Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L IS II Confirmed

[Orangutan]

[1N.B. Being British, it pains me to use this analogy, but I though it would be more widely understood around here]

You may be gratified to know that "own goal" has started to work its way into American vernacular, particularly in politics.

 

[Don Haines]

The more the range, the lower the quality. You can design a better 3X zoom range lens than a 4X zoom range, plus it is easier to keep it constant aperture. This was a step forward.

The 100-400 II is regarded as probably the best zoom ever made... at 4x

And there's the 24-105 which is tolerably good.

And the third-party 150-600s.

Sorry, I am not buying the "4x is too hard" excuse. Canon like 70mm because it forces sales of the 24-70 standard zooms to cover useful prime lengths, not because it is a useful focal length itself.

Given the same technology, a 3X zoom will be better than a 4X zoom. You can not compare across different manufacturers, different materials, and different accuracies of machining.

This is the same as why, given the same materials and technology, a prime is always better than a zoom.

In a zoom lens, you have to make compromises as to which focal length(s) will perform best. The wider the zoom range, the greater the compromises.

Nowhere did I say that 4X is too hard. There are several very good 4X zooms out there, and yes, the 100-400II is a very good example..... but you can not fairly compare the brand new design, modern materials, new coatings, and far more precise machining of a 2017 lens to an older lens. It is those factors that make it better than the version 1 lens that it replaces.

Similarly, you can expect to see the same range of improvement in the new 70-200F4, and I expect it to be a sharper lens than the 100-400, because it is less range, and partly because it in newer.... and if they ever come out with another 400F5.6, it will spank them both for sharpness.

Pardon me for butting in or your argument friendly debate

I think that there is another factor at work in addition to zoom ratio and that is the number of lens designs that a zoom encompasses over its range. For example, a 100-400mm lens (all examples on 35mm format, before the pedantic cut in!) is a pure telephoto design, whereas a 24-105mm must change from a retro-focal optical layout at the wide end to a telephoto at the long end of its zoom range (other lens designs are possible, but I don’t know of any DSLR zooms that use them -I await correction...). This leads me to suspect that it is somewhat easier to design a high performance, 4x zoom ratio pure telephoto design than a 4x “normal zoom” (e.g. a 24-105), which would explain why there are now quite a few decent 100-400mm zooms on the market, but no one has yet “hit a home run”1 with a 24-105mm.

[1N.B. Being British, it pains me to use this analogy, but I though it would be more widely understood around here]

You are correct, telephoto is easier than wide.

A typical telephoto design has easy angles and does not bend the light sharply, that makes CA consirably asier to correct, while wide angle lenses, and in particular ultra-wide lenses, bend the light very sharply and are a nightmare to design.

I thought it was implied earlier that in saying 3X or 4X zooms, thatthe 4X zoom was an extension of the range and not a completely different range. My bad!

 

[Sabaki]

If memory serves, this lens was not on the approved for the 5DSR body so will the new body bring the required resolution bump to make said list?

 

[AvTvM]

If memory serves, this lens was not on the approved for the 5DSR body so will the new body bring the required resolution bump to make said list?

Probably due to some simple typo/s the 70-200/4 L IS was not on the first version of that list, published by some of the internet portals.
http://www.canonrumors.com/canon-releases-recommended-lenses-for-eos-5ds-eos-5ds-r/

The list on Canon's own 5DS R product site does include the 70-200/4 L IS (but not the non IS version).
https://www.canon-europe.com/for_home/product_finder/cameras/digital_slr/eos_5ds_r/
scroll down halfway and select "zoom lenses"

Zoom lenses
EF 8-15mm f/4L Fisheye USM
EF 11-24mm f/4L USM
EF 16-35mm f/4L IS USM
EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II USM
EF 24-70mm f/4L IS USM
EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM
EF 70-200mm f4L IS USM
EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6L IS USM
EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS II USM
EF 200-400mm f/4L IS USM Extender 1.4x

also: list includes EF 50/1.8 STM instead of EF 50/1.8 II on first published version of that list

So the current version 70-200/4 L IS definitely can handle a 50 MP Canon sensor (at least) as well as the very cheapest of all Canon EF lenses.

 

[scyrene]

Oh, still a 70-200. Shame they couldn't wide the short-end to 50mm and it'd be a perfect gap-filler in the bag. Lovely for walkaround when the 70mm is just too much.

But when was the last time Canon introduced a new zoom range? 200-400?

The 11-24 is newer.

Sorry, I am not buying the "4x is too hard" excuse.

Of course, they can and do make top notch zooms with massive ratios, but they tend to cost a lot more - there's a 50-1000mm lens that costs $70k, for example.

 

[pgeezer]

Please offer it in black!

 

[Sabaki]

If memory serves, this lens was not on the approved for the 5DSR body so will the new body bring the required resolution bump to make said list?

Probably due to some simple typo/s the 70-200/4 L IS was not on the first version of that list, published by some of the internet portals.
http://www.canonrumors.com/canon-releases-recommended-lenses-for-eos-5ds-eos-5ds-r/

The list on Canon's own 5DS R product site does include the 70-200/4 L IS (but not the non IS version).
https://www.canon-europe.com/for_home/product_finder/cameras/digital_slr/eos_5ds_r/
scroll down halfway and select "zoom lenses"

Zoom lenses
EF 8-15mm f/4L Fisheye USM
EF 11-24mm f/4L USM
EF 16-35mm f/4L IS USM
EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II USM
EF 24-70mm f/4L IS USM
EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM
EF 70-200mm f4L IS USM
EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6L IS USM
EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS II USM
EF 200-400mm f/4L IS USM Extender 1.4x

also: list includes EF 50/1.8 STM instead of EF 50/1.8 II on first published version of that list

So the current version 70-200/4 L IS definitely can handle a 50 MP Canon sensor (at least) as well as the very cheapest of all Canon EF lenses.

