Is the EF 70-200mm f/4L IS II Still Being Announced This Month?

[Canon Rumors Guy]

We <a href="http://www.canonrumors.com/the-canon-ef-70-200mm-f-4l-is-ii-is-coming-in-april-cr3/">reported in March of this year</a> that the upcoming Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L IS II was going to be announced this month.</p>
<p>We’re now nearing the end of April and we haven’t heard anything further about this lens announcement. We have asked around, but for the moment we’re just getting silence on the matter.</p>
<p>It’s not unusual for lens announcements to move, even at the last minute. The last one to suffer this fate was the EF 16-35mm f/2.8L III, which was originally to be announced in June of 2016, but was delayed until August 24, 2018. The other recently delayed product from Canon was the Speedlite 470EX-AI, which was originally going to be announced in the summer of 2017, but was held off until February of this year.</p>
<p>The lens is coming and the month isn’t over yet, but we cannot update you any further on when EF 70-200mm f/4L IS II is going to be officially announced.</p>
<p>I will say that I am pleasantly surprised about how many people seem to be looking forward to this lens.</p>
<span id="pty_trigger"></span>

 

[criscokkat]

I hope soon, I am planning to buy this lens. I haven't seen any real discount on the current V2 version.

 

[neonlight]

Hmm.. the original is an excellent performer. It's hard to see what an update might offer. Perhaps a quieter AF mechanism and closer MFD would be good but that's all I would want in an update.

 

[tmc784]

Don't want a F/4, F/2.8 is versatile.

 

[tron]

Hmm.. the original is an excellent performer. It's hard to see what an update might offer. Perhaps a quieter AF mechanism and closer MFD would be good but that's all I would want in an update.

Exactly! This wasn't an urgent update.

 

[Talys]

Hmm.. the original is an excellent performer. It's hard to see what an update might offer. Perhaps a quieter AF mechanism and closer MFD would be good but that's all I would want in an update.

Exactly! This wasn't an urgent update.

Closer MFD for sure.
Better & included tripod ring would be nice.
Whiter paint!

 

[maxfactor9933]

canon keep releasing EF lenses. kinda hints their upcoming ML cameras can handle EF lenses without hassle

 

[AuroraChaserDoug]

Every time I think about upgrading my 70-200 f4 for a 70-200 f2.8 to finish my f2.8 zoom collection, my 70-200 f4L IS USM gets the job done. It gets the job done after I remember to ignore the IS motors spinning up and take a few more steps back to acquire minimum focus distance. A replacement would need to have some great specs to replace the original.

 

[mb66energy]

Hmm.. the original is an excellent performer. It's hard to see what an update might offer. Perhaps a quieter AF mechanism and closer MFD would be good but that's all I would want in an update.

Same here. I upgraded from the non-IS version that is a very good performer and it is substantially better on FF and high MPix APS-C. I payed roughtly 600 EUR 2nd hand for a 8 month old lens which seemed fresh from production.
It's my first IS lens and I am impressed how helpful it is: this and very usable ISO 1600 on current 24MPix sensors opens up a whole new world without tripod.
Maybe some built-in hood? Closer MFD as you said? 1 stop improvement in IS? To best Nikons and Tamrons alternatives (and maybe coming Sigma counterpart)?

At least for me an update for the 1.4 50 is much more important: very good IQ at f/1.4, excellent from f/2.0 + 11 blade diaphragm + IS + reasonable size/weight is the next lens I buy I would buy if available.

 

[Tyroop]

Don't want a F/4, F/2.8 is versatile.

The f/2.8 is also very big and very heavy. No thank you.

The rumors on this site are normally quite accurate, but I was surprised with this particular one because the lens it will replace is already excellent - I've had mine since 2006. The only criticism I hear is noisy IS, but that hardly justifies bringing out a new version.

It also surprises me that Canon would upgrade this superb lens before upgrading the EF 400mm f/5.6L to an IS version, and the EF 300mm f/4L IS is at least a decade overdue for an optics and IS update.

