Canon EF 200-400 f/4L IS 1.4x TC Information

[dhofmann]

Am one who's still hoping for a replacement for the 100-400 L that's a bit sharper, better IS(a given) and lighter weight(I doubt it).

To avoid cannibalizing sales of the 200-400 lens, maybe they will announce a new 100-400 after sales of the 200-400 start to dwindle.

[MichaelHodges]

A few posters make a good point: Why not just get the 500 or 600?

Well, sometimes you miss shots with a prime. A good example would be a bird flying right at you. Bears with cubs are another reason why a zoom would be superior. Also, the built-in TC offers a big advantage. Changing a TC in the rain or snow is awful.

I like the "look" that primes give for wildlife. But if this lens can be as sharp as the 300 or 500, while offering the ability to pull back to 200mm to get those hooves or cubs in the frame, then it's going to be a popular lens. If it's not as sharp as the primes, then it's in serious trouble.

----------------------------------------
http://michaelhodgesfiction.com/

[candyman]

I like handholding a lens. I don't mind the 200-400 will take more time to actually hit the market.
I don't look like this guy but I see you need some bodybuilding before you can hold this lens. So time to go to the gym 

[jasonsim]

Anyone looking for the 200-400 + 1.4x range, should consider a 300mm f/2.8L IS II with 1.4x III and 2x III.  I just got mine and that combo is super sharp and versatile.  Will be selling my old 500mm f/4L IS and old 300mm f/2.8L IS now.  If I need something longer than 600mm f/5.6, I have my 800mm f/5.6L IS.

The price of the 300mm f/2.8L IS II has also dropped recently to $6800.00 most places.  Add the 2% bonus most places are giving ( Amazon, BH, Adorama ) and purchase with a rewards card ( Amazon give 3x points for items purchased with Amazon Chase card) and you can get a 2x III for nearly nothing. :-)

Kind regards,
Jason

Well the big worry is will that 560mm be as clean as the old 500mm? If it is, then that old heavy 500 will be less missed than I thought.

And will I want to shoot at f5.6 for the duration of a day in shadows and late afternoons?....back to shooting at 400mm. Not that big of a deal. I do find when shooting with my 300, I am always wishing for a 400. 400 is useful for sports and larger wildlife. Quite a few times I had to run backwards so I could get far enough away for a full shot of a close Bobcat. Tree shooting would be great at 400 also.

Air shows, well 500mm was tight. I had myself wishing for a 400 a few times. It's too bad they could apply that inboard teleconverter to a 500mm. That would be a big seller. Sure, I prefer 500mm, but there are quite a few uses for 400. A revamp of the 400DO would have been great. I'm tired of my shoulders hurting! So the 200-400 still doesn't help that much.

[sanj]

Am one who's still hoping for a replacement for the 100-400 L that's a bit sharper, better IS(a given) and lighter weight(I doubt it).

To avoid cannibalizing sales of the 200-400 lens, maybe they will announce a new 100-400 after sales of the 200-400 start to dwindle.

I am not sure if I agree. Different market segments entirely..!! Not to say that the 100-400 may come later, but for certain the lenses cater to different people.