Canon EF 100-400 f/4-5.6L IS Patent Pending

[bvukich]

Despite the push/pull design... what's so bad about the current 100-400ß?

It's first gen IS system could stand an update, and coatings/etc. etc are always getting better.  But it is already an outstanding lens, there are quite a few other lenses that are more needing of an update.

[photophreek]

I agree with DAVE, there is nothing wrong with the current 100-400mm.  I just bought one and the IQ/sharpness is quite amazing.  I'd say it's on par with my 400mm f/5.6.  The push/pull zoom does require some getting used to, but certainly not a deal breaker.

I've worked filing and defending patents.  The big problem is defending patents.  These patents were probably filed to protect the design and does not mean that a ver II will come out anytime soon.

[Mt Spokane Photography]

I have no idea how to read patents so ... can anyone tell if this would still be a push-pull design?  rotating zoom would be much preferred ... although frankly, with the 2X on the 70-200 f/2.8, I'm not really in the market for a repeat lens in this range.

After reading thru the entire patent, I would say that its probably a push-pull.  5 lens groups move foward while zooming while the 6th and rearmost group moves only with the focus ring to focus.  Typically, rotating zoom rings only move some of the elements while others are fixed.  You can, of course design it as a rotating zoom ring, bit it doesn't sound practical to move the first 5 lens groups a large distance.

[dstppy]

I agree with DAVE, there is nothing wrong with the current 100-400mm.  I just bought one and the IQ/sharpness is quite amazing.  I'd say it's on par with my 400mm f/5.6.  The push/pull zoom does require some getting used to, but certainly not a deal breaker.

I've worked filing and defending patents.  The big problem is defending patents.  These patents were probably filed to protect the design and does not mean that a ver II will come out anytime soon.

"won't come out soon" -- definitely agree . . .

But if you read through pretty much every one of "Roger's Take"s on LensRentals.com, you'll see that nothing wrong doesn't mean a better lens won't come out.  (Depends on how much you're REALLY trying to avoid actual work).  Canon has had some darned good lenses that it released a "II" version of and had marked improvement . . . so it's never say never.

Besides, releasing an even better version of an excellent lens means that the previous version is 'worth less' than it was before, used   *IF* Canon ever did release a MkII of the 100-400, I think it would be a home-run . . . it wouldn't be worth it otherwise, no?

[Mt Spokane Photography]

I certainly love my 100-400mm L, if a reasonably priced upgrade were to appear, I'd want it.  However, the 70-200mm L MK II jumped $800 or more when it appeared, so I'd expect the same here.

[/dev/null]

I know well that (a) this does not prove that a new lens is around the corner and (b) it is supposed to be a more or less general solution to an optical problem rather than a specific lens design.
Having said that, the arrangement does look rather similar to the existing 100-400L, so it would appear that this is not some land-grab of a far-future crazy idea but something rather practical and therefore much closer to production.
The 100-400 is certainly a good candidate for that. There has already been plenty of speculation about an replacement. I don't know how long patents take to get approved and published these days, but if a factory-ready design existed, Canon would certainly hold it back until the patent was published.

[Lee Jay]

Despite the push/pull design... what's so bad about the current 100-400ß?

Really poor handling in multiple ways, poor performing IS, optical quality degrades a lot if the IS happens to be at a substantially off-center position when you shoot, mediocre corner performance, relatively slow AF compared to newer lenses, not diffraction-limited in the center wide open despite being f/5.6.

I'd really, really, really like to see a new high-pixel-density 1.6-crop camera with high-performing f/8 AF sensors, and a new 100-400L that goes with it that's designed to be dead-sharp wide open with a 1.4x TC on it on that camera (which could AF with it that way), and to have all that other stuff fixed.  The ideal one would be f/4.5 at 300mm and have AF faster than the 400/5.6L while weighing the same, thus eliminating the need for the 300/4L IS and the 400/5.6L.

That system would be virtually the ultimate hand-holdable "reach" camera system for good light applications.