Canon EF 100-400 f/4-5.6L IS [CR2]

[tomscott]

I have had nothing but good experiences with this lens. In the day before IS people didnt complain. If you are relying on technology like IS too much you need to go back to how you shoot and improve.

[Astro]

the current version cost around 1300 euro.. so can we expect the new one will cost 2600 euro?

Or, if the algorithm is not 2X but +1000 it will be around 2300 euro which is no good either 

yep.... i have a few hobbys but photography is the only one where the gear gets more expensive each year (beside the normal rate of price increases).

to bad the photography world does not work like the computer world.
or we would have cheap FF cameras by now.

of course the bad thing for us photographers is that a FF sensor can not be shrinked so that more of them fit on a wafer.

[lol]

The push-pull is probably the feature (other than focal length range) I like most about the existing version. So expect it to go to a slower less accurate modern twist design for the next version. Radical thought: is there any way they could come up with a reliable physical design that allows both twist and push-pull zoom on the same lens?

I don't have any major complaints of the existing version. About the only problem I have is water ingress and I've dried it out on more than one occasion, so better sealing on a new version would be a big plus for me. The other is that a shorter minimum focus distance would be really nice, and faster focus speed.

[dilbert]

the current version cost around 1300 euro.. so can we expect the new one will cost 2600 euro?

Or, if the algorithm is not 2X but +1000 it will be around 2300 euro which is no good either 

yep.... i have a few hobbys but photography is the only one where the gear gets more expensive each year (beside the normal rate of price increases).

to bad the photography world does not work like the computer world.
or we would have cheap FF cameras by now.

of course the bad thing for us photographers is that a FF sensor can not be shrinked so that more of them fit on a wafer.

www.grammarly.com

[Astro]

the current version cost around 1300 euro.. so can we expect the new one will cost 2600 euro?

Or, if the algorithm is not 2X but +1000 it will be around 2300 euro which is no good either 

yep.... i have a few hobbys but photography is the only one where the gear gets more expensive each year (beside the normal rate of price increases).

to bad the photography world does not work like the computer world.
or we would have cheap FF cameras by now.

of course the bad thing for us photographers is that a FF sensor can not be shrinked so that more of them fit on a wafer.

www.grammarly.com

na wie gut kann der herr klugscheißer wohl deutsch?
oder wollen wir uns in schwedisch unterhalten, spanisch hatte ich auch 3 jahre lang!

mal wieder ein typischer dämlicher amerikaner, der gerade mal seine eigene landesprache beherrscht?

warum schreibt die welt englisch?
weil die amis dank ihrem schulsystem ja nichts anderes beherrschen.

LOL

http://translate.google.de/

[Canon-F1]

the current version cost around 1300 euro.. so can we expect the new one will cost 2600 euro?

Or, if the algorithm is not 2X but +1000 it will be around 2300 euro which is no good either 

yep.... i have a few hobbys but photography is the only one where the gear gets more expensive each year (beside the normal rate of price increases).

to bad the photography world does not work like the computer world.
or we would have cheap FF cameras by now.

of course the bad thing for us photographers is that a FF sensor can not be shrinked so that more of them fit on a wafer.

www.grammarly.com

na wie gut kann der herr klugscheißer wohl deutsch?
oder wollen wir uns in schwedisch unterhalten, spanisch hatte ich auch 3 jahre lang!

mal wieder ein typischer dämlicher amerikaner, der gerade mal seine eigene landesprache beherrscht?

warum schreibt die welt englisch?
weil die amis dank ihrem schulsystem ja nichts anderes beherrschen.

LOL

http://translate.google.de/

Lach, ja ich würde es auch mal ganz erfrischend finden, wenn die Amis einfach mal ihre Fresse halten würden.

+1

Würde nicht nur ihrem EX-Presidenten "Afrika ist ein Staat" G.W. Bush gut zu Gesicht stehen.

Aber viele Amerikaner merken gar nicht wie ungebildet sie eigentlich sind.
Wer nichts von der Welt kennt oder über sie lernt, kann leicht denken er wäre etwas besonderes.

Ich bin übrigens gebürtiger Franzose.. man entschuldige bitte meine Deutsche Rechtschreibung. 

[unfocused]

Ne pas juger tout le monde à cause des paroles d'un troll.

Urteilen Sie nicht alle, weil der mit den Worten eines Troll.

Not all Americans think the world revolves around us.

[t.linn]

This probably sounds laughable to anyone used to using the super zooms but I'm disappointed that the weight is going up instead of down.  Down has been the trend on all the newly announced lenses that come to mind.  Perhaps my attitude will change once the new version has been released but right now "heavier" is a deal killer for me.

[t.linn]

Ne pas juger tout le monde à cause des paroles d'un troll.

Urteilen Sie nicht alle, weil der mit den Worten eines Troll.

What's with the talking in code?

Not all Americans think the world revolves around us.

The world doesn't revolve around us?  Now that's just crazy talk!   

[preppyak]

By the way, these are past rumors, for comparison sake

I was told it would be in the $3000 price range, have a rotating zoom, weigh less, be slightly faster on the wide end at f/4 and carry the latest and greatest coatings and IS.

Ring zoom (not push/pull)
Latest IS System
82mm Filter Size
Weather Sealed
Slightly heavier than the current model
Slightly faster f/4 at 100mm (Current is f/4.5)
Retail around $2800 USD

So, that's 2 mentions of being heavier, 2 mentions of the price in the $3k range, all mention it at f/4, and the rotating zoom seems to also be likely. Then gain, this was rumored at CR2 in 2010 before they scrapped that lens, so, who knows

I'd say set your expectations at $2500 to be the lowest possible price point, and be surprised if its cheaper. Especially if they wasted R&D on a previous design

[HarryWintergreen]

Provided IQ is close to excellent, for an amateur phtographer with wild-life ambitions what would be the alternative to spending more than 2k for a (highly speculative) mark II version of the Canon 100-400? Sigma 120-300 f/2,8 is too short in reach and @ f/5,6 not superior to the current Canon 100-400. The other serious alternatives are way too expensive. Unfortunately 

[wtlloyd]

Current (old) lens is f/4.5-5.6, this one will have a larger objective so bigger, heavier glass...

This probably sounds laughable to anyone used to using the super zooms but I'm disappointed that the weight is going up instead of down.  Down has been the trend on all the newly announced lenses that come to mind.  Perhaps my attitude will change once the new version has been released but right now "heavier" is a deal killer for me.

[neuroanatomist]

Current (old) lens is f/4.5-5.6, this one will have a larger objective so bigger, heavier glass...

How do you figure that?  Same ratio at the long end - 400/5.6 = 71.4mm diameter element.  100/4.5 = 22.2mm, 100/4 = 25mm, both much smaller than dictated by the long end, i.e that's where the limitation is, not the wide end.

[wtlloyd]

Clearly, I wasn't figuring, I just ass-umed 

I'd be interested in your thoughts accounting for (presumed) the weight increase..

Current (old) lens is f/4.5-5.6, this one will have a larger objective so bigger, heavier glass...

How do you figure that?  Same ratio at the long end - 400/5.6 = 71.4mm diameter element.  100/4.5 = 22.2mm, 100/4 = 25mm, both much smaller than dictated by the long end, i.e that's where the limitation is, not the wide end.

[neuroanatomist]

I'd be interested in your thoughts accounting for (presumed) the weight increase..

I'm guessing additional elements for better optical correction.