. What tripod would you recommend, Benny???

[Bennymiata]

What tripod would you recommend, Benny???

A stabel one with a strong head.
You'd really need to get one that can take around 8kg or more to be on the safe side.

I use a Vangaurd something or other 263 with a Manfrotto head and they just cope with the 60D, the 100-400, a 580EXII flash and a grip, although for my own piece of mind, I take the grip off nowadays.

I think a carbon tripod would be best, as they are quite a bit stiffer than aluminium ones of similar size etc, and i'm trying to save up for one!

[KeeFy]

The thing about tripods is.. if you want anything decent be ready to pay about $300 for the legs alone and $200 for the ballhead. All-in $500 easy for a decent set that will last you a long time. Stick with branded tripods, ie. Silk, Vanguard (the cheap ones really suck), manfrotto, gitzo. There are some 2nd tier tripods like benro, sirui, photoclam, etc. Typically the heavier the tripod the better, unless you need weight reduction then go for a carbon fibre tripod.

I highly recommend the carbon fibre tripods by Sirui if on a budget for the 2nd tiered ones. I personally have a benro tripod and tho it's decent, for the same amount of $$ the sirui alternative is much better built. I'm looking to upgrade my legs soon to a Gitzo.

For tripod heads, you can't go past kirk, Markins, RRS, Acra Swiss (really really expensive), Manfrotto (only certain models). I have a Markins Q3T with Quick Release and it works beatifully with 70-200 2.8 mk2 + 7D + BG. 0 creep. When reading specifications, note the size of the ballhead. The bigger it is, typically the better.

If you have heavy lenses like L zooms, you do not ever want your tripod to fail on you only to realise that your few grand worth of lens is now worthless due to the shoddy tripod. When i first got my 500D with a 18-55, i was given a lousy tripod which could not take the weight of the camera tilted slightly. The whole setup came crashing down to the floor and the 18-55 uv filter was shattered. Thank God for uv filters.

[Tannin]

Excellent advice immediately above, though Keefy mysteriously forgets to mention the undisputed best head made for long lenses, the Wimberley. Not cheap, but worth every penny.

Don't even think about a 1.4 converter, or any other type. Converters work, essentially, by sacrificing speed and image quality to gain magnification. If you have (say) a 600/4L you can afford that trade-off. If you are already at f/5.6 in a zoom lens, you can't. At f/5.6 and 400mm, the 100-400 has already been pushed to the limit of its ability. (At f/6.3 and 500mm, the Sigma zooms have already gone beyond theirs.)

[KeeFy]

Excellent advice immediately above, though Keefy mysteriously forgets to mention the undisputed best head made for long lenses, the Wimberley. Not cheap, but worth every penny.

Don't even think about a 1.4 converter, or any other type. Converters work, essentially, by sacrificing speed and image quality to gain magnification. If you have (say) a 600/4L you can afford that trade-off. If you are already at f/5.6 in a zoom lens, you can't. At f/5.6 and 400mm, the 100-400 has already been pushed to the limit of its ability. (At f/6.3 and 500mm, the Sigma zooms have already gone beyond theirs.)

Not mysteriously.... completely forgot! I don't know how i missed that! Possibly because when i was doing my research for a new ballhead.. i completely dismissed wimberly .. as i did acra swiss due to the cost! Also in regards to a tele. You still can use a 1.4x if you sacrifice IQ and AF. How much you're willing to sacrifice is really up to you

And a little correction from my previous post.
"When reading specifications, note the size of the ballhead. The bigger it is, typically the better."
What i meant by that is not the physical size of the ballhead, but the circumference of the ballhead joint.