April 19, 2014, 10:23:06 PM

Author Topic: Canon EF 100-400mmL IS  (Read 6701 times)

aldvan

  • Guest
Re: Canon EF 100-400mmL IS
« Reply #15 on: January 30, 2012, 08:13:16 AM »
The whole dust issue in the 100-400mm is an urban legend.

I fully agree. I live in a very windy and dusty island. I traveled to deserts with my 100-400 that is for me something like a standard lens. After two years of travelling in very hard environment I never got a dust particle inside. Obviously you have to perform regularly a good maintenance, avoiding dust or other kind of dirt to build up for weeks on the barrel. As I wrote in other occasion,  I had it rocket launched from my backpack in Beijing last year and it needed just a new YA2-3629 zooming ring and barrel. No glass was minimally damaged, although the cinetic energy due to the heavy weight was huge.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Canon EF 100-400mmL IS
« Reply #15 on: January 30, 2012, 08:13:16 AM »

neuroanatomist

  • CR GEEK
  • *******
  • Posts: 12786
    • View Profile
Re: Canon EF 100-400mmL IS
« Reply #16 on: January 30, 2012, 08:18:53 AM »
I'm not sure if either of you can dismiss the other party as any kind of "legend" or myth, but I personally doubt it really commonly is a dust magnet. Lack of a filter could be a cause of dust for at least some unenlightened people. Others might be unfortunate. No two lenses are the same and all that.

+1.   I'm sure there are people with 100-400's that have dust, and people with no dust.  I don't know that I'd call it an urban legend, but it's a popular lens and things do get blown out of proportion on the Internet.  Try an experiment - search Google for 'your car make/year' and 'transmission problems'.  You'll get hits - probably lots of hits.  Assuming you've never had such a problem, your initial reaction will probably be, "That's BS."  If you have had such a problem, those results will confirm for you that it's a pervasive issue.  The real question is, if you had run that search before buying that car, would you still have bought it?  If you say 'no', expand that concept - if you had done that search on every car you had been considering, you'd be taking the bus to work.
EOS 1D X, EOS M, and lots of lenses
______________________________
Flickr | TDP Profile/Gear List

sawsedge

  • Rebel SL1
  • ***
  • Posts: 97
    • View Profile
Re: Canon EF 100-400mmL IS
« Reply #17 on: January 30, 2012, 08:45:29 AM »
I have yet to hear of a person who *actually owns* the 100-400 complaining about dust.

aldvan

  • Guest
Re: Canon EF 100-400mmL IS
« Reply #18 on: January 30, 2012, 09:50:53 AM »
In the Land Rover Defender forum I attend, there is a member that used to own the latest model of that off road car. He should be very unfortunate getting his sample, or, may be, he wasn't very able to drive such a particular car or to perform a regular maintenance. He post regularly any sort of smear on the new Defender, affirming very unlikely that he owned four samples of the car and each of them was a lemon. Now, you can live very well ignoring that kind of obsession, but the problem is that is quite disturbing to read nasty and hardly demonstrated (a huge number of customer are very happy about that) things about something you had paid a lot of money and that you suppose to resell a day.
Conclusion: on the Internet is very easy to transform an individual case in a general opinion. And it is very easy that this opinion should be built on very specific situation. So, please, before stating some nasty opinion, consider if yours just a specific experience or a real flaw, since in few weeks a lot of people that never got in touch with the object, will sell themselves as great expert on that...

Peerke

  • Canon AE-1
  • ***
  • Posts: 67
    • View Profile
Re: Canon EF 100-400mmL IS
« Reply #19 on: January 30, 2012, 12:20:27 PM »
In the Land Rover Defender forum I attend, there is a member that used to own the latest model of that off road car. He should be very unfortunate getting his sample, or, may be, he wasn't very able to drive such a particular car or to perform a regular maintenance. He post regularly any sort of smear on the new Defender, affirming very unlikely that he owned four samples of the car and each of them was a lemon. Now, you can live very well ignoring that kind of obsession, but the problem is that is quite disturbing to read nasty and hardly demonstrated (a huge number of customer are very happy about that) things about something you had paid a lot of money and that you suppose to resell a day.
Conclusion: on the Internet is very easy to transform an individual case in a general opinion. And it is very easy that this opinion should be built on very specific situation. So, please, before stating some nasty opinion, consider if yours just a specific experience or a real flaw, since in few weeks a lot of people that never got in touch with the object, will sell themselves as great expert on that...