 

[hendrik-sg]

The original one, is a very expensively built lens, with magnesium barrel, many lens elements, USM focus etc. It's build to the highest standards (except the superteles maybe). This in mind, the selling price is very reasonable. The same is true for the much cheaper non IS version. Not having the numbers, i would expect the IS version is selling in much higher numbers.

So for me it looks obvious, that they want to optimize production costs and to increase the price by adding some goodies which cost not much, newer coatings for exapmple and less weight (plastic barrel)

 

[riker]

That's right, I'm checking the site twice a day to see if it is out yet

 

[Steve Balcombe]

The rumors on this site are normally quite accurate, but I was surprised with this particular one because the lens it will replace is already excellent - I've had mine since 2006. The only criticism I hear is noisy IS, but that hardly justifies bringing out a new version.

How do you update a lens which is almost faultless but is perceived as old? Just about the only thing I would change is to make it shorter (physically I mean), but only if that didn't impact on the IQ and only if it was still Extender-compatible. An internally-zooming 70-200 which fits in a standard compartment in my bag might persuade me to upgrade.

It also surprises me that Canon would upgrade this superb lens before upgrading the EF 400mm f/5.6L to an IS version, and the EF 300mm f/4L IS is at least a decade overdue for an optics and IS update.

Agreed. The 300 needs current-generation IS and an optical redesign to get rid of the the LoCA. Important things to keep are the excellent IQ at MFD, and the built-in hood.

If a new 300/4 performed well enough with a 1.4x III, there might be no need for a new 400/5.6. That could also make it easier to fit a 500/5.6L IS into the lineup.

 

[LesC]

Better AF mechanism would be good - the existing model is known for focus slipping when held vertically - mines currently with Canon for repair for this exact fault.

 

[Etienne]

Every time there's a new L lens, a slew of people say that it isn't needed because the current one is just so damn good. Then the reviews come out showing (usually) that the new one blows the old one away.
Maybe Canon knows a thing or two that the fans don't?

 

[Etienne]

BTW ... I have the 70-200 f/2.8L IS II and I would still consider the new f/4 IS II. There are a lot of times that the f/2.8 stays home because it's just too heavy. There's a place for both in my kit: The f/2.8 when it just has to be so, and the f/4 when low weight is a priority.

 

[stevelee]

Sort of a remark and sort of a question re:f/4 vs. f/2.8 models:

For my purposes, it seems that the IS and improved high-ISO performance of modern lenses and bodies makes that extra stop in speed much less often needed, so hardly worth the extra cost and lugging around the extra weight of the faster lens.

Is that a reasonable perspective and rational tradeoff?

That's not to say I begrudge anyone's preferring the f/2.8 for their purposes, such as need for the extra stop or blurrier backgrounds. It's just those are less often major considerations for me than apparently they are for others.

 

[chrysoberyl]

It also surprises me that Canon would upgrade this superb lens before upgrading the EF 400mm f/5.6L to an IS version, and the EF 300mm f/4L IS is at least a decade overdue for an optics and IS update.

This, exactly! I will not buy this 70-200, but I would buy either or both 300L and 400L.

 

[slclick]

It also surprises me that Canon would upgrade this superb lens before upgrading the EF 400mm f/5.6L to an IS version, and the EF 300mm f/4L IS is at least a decade overdue for an optics and IS update.

This, exactly! I will not buy this 70-200, but I would buy either or both 300L and 400L.

I totally get your frustration but we who want those two lenses updated are in the minority and the 70-200 crowd is much more vast.

 

[chrysoberyl]

I totally get your frustration but we who want those two lenses updated are in the minority and the 70-200 crowd is much more vast.

I have doubt that you are correct and it makes good business sense for Canon to proceed accordingly. What I don't get is why no 50mm 1.4 has been offered. That I would consider, too.

Sorry to go off-topic.