Thank you AvTvM! Much appreciated

 

[privatebydesign]

If memory serves, this lens was not on the approved for the 5DSR body so will the new body bring the required resolution bump to make said list?

Probably due to some simple typo/s the 70-200/4 L IS was not on the first version of that list, published by some of the internet portals.
http://www.canonrumors.com/canon-releases-recommended-lenses-for-eos-5ds-eos-5ds-r/

The list on Canon's own 5DS R product site does include the 70-200/4 L IS (but not the non IS version).
https://www.canon-europe.com/for_home/product_finder/cameras/digital_slr/eos_5ds_r/
scroll down halfway and select "zoom lenses"

Zoom lenses
EF 8-15mm f/4L Fisheye USM
EF 11-24mm f/4L USM
EF 16-35mm f/4L IS USM
EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II USM
EF 24-70mm f/4L IS USM
EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM
EF 70-200mm f4L IS USM
EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6L IS USM
EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS II USM
EF 200-400mm f/4L IS USM Extender 1.4x

also: list includes EF 50/1.8 STM instead of EF 50/1.8 II on first published version of that list

So the current version 70-200/4 L IS definitely can handle a 50 MP Canon sensor (at least) as well as the very cheapest of all Canon EF lenses.

Thank you AvTvM! Much appreciated

And anybody that believes that clearly buys into the marketing pitch of buying lenses rather than has even a modicum of understanding of how system resolution works.

Cut and pasted from a similarly misinformed thread in.. (So many times).

System resolution can be broadly shorthanded down to this equation, it isn't perfect but pretty close.

tsr = 1/sqrt((1/lsr) ² + (1/ssr) ² )

Where tsr is total spatial resolution, lsr is lens spatial resolution, and ssr is sensor spatial resolution.

So if, for example, we have a sensor that can resolve 100 lppmm, and a lens that can resolve 100 lppmm we get this

1/sqrt((1/100) ² + (1/100) ² ) = tsr of 71 lppmm

Leave the same lens on, good or bad, and double the sensor resolution to 200 lppmm

1/sqrt((1/100) ² + (1/200) ² ) = tsr of 89 lppmm


You will notice that the system resolution, even in this simplified form, can never resolve 100% of the lowest performing portion of that system, so if a 24MP sensor is returning 80% of the potential of a lens then a 50MP sensor might return 90%, how useful that is in real life is a moot point, but it does illustrate that even the most modest lens will show increased resolution when put in front of a higher resolving sensor.

http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=34095.msg699410#msg699410
http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=26938.msg595108#msg595108
http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=27616.msg545641#msg545641

 

[Ozarker]

Please offer it in black!

Red plaid is the only other option besides white.

 

[geekpower]

anyone care to speculate on whether this version will jump from 67mm filters to 72mm?

 

[slclick]

anyone care to speculate on whether this version will jump from 67mm filters to 72mm?

That's a given

 

[Talys]

Please offer it in black!

Red plaid is the only other option besides white.

Polished Chrome.

There are some great selling features: First, it reflects light even better than white to keep your lens cool, in the California heat! Second, it employs patent-pending, InstaGlance technology, which will make your subjects look straight at your lens when they see the sun reflect off of it, allowing you to capture perfect eye contact angles.

 

[Ozarker]

Please offer it in black!

Red plaid is the only other option besides white.

Polished Chrome.

There are some great selling features: First, it reflects light even better than white to keep your lens cool, in the California heat! Second, it employs patent-pending, InstaGlance technology, which will make your subjects look straight at your lens when they see the sun reflect off of it, allowing you to capture perfect eye contact angles.

Backlighting won't be a problem anymore. True. Well, as long as I can get flames painted on... I hear there might be a special Harley-Davidson edition. I'd certainly pay an extra $250 to haul that logo around.

Seriously... I'm going to print out a Sony logo to tape on my 5D Mark III. I can't afford the best anymore and the neighbors are starting to stare. From what I understand, just having the logo on my camera will make me double plus good! Maybe even as good as Peter Lik! Now that I think about it, that is an unfortunate name. Should have named him Sue.

 

[Sporgon]

So don't expect AF miracles with your new Canon 5DIII and your 1990 EF 85/1.8

Funny you mention that. I have had my EF 85mm 1.8 since the 90's. Always hit and miss with AF. From a Canon A2e to Digital Rebel to 30D to 70D to 5DII. I now have a 5DIV and guess what, suddenly the AF is right on the money. From maybe 40% of all pictures being tack sharp, the rate went to probably 90% with the 5DIV. Unfortunately it's a little late as I just got a EF 85MM 1.4....

Actually I have had a similar experience with the 85/1.8 since moving from the 5DII also, but I got the 5DS rather than 5DIV. The reliability of the AF is greatly improved, and I'd agree with you, maybe 90% so it is useable whereas before the risk of OOF was just too great. However it is not as 100% on the nail as the 35/2 IS, 40/2.8 and also the 28/2.8 IS though I appreciate that it's not really a fair comparison in required accuracy.