I’m certainly wrong on this, but I have always considered telescopic zooms as cheap compromises. Dust filtration and solidity are among my fears with that kind of lenses.The EF 70-300L and 100-400L II have the same design, as do the standard (24/28-xx) L zooms for RF and EF.
I don't see how it is much cheaper to manufacture, but the ease of storing in a bag seems to be a preference among many here. Personally, with a few "critical" lenses such as the 70-200mm f/2.8L IS, I don't mind needing some extra space to accommodate a more dust and weather resistant design, but Canon has a different agenda from any individual photographer!I’m certainly wrong on this, but I have always considered telescopic zooms as cheap compromises. Dust filtration and solidity are among my fears with that kind of lenses.
As long as they don't make it to the sensor . . .Not all that worried about a few dust specs.
I am sure it has been posted but worth re-posting
I've been doing lens stuff for a long time now. Long time. Trust me; it's hard to remain polite the 843,911th time some newbie goes into hysterics because there's dust in their lens. Telling them it doesn't matter a bit, and that all their other lenses have dust they just can't see ( because...www.lensrentals.com
The smiley doesn‘t „mean“ so much at all.What is a smiley supposed to mean in the context of calling something a scheme?
Canon is trying to offer a product that competes well in a saturated market. What do you want them to do, give it away for free?