Funny that someone owns four lemon cars. Why buy a sencond lemon? What a lemon.

BTW, if the 100-400 sucks in air and dust when pulling, what will it do when pushing?
7D, 40D, EF-S 10-22, EF-S 17-55 f/2.8, EF 70-200 f/4 IS, EF400 f/5.6, EF 85 f/1.8, EF 50 f/1.8 II, Sigma 150, Speedlite 430 II

jrista

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 3242
  • POTATO
    • View Profile
    • Nature Photography
Re: Canon EF 100-400mmL IS
« Reply #20 on: January 30, 2012, 01:01:14 PM »
While I can't say that I've taken my copy of the 100-400L lens onto five different continents like @smirkypants, I have used it pretty extensively for the last couple years in some of the worst weather Colorado has to offer. I've used it in torrential rains, near-whiteout blizzards, sub-zero temperatures, and highly dusty winds. Even though it does not carry a "weather sealed" label, I've never gotten any moisture or dust inside of the lens, and I've never noticed any accumulation of dust on my sensor due to its use.

While I don't have any patents or diagrams to back it up at the moment, I think its a bit naive to think that Canon did not design this lens with an adequate filtration system around the push/pull design. Yes, the lens sucks in air, but its highly unlikely it directly sucks in unfiltered air.
My Photography
Current Gear: Canon 7D | Canon EF 600mm f/4 L IS II | EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 L IS | EF 16-35mm f/2.8 L | EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro | 50mm f/1.4
New Gear List: Canon 5D III/7D II | Canon EF 300mm f/2.8 L II

CR Backup Admin

  • Administrator
  • 1D Mark IV
  • *****
  • Posts: 750
    • View Profile
Re: Canon EF 100-400mmL IS
« Reply #21 on: January 30, 2012, 01:12:25 PM »
Several posts were removed, due to the insulting language made and then being quoted.

Its ok to disagree, but be civil!

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Canon EF 100-400mmL IS
« Reply #21 on: January 30, 2012, 01:12:25 PM »

unfocused

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1762
    • View Profile
    • Unfocused: A photo website
Re: Canon EF 100-400mmL IS
« Reply #22 on: January 30, 2012, 01:28:03 PM »
Several posts were removed, due to the insulting language made and then being quoted.

Its ok to disagree, but be civil!

Giving you some good Karma, as it sucks to be an administrator. (on the other hand, it never hurts to suck up to administrators) :)
pictures sharp. life not so much. www.unfocusedmg.com

vbi

  • Canon AE-1
  • ***
  • Posts: 70
    • View Profile
Re: Canon EF 100-400mmL IS
« Reply #23 on: January 30, 2012, 02:13:47 PM »
Never had a problem with my 100-400 even though I have taken it to many game reserves over the last 4 years.

And, contrary to urban legend, it is pretty sharp wide open...sharp enough that I now always shoot wide open and get good results.
All politicians are scum
5D3, 5D2, 7D and too many lenses

keithfullermusic

  • 7D
  • *****
  • Posts: 364
    • View Profile
    • k2focus.com
Re: Canon EF 100-400mmL IS
« Reply #24 on: January 30, 2012, 02:49:02 PM »
I've only had mine for a few months,must I bout it used and have taken it to some very dirty places and I still don't have a problem with dust.  I also love the push/pull.  It's super fast, and I wish all big zooms had it.
5Diii - 50D - 100mm f/2.8, 50mm f/1.4, 20mm f/2.8, 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS, 430 EX II, YN560
---
Pics - http://k2focus.com | Tunes - http://keithfullermusic.com | For Fun - http://thewalkingdeadrumors.com

