Airshow Glass

Keep getting the itch for a longer reach for Airshow photos, I upgraded my lackluster AF Canon 70-300 (otherwise fantastic images below 200mm) to a second hand 70-300L which has blown me away AF wise and with the step up in image quality.

However, having not done a proper Airshow yet, I know I'm going to be short on focal length unless I crop in - bare in mind until recently I was using a 135L + 1.4x extender for my Airshow shots, which required large crops in on my 6D shots.

So here's the rub, will a 100-400L with a 1.4x give me enough reach for fuller frames at close proximity air shows, and importantly be fast enough or would something like the Tamron 150-600mm be a better bet... I realise that the 100-400II is rumoured to be coming this year, given the six of one and half a dozen of the other views on the 100-400 vs 150-600, I'm half expecting a wait till the 100-400II comes out - but in the meantime, I'd be interested in any views... And also on handling of the huge 150-600

So, crop into 100-400, or 100-400 + 1.4, or 150-600 - away ya go

I don't know a lot about these lenses, but the 100-400 + 1.4 extender won't focus on a 6D. 3rd parties extenders may focus, but operation may be erratic. Fast AF is critical for airshow shots.

I would think the 6D + 70-300L is a really good air show setup.

Dave

I recently saw photos taken with the Tamron 150-600 at the Offutt Air Force base air show and they looked really good. I'll see if I can dig up a link for some photos.

I currently use both the 6D and 7D bodies with a EF 100-400mm, the EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM +1.4x III combo and the Tamron SP 150-600mm F/5-6.3 Di VC USD A011 for air shows. With out a doubt the EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM +1.4x III combo is my favorite. So much flexibility with this lens and either the 1.4 or 2.0 extenders, plus the IQ is out of this world. The Tamron is good, but almost to much lens in a lot of cases and the IQ doesn't quite match either of the Canons. A few samples -

EOS 6D w/ EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM +1.4x III combo

https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3873/...da1fac53_b.jpgBombs Away by davidfranks319, on Flickr

https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3913/...7c80083d_b.jpgWings of Blue by davidfranks319, on Flickr

EOS 7D w/ Tamron SP 150-600mm F/5-6.3 Di VC USD A011

https://farm3.staticflickr.com/2897/...ceb6b7b0_b.jpgFrom the Top by davidfranks319, on Flickr

EOS 6D w/ EF 100-400mm Dust Pump

https://farm3.staticflickr.com/2915/...e9266f68_b.jpg"Spirit of Texas" by davidfranks319, on Flickr

Another with the 6D / EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM +1.4x III pairing. This is a pricey lens, but so worth it in my book.

https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3919/...5ac2dfc5_b.jpg20140621_IMG_2315-Edit.jpg by davidfranks319, on Flickr

Interesting stuff, thank you for sharing great aircraft shots.... How did you feel the AF was on the 70-200 with extenders ? Vs the 100-400, would you say the 100-400 IQ matches that of the 70-200 with extenders ?

I've been itching to get both 70-200 & 100-400 but compromised on a second hand 70-300 at a great price, I'd seriously consider trading the 70-300 for the much anticipated 100-400 MkII, but feel the 70-200 would get more use generally. Opinions welcome ;-)

I haven't noticed a significant difference in AF between the two and my keeper rate is much higher with the 70-200mm. I haven't actually checked the weight difference, but my shoulders say the 70-200mm is lighter than the 100-400mm, even with an extender (that might be all in my head though, I need to weight them both). Plus, take the extender off and you have a great walk around lens for static shots - even in dimly lit hangers.

When I'm thinking about a new body or lens I'll usually rent them on a few occasions just to get a feel of how they do in different situations. Might be something you want to look into before laying down the big bucks.

Additional note on the Tamron 150-600mm: I found the stabilization to be horrendous. After the first dozen shots I turned it off and have never turned it back on.

Although I've never been completely tempted by third party lenses, the Tamron did give me an itch that needed scratching.... However, I've bought into Canon, sub-consciously I feel that I'm compromising not using Canon's greatest asset, it's amazing glass... It's looking like a costly future for me with both the 70-200 2.8 II IS & 100-400 (MkII hopefully) plus the inevitable big white to follow... Oh dear, I've got gas :-/

Yeah, it never ends. My wish list is as long today as it was when I started.

I've been playing with the 70-200 II with 2x TC as a replacement for the 100-400L. The IQ is pretty similar. The AF speed is pretty close, but I would say that the 70-200 II with 2x TC will hunt more if it loses focus. The 70-200 II plus 2x TC is heavier and more awkward than the 100-400L to hold and shoot for long periods of time. But, since I bought the 70-200 II and 2x TC, I've only used my 100-400L for local birding trips. It is still a great lens, but that may not be enough of a niche for me to keep it. Especially if I can get a lens even better suited for local birding (cough 500 or 600 f/4 II).

I still have to look at a few photos from my trip (computer almost fixed), but I am starting to lean toward the conclusion that the 70-200 ii is so good from 70-200 mm w/o the TC and close enough with the TC that it outweighs the inconveniences when compared to the 100-400L for general purpose telephoto photography. If I know I'll only be shooting at 400mm, the 100-400L still wins.

I will say I have heard the 100-400L called the perfect air show lens. But I haven't used it for that purpose yet myself.

BTW...great photos.

It may well be that my 70-300L works just right, slight crop etc... I was working with a 135L & 1.4x last year and happy ;-)