EF 100-400 Version 2 Coming [CR2]

M

MILTON

Guest
The 100-400 is principally a bird shooter lens, this is why you need it to:
1-have very fast AF
2-be a very sharp-image catcher
3-have a fast zoom-in/out system as the push/pull
4-be adapted to support the high pixel density of the new cameras
5-have a last generation and on-tripod-efficient IS system for panning etc.
6-to be water and dust resistant
7-be "light-weight"

You have to look at the 100-400 as a "400mm f/5.6 L series zoom", with the adding of a fast zoom system to let you catch your escaping sobjects, to understand the reason of it's being, that's it!!!

For ceremonies, in door sports, etc., you can take one of the 70-200 S, 70-300, 28-300... of course i will suggest the magnific 70-200 f/2.8L IS II...

When the 100-400 f/4.5-5.6L IS II will be released, I'm going to be one the already sure buyers!!!
 
S

scalesusa

Guest
Canon has made 100-300, 70-300, and 75-300 models galore. That focal length range obviously sells well. Those who like this focal length range will make it very popular. My 100-400mm L is excellent, and when telescoped, it fits pretty well in a camera bag. 300mm is not enough for my FF and 1DMKIII, I'd like to have longer. But then my 600mm f/4 wasn't long enough either, so I have to be happy with 400mm.
 
A

Ago

Guest
This lens has very strong position among non professional nature photographers, and even having obvious issues it still is a great choice.
In my opinion, if Canon will be modest and keep the price in the similar range, than an upgrade will be a great news, even for somebody like me, that hate constantly swapping equipment this may be tempting offer.
If the price will exceed what semi pro, and advanced amateurs will pay for, than this will be a flop, since this is not a lens that professionals will chose for that focal range.
 
S

scalesusa

Guest
I do not think that everyone needs every lens. If you don't, and I don't, thats fine, we have other lenses we use, however many others will want this lens, and thats fine, more power to them!

If Canon only made the lenses that I use, 90% of their lenses would go away, and there would be lots of unhappy photographers.
 
P

PorkyKat

Guest
I've owned a good version of a 100-400 for about 4 years and I use it a lot and have generally been very pleased with the results. If I've managed to keep it steady :). I'd be very interested in an updated version that had better IS and IQ. Physically smaller or weighing less would also be an advantage, but aren't essential.

I'm happy with f4-f5.6 and have a good idea what would happen (to size and price) if Canon made it constant F4.

If I can buy it from a retailer for ~£1500 I'd buy one, significantly more £1500 I'd have to think long and hard about it.
 
T

tzalmagor

Guest
scalesusa said:
Canon has made 100-300, 70-300, and 75-300 models galore. That focal length range obviously sells well. Those who like this focal length range will make it very popular. My 100-400mm L is excellent, and when telescoped, it fits pretty well in a camera bag. 300mm is not enough for my FF and 1DMKIII, I'd like to have longer. But then my 600mm f/4 wasn't long enough either, so I have to be happy with 400mm.
I'm wondering for a long time why is there a 'knee' at the 300mm line - Canon has plenty of primes and zooms at a variety of prices up to 300mm, but only one zoom and view primes over the 300mm point, and those are rahter expensive.

Is this due to customer demand, or is there something in the physics behind making those lenses ?
 
S

scalesusa

Guest
Pricing is likely set by estimating the number of sales, and then amortizing the development and tooling cost. Then, the cost of components assembly and testing. A reserve is created for warranty cost.

Advertising, cost of salesmen, transportation, cost of money for keeping a stock in inventory, etc is also added in.

Its likely that the amortized cost of development and tooling is much higher for lenses that sell only a small number of copies, and the cost of special one of a kind or limited production components is also very high.

Then, there is profit. Canon likely makes much of their profit from lens sales, and sell bodies for a small markup, knowing that owners will then have to shell out for lenses.

I'd expect that the actual cost of production was a small part of the final selling price.