StevenBrianSamuels

  • Guest
Re: Canon EF 100-400mmL IS
« Reply #25 on: January 30, 2012, 08:31:07 PM »
Hey,

Does anyone know if Canon will be replacing their old 100-400mmL lens any time soon? - I know some have said that the 70-300mmL is a replacement, because of crop body users, But for birding, that extra length is pretty vital. I've heard mixed revues of the 70-300mm with 1.4x tele, and think it would probably be too much of a compromise to loose AF.

Many thanks


They will update it as soon as you or I push BUY NOW.

I'm still waiting for an update.

Kahuna

  • Canon AE-1
  • ***
  • Posts: 66
    • View Profile
Re: Canon EF 100-400mmL IS
« Reply #26 on: January 30, 2012, 09:08:22 PM »
Several posts were removed, due to the insulting language made and then being quoted.

Its ok to disagree, but be civil!

Giving you some good Karma, as it sucks to be an administrator. (on the other hand, it never hurts to suck up to administrators) :)

+1

lynx0069

  • Guest
Re: Canon EF 100-400mmL IS
« Reply #27 on: January 30, 2012, 09:32:36 PM »
i love my 100-400, its attached to my XSi prob about 80% of the time because i enjoy wildlife photography and aircraft. have i ever experienced a dust problem? no, i have not, so i would agree that the "dust pump" statement is definatly an urban legend. in fact, one of my first lenses that i owned was a 70-210f/4 way back when i bought my first slr, an eos 650, and that lens is still in use today as i gave it to my niece when i purchased my 70-200f/4L. so, i use both types of zooms, both the push pull and 2 touch, and i actually enjoy the speed of a push/pull design. IF canon were to update the 100-400, would i buy it? hard to say, if it wasnt massively more expensive than the current one, i would think about it just for an improvement in the IS.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Canon EF 100-400mmL IS
« Reply #27 on: January 30, 2012, 09:32:36 PM »

davisje011

  • Guest
Re: Canon EF 100-400mmL IS
« Reply #28 on: February 02, 2012, 01:25:36 PM »
I have to be the exception I guess, I own a 100-400 and mine got pretty dusty in the 3 years I have owned it. however, I never experienced any undue dust on my sensor, just the lens elements. It got to be so much that I started to get a haze on my daytime photos.

I solved that last night.

I am now dust free on my 1st 2 elements, I didn't want to go further because it just would have been a technical nightmare. This lens is much more simple than it seems.

BTW, I bought this thing on craigslist, I had no warranty or service contracts. I am proficient with electro-mechanical repair, and did not go into this blind. So save me the "You're a fool to do this" I recorded the calibration of the 1st element and retested after reassembly. Every thing is in working order and is in fact smoother than before, due to some long overdue re-lubing and cleaning.

samkatz

  • PowerShot G1 X II
  • ***
  • Posts: 56
    • View Profile
why I want a 100-400 IS L II updated lens..now..
« Reply #29 on: February 08, 2012, 11:14:52 PM »
Had one 100-400 L, it was not as sharp as I wanted, sold it. Have rented them from lensrentals.com a few times, the sharpness have been fine.  Why don't I just buy one??

The I S really is dated.  2 stops is less than new equipment coming out from Canon or Tamron or anyone else doing IS/VR.    No tripod mode for IS.  I don't care about push pull vs ring zoom, don't believe in the dust issue.
I don't mind paying more than the current lens for an update.  Yes, I'm wasting money by renting, but I only need the lens for 3-4 weeks per year, my 70-300 (non L) is fine for many uses.   I may just give up and buy the current model if no update by this fall. Knowing my luck the update will come out immediately after I buy.

canon rumors FORUM

why I want a 100-400 IS L II updated lens..now..
« Reply #29 on: February 08, 2012, 11:14:52 PM »