I am waiting it with 2000USD offer.
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
You have to understand the mindset of us techno-geeks (assuming leecheeyee is one also). If it's more than 6 months, it's not new. If it's more than a year, it's starting to get aged. If it's more than 2 years, it's positively ancient.From your signature: 5D mark 2, 5D mark 3, EF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM, EF 135mm f/2L, EF 85mm f/1.8
24-105, released in 2005. 135L, released in 1996. 85/1.8, released in 1992. Dude, you better throw that
oldancient crap in the bin and get some new lenses.
Note that the 100-400mm lacks the seal at the mount gasket that would otherwise make it a 'weather-sealed' lens like the 28-300mm.Why, in your opinion, the 100-400 lacks this seal?
Timing. Canon started releasing 'weather- and dust-sealed' lenses in 1999, and the 100-400mm is from 1998 (whereas the 28-300mm is from 2004).
Isn't the rumored 100-400mm a f/4-5.6 as opposed to a f/4.5-5.6? If the ver II is indeed a f/4-5.6, this lens will be heavier and bigger than the ver I. I also seem to remember reading here that the rumored price could be $3000+. Given Canon's track record of pricing for new lenses, this price might happen. I'm in no rush for this lens as I am quite happy with my sharp 100-400 ver I.