Vignetting on 100-400mm Mk2 (1 Viewer)

[Steve Arlow]

Has anyone else experienced really poor vignetting on the Canon 100-400mm at 400mm. Just got this lens and used on both 1DX and older 1DmkIII and there's just an awful amount of vignetting.

I tried it out before I bought one and now given it a go properly finding I really don't like it; poor amount of Vignetting, not impressed with IQ, lack of light so having to ramp up the ISO to levels I don't want to go to (whilst also having to drop to F4.5/5.6 to get even slowest of shutter speeds in low light etc.

 

[Vespobuteo]

Has anyone else experienced really poor vignetting on the Canon 100-400mm at 400mm. Just got this lens and used on both 1DX and older 1DmkIII and there's just an awful amount of vignetting.

I tried it out before I bought one and now given it a go properly finding I really don't like it; poor amount of Vignetting, not impressed with IQ, lack of light so having to ramp up the ISO to levels I don't want to go to (whilst also having to drop to F4.5/5.6 to get even slowest of shutter speeds in low light etc.

Seems to be about 1 stop, quite normal for a tele zoom like that I think, don't you use auto lens correction at some point in the process?

http://photozone.de/canon_eos_ff/896-canon100400f4556is2?start=1

 

[Steve Arlow]

I should add the images reviewed are on back of camera not dealt with in post. The amount of vignetting only goes away when extreme Fstop changes, its almost like a halo effect surrounding the centre of the photo.

I've read loads of reviews saying virtually no vignetting but what I can see in the back of camera images they would all be deleted before being downloaded as just not good enough.

 

[johnf3f]

I also use this lens on a 1DX, I haven't found vignetting to be an issue. Yes there is a little vignetting but what telephoto/SuperTele doesn't have some?

I think most users use this lens with crop sensor cameras - so they probably do not see this effect?

 

[Steve Arlow]

Was expecting a little big netting in the corners but this is like the middle of the image is framed by a tyre; really bad. Can't understand so many glowing reviews, this one will be going back and I'll stick to fixed focal length lenses. I allowed myself to be swayed by popular opinion.

 

[Dave Williams]

My 100-400 is excellent in combination with a 1DX Steve. Amazingly sharp, fast to focus even with a 1.4TC ( on a 1D with a big battery particularly), no vignetting that I am aware of. Brilliant value for money lens. I acquired mine in exchange for a 300mm f2.8 and have no regrets as it makes for a very portable lightweight combination and I do wonder why I have still kept my 70-200 f2.8 most of the time. It convinced me that I didn't need a 200-400 at around 6x the price either.
The only thing I don't particularly like is the lens barrel extending from within when you zoom in and at f5.6 the bokeh isn't always the best.If you are used to using a longer lens then yes you might find that you are cropping the image more to put the subject full in the frame and so IQ will not be as good, and yes, in poor light you are better off with an f4 lens. It took me a while to grow to like the lens just because of it's feel, I was more used to using solid prime lenses but the images it produces speak for themselves.
You seem to be the exception to the rule when it comes to opinions Steve, must be something not right somewhere. Don't just give up on it though, it must be an issue you can resolve one way or another.

 

[Steve Arlow]

Hi Dave. I have tried this lens in typical UK light, overcast and low, and the result at 400mm/F5.6 where just terrible, even back down towards the 300mm extension. I'm sure the lens will perform well in great light, but then all lenses will perform much better in optimum conditions.

I have had to stop at least 3 or more to make the vignetting less obvious for birds in flight but then central image is then far to washed out. I got the same when shooting a static subject against a pale wall and the vignetting was rediculous. I don't want to spend ages on Photoshop removing the darker image edges.

I've never been a fan of zooms but I need a walk around lens as carrying the Canon 500mm around all day locally when I go birding, and given where I live it rarely gets used, so after the reviews etc stumped up for this.

I have previously owned the older pump action 100-400mm, the 400mm F5.6 and the 400mm DO and have to say that whilst this new version is better than the old dust sucker I still had better results with the fixed 400mm F5.6. The 400mm DO was a complete dud and after several weeks got rid as 90% delete/10% keeper rate in great light was just not good enough. Wish I had never parted with 400mm F5.6 lens now as that still had a higher percentage keeper rate. The Sigma 300mm F2.8 that I had for a few years was all over the 100-400mm mk2. I may go back to that as it was a great lens, can't afford the Canon equivalent. Wish I hadn't parted with that as well.|=(|

The back of camera images on the 100-400mm mk2 are generally of closer subjects so not having to zoom in to much to see that the sharpness is just not there, even after ramping up the ISO on the 1DX to compensate for low light just doesn't seem to make a difference, still really slow shutter speeds and poor results.

I may be unlucky and have another dud lens on my hands which means my views differ to those that I read that swayed me to buy one but on actual use of the lens it is going back as not fit for my purposes. If the Vignetting was not this bad I would probably stick it out but this is at an unacceptable level. Disappointed as will have to look around for an alternative again.

 

[Dave Williams]

Steve, hopefully these shots, the original and a 100% crop demonstrate the vignetting and IQ are acceptable to me anyway.
The 100-400 doesn't tend to be my weapon of choice as I'm lucky enough to have bigger lenses for usual birding but for BIF at reasonable close range I think it's pretty brilliant.

f5.6, 1/1000sec ISO 160 using single fine point on the 1DX2

The full frame is out of the camera, the other has been altered with a bit of PP

 

[Dave Williams]

http://cpn.canon-europe.com/content...hooting_wildlife_with_the_eos-1d_x_mark_ii.do

Another vote for the 100-400 by Danny Green on the latest Canon newsletter.

 

[johnf3f]

Sounds like a faulty lens - where did you get it from? Send it back?

 

[Malcolm Stewart]

Sounds like a faulty lens - where did you get it from? Send it back?

How can a lens be faulty with respect to vignetting as in this thread? Vignetting is essentially a geometric effect caused by the mechanics and physics of the lens, and unless some internal shade or tube has come loose within the lens, I can't see how one lens can be different to others of the same model. (Different camera bodies, and post-processing, yes, but surely not the lens by itself.)

Could some camera preset be exaggerating the effect? I don't own a 1DX, so won't comment in detail. Could the vignetting have been caused by a Picture Style set to a high contrast setting? If I'm trying to optimise AF-MA in the field, I'll often raise the contrast, and sometimes I forget to return it to normal - and then wonder where the image quality went...

 

[johnf3f]

How can a lens be faulty with respect to vignetting as in this thread? Vignetting is essentially a geometric effect caused by the mechanics and physics of the lens, and unless some internal shade or tube has come loose within the lens, I can't see how one lens can be different to others of the same model. (Different camera bodies, and post-processing, yes, but surely not the lens by itself.)

Could some camera preset be exaggerating the effect? I don't own a 1DX, so won't comment in detail. Could the vignetting have been caused by a Picture Style set to a high contrast setting? If I'm trying to optimise AF-MA in the field, I'll often raise the contrast, and sometimes I forget to return it to normal - and then wonder where the image quality went...

Honestly I have absolutely no idea! Vignetting is simply not a criticism that I have ever heard of on this lens. I use mine with both crop and full frame bodies and it is simply a non issue - hence my thought that there may be a significant problem with the lens.