Field review of the new Canon 100-400

[Harv]

I found this on the Canon Europe Professional website this morning.....

http://cpn.canon-europe.com/content/education/technical/danny_green_on_ef100_400mm_f45_56l_is_ii_usm_zoom.do

 

[brad-man]

I don't know that I would call that a "review", but thanks for the link all the same.

 

[Harv]

I don't know that I would call that a "review", but thanks for the link all the same.

I agree that it`s not a full fledged review, but he touched on the elements of the lens that are important to me. Possibly to others as well.

 

[weixing]

Hi,
He mention it focus as fast as the big white prime and looking at the MTF chart, I think this will replace both the old EF 100-400mm L and the EF 400mm F5.6L.

Have a nice day.

 

[Harv]

Hi,
He mention it focus as fast as the big white prime and looking at the MTF chart, I think this will replace both the old EF 100-400mm L and the EF 400mm F5.6L.

Have a nice day.

That's what I'm hoping. I have mine on order.

 

[JonAustin]

Hi,
He mention it focus as fast as the big white prime and looking at the MTF chart, I think this will replace both the old EF 100-400mm L and the EF 400mm F5.6L.

Have a nice day.

I don't have any experience with the 400/5.6, but it gets rave reviews for its sharpness, so I'm looking forward to comparative reviews of it vs. the long end of the new 100-400 II.

 

[Bennymiata]

I'm really hanging out to try it.

 

[Cosmicbug]

Hi,
He mention it focus as fast as the big white prime and looking at the MTF chart, I think this will replace both the old EF 100-400mm L and the EF 400mm F5.6L.

Have a nice day.

I don't have any experience with the 400/5.6, but it gets rave reviews for its sharpness, so I'm looking forward to comparative reviews of it vs. the long end of the new 100-400 II.

I have the 400 f5.6 and it is very sharp. I am hoping this 100-400 will be as sharp or better as not having IS is a pain.

 

[Monte]

The picture in his article with him holding it is the first time I've caught the fact that it still has a barrel that moves in and out thus still making this lens a potential for sucking in dust and moisture like the old version that I have. That's a disappointment. I thought I read somewhere here that it didn't do that and it was a more "balanced: lens since it wouldn't change it's centre of gravity when zoomed in.

 

[Harv]

The picture in his article with him holding it is the first time I've caught the fact that it still has a barrel that moves in and out thus still making this lens a potential for sucking in dust and moisture like the old version that I have. That's a disappointment. I thought I read somewhere here that it didn't do that and it was a more "balanced: lens since it wouldn't change it's centre of gravity when zoomed in.

I have one of the new versions on pre-order. Having said that, I've had 4 copies of the original and never had one that "sucked in dust and moisture". I was just never able to find a sharp copy which is why I don't own one now.

 

[Monte]

I haven't had a dust or moisture problem either, just read lots about other people having or speculating this issue. I'm very careful with mine. I'm interested in the faster focusing of this lens if this really turns out to be the case not that I can justify replacing the one I have since I'm a casual photographer at best.

 

[JorritJ]

I wonder how many people have actually had the dust/moisture issue rather than heard about it.

I've had other photographers come up to me and mention this issue while I was actually shooting with it, but after further questioning they had never owned one, just heard the stories. The guy teaching the photography course my girlfriend took a few years back (this being a respected local photograhper) told her my lens choice was bad as well, because of this very issue; again after further investigation he ended up being a Nikonian who had never actually shot this lens.

The darned thing may be as sharp as a spoon, but I've used it all over the place, from scorching hot dusty African deserts to the cold wet Scandinavian mountains, and being a dustbuster is certainly not its biggest shortcoming.

 

[monkey44]

I've owned the same 100/400 since 1999 -- never had a dust issue or mold, or dirt, or moisture. I take very good care of my equipment, shoot a lot of wildlife and travel, and shot sports for much of that time as well. It gets a lot of use. I've heard this "dust pump' a lot, but not experienced it at all with this lens ...

My work is primarily in USA, desert (dry/dusty), mountains (cold), Southeast (humid, hot) and pretty much every climate. Maybe I got a "tight one" ... in fact, I'm looking at the new 100-400 MkII and wondering if I really need it. Altho' with a fourteen years old lens, the new Mk II is whispering in my ear -- especially the IS x 4 and the rotate focus.

Altho' I've used this lens all these years (hmm, what else?) I'm not a fan of the push-pull style - and would prefer the rotating focus ring like most other Canon lenses.

 

[BeenThere]

Art Morris (Birds as Art) has some preliminary field test info on his web site. He I is shooting a video for Canon touting this lens at Bosque del Apache.

 

[allanP]

... Altho' with a fourteen years old lens, the new Mk II is whispering in my ear -- especially the IS x 4 and the rotate focus.
Altho' I've used this lens all these years (hmm, what else?) I'm not a fan of the push-pull style - and would prefer the rotating focus ring like most other Canon lenses.

I think, You mean rotating zoom

 

[monkey44]

... Altho' with a fourteen years old lens, the new Mk II is whispering in my ear -- especially the IS x 4 and the rotate focus.
Altho' I've used this lens all these years (hmm, what else?) I'm not a fan of the push-pull style - and would prefer the rotating focus ring like most other Canon lenses.

I think, You mean rotating zoom

Yes, right, slap my paw please ... sometimes the typing runs faster than my brain. Looks like a great lens tho' and maybe it will win the "lens vs wallet" debate.

 

[craiglove]

Wow. It was my impression as well that the lens barrel would not extend. Judging from the photo, it does. That is one thing that I love about my 70-200 f4: The physical size never changes. It looks like the pump action is gone, anyway. I worked in the motion picture biz and one cameraman I worked with loved the 150-600 which he had converted at an Arri PL mount. As far as the dust sucking thing, it seems to be more of a rumor than anything. A few specks of dust inside a lens should have no effect on the IQ as far as I know. I am looking forward to this lens!