missing 200-400 and 100-400 announcements?

[M.ST]

The new EF 200-400 is definitely no walk around lens, very heavy and expensive.

Who needs such a lens?

Don´t waste your money and use one of the big Canon telephoto lenses instead.

For travelling I wait for a new 100-400 lens.

[canon816]

The new EF 200-400 is definitely no walk around lens, very heavy and expensive.

Who needs such a lens?

Don´t waste your money and use one of the big Canon telephoto lenses instead.

For travelling I wait for a new 100-400 lens.

Who needs such a lens? 

I don't know, who needs a macro lens?  Instead of macro people should just be happy with mid range zoom.
who needs long prime glass anyway?  Instead go use a wide ange.
Need a wedding lens?  I recommend you shoot without a lens...

This lens will have a great following and for many it will be a great consolidation of focal lengths.  Sport photographers, nature photographers and traveling photographers just to name a few.

I know that I would happily give up my big glass for this lens if the IQ is just as good.  I do a ton of wildlife photography and hike to access most of it.  Currently I carry in an old 600 f4 and a 3002.8.  I also shoot from a kayak and carry 2 bodies with long and short glass.  I also travel and hate having to choose which lenses to fly with.

Well, maybe you are right.  Who needs this lens anyway,  maybe i'm the only one who could benefit from this lens....  Stupid canon...

[IIIHobbs]

The new EF 200-400 is definitely no walk around lens, very heavy and expensive.

Who needs such a lens?

Don´t waste your money and use one of the big Canon telephoto lenses instead.

For travelling I wait for a new 100-400 lens.

Who needs such a lens? 

I don't know, who needs a macro lens?  Instead of macro people should just be happy with mid range zoom.
who needs long prime glass anyway?  Instead go use a wide ange.
Need a wedding lens?  I recommend you shoot without a lens...

This lens will have a great following and for many it will be a great consolidation of focal lengths.  Sport photographers, nature photographers and traveling photographers just to name a few.

I know that I would happily give up my big glass for this lens if the IQ is just as good.  I do a ton of wildlife photography and hike to access most of it.  Currently I carry in an old 600 f4 and a 3002.8.  I also shoot from a kayak and carry 2 bodies with long and short glass.  I also travel and hate having to choose which lenses to fly with.

Well, maybe you are right.  Who needs this lens anyway,  maybe i'm the only one who could benefit from this lens....  Stupid canon...

LOL

Different strokes...

The 200-400 1.4x will be extremely versatile and much appreciated by those who benefit from the obvious flexibility offered by this lens. For any/everyone else, use whatever suits your needs.

[bdunbar79]

I'm a sports photographer and unfortunately I won't be buying it either.  If it only opens up to f/4, that won't be good enough for most of my stuff.

Edit:  No fault of the lens, but AU's scheduling practices, ie everything has to be outside at 7pm

[tron]

Well, maybe you are right.  Who needs this lens anyway,  maybe i'm the only one who could benefit from this lens....  Stupid canon...

If this is your profession so be it. But Canon is stupid in everything related to 200-400 in the sense that they announced it months er year(s) I mean before it will actually be available. They were not professional enough to say even approximately when it will be available

[canon816]

Well, maybe you are right.  Who needs this lens anyway,  maybe i'm the only one who could benefit from this lens....  Stupid canon...

If this is your profession so be it. But Canon is stupid in everything related to 200-400 in the sense that they announced it months er year(s) I mean before it will actually be available. They were not professional enough to say even approximately when it will be available

Nothing sells better then hype...  Maybe it is part of their marketing strategy... perhaps not so stupid after all.

[DzPhotography]

I want one

[tron]

Well, maybe you are right.  Who needs this lens anyway,  maybe i'm the only one who could benefit from this lens....  Stupid canon...

If this is your profession so be it. But Canon is stupid in everything related to 200-400 in the sense that they announced it months er year(s) I mean before it will actually be available. They were not professional enough to say even approximately when it will be available

Nothing sells better then hype...  Maybe it is part of their marketing strategy... perhaps not so stupid after all.

Maybe you are correct! Stupid? No But professional? Still NO!

[DzPhotography]

Well, maybe you are right.  Who needs this lens anyway,  maybe i'm the only one who could benefit from this lens....  Stupid canon...

If this is your profession so be it. But Canon is stupid in everything related to 200-400 in the sense that they announced it months er year(s) I mean before it will actually be available. They were not professional enough to say even approximately when it will be available

I don't remember it being officially announced... 

Nothing sells better then hype...  Maybe it is part of their marketing strategy... perhaps not so stupid after all.

Maybe you are correct! Stupid? No But professional? Still NO!

[dolina]

Dimension comparison between the 400, 500, 600 and 800.



400's 13.5-inch
500's 15.1-inch
200-400's 14.5-inch?

Reported to be heavier than the 400 (3850g). So does this mean the 200-400 is lighter than the 600 (3920g)?

[candyman]

I would replace my 70-300L if the IQ of the new 100-400 is better than the 70-300L
What do you think, will it be better?

[canon816]

I would replace my 70-300L if the IQ of the new 100-400 is better than the 70-300L
What do you think, will it be better?

If and/or when this lens comes out I doubt it will be better then the 70-300mm at 300mm.

The current 100-400 and the 70-300 lenses are both about the same for image quality at 300mm.  The real advantage is the extra 100mm in one lens.

I do hope that the new version of the 100-400 would be slightly better then the old one.  I would love this lens as an all purpose walk around/kayak wildlife lens.

I'd love the 200-400, but the more I think about it the more I am discouraged by the weight to consider it as a walking/kayaking lens.  Thus the 100-400 rumors get me very interested.

Like you... the IQ will be the deciding factor for me. 

[Greatland]

I spoke with someone who actually used it in London.  He said it was an awesome lens, for what that's worth...I have been on a waiting list for the 600 for several months now and still don't have it....right now that is the one that I can't wait to get my hands on...Got the 1Dx back in late July, after being on another list since November so I guess that is just kind of SOP with Canon right now.  Damn I want that new 600...sold my 500

[kirispupis]

The 200-400 will be out of my price range, but if I had the money it would certainly be near the top of my list.  It is an extremely versatile lens that I expect will become a favorite of wildlife photographers.

For me I am hoping for a new 100-400 lens.  My suspicions are a new version would have the following attributes
- Slightly lighter, but otherwise similarly sized to the old one
- Much sharper.  @400/5.6 this will be a very sharp lens - probably not near the level of the new 500 and 600 but significantly better than the old one.
- Much better AF.  The old version was slooooow.  The new one will be much better, at least for a 5.6 lens.
- Price about $3k

If it has those attributes I will buy it.

[neuroanatomist]

If it has those attributes I will buy it.

Me, too!