Review - Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS II

[Canon Rumors Guy]

Discuss our review of the Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS II here.

 

[Maximilian]

Once again a big "THANK YOU!" for this good and informative review.

I think, I'll have to start saving my pennies to upgrade.
But looking at the price chart it also has to come down a bit more to justify the purchase.

Edit: Thanks, Dustin, esp. for the detailed pro/con breakdown and comparison to V1 and the other zooms.

 

[AlanF]

Here are some reviews that include measurements of MTFs, stops of IS etc. The objektivtest.se one has MTF measurements of the lens plus 1.4xTC III, and you can compare it with the Tamron 150-600mm and the Sigma 150-600mm S on the same site. The Canon is measured to be slightly sharper at 560mm than the others at a nominal 600mm on FF, and much more so on crop.

https://www.ephotozine.com/article/canon-ef-100-400mm-f-4-5-5-6l-is-ii-usm-lens-review-26892

http://www.lenstip.com/index.html?test=obiektywu&test_ob=439

http://www.photozone.de/canon_eos_ff/896-canon100400f4556is2

http://www.objektivtest.se/tester/canon-ef-100-400-mm-f45-56-l-is-ii-usm-test/

http://www.dxomark.com/Lenses/Canon/Canon-EF-400mm-F4-DO-IS-II-USM-mounted-on-Canon-EOS-1Dx__753

 

[setterguy]

Great review of the lens! Provides the nonprofessional with a down to earth evaluation of its capabilities and short comings which seem to be very minimal. Thanks again!

 

[HighLowISO]

Good Review. Being an early adopter of the original 100-400mm lens, I really want this lens. Since I already have the original though I've been trying to find this one at a good price and missed the refurb sales so far. In the mean time I got the Sigma for just $700 (the best lens deal or what), which might work better on my 5DII since I can get the longer reach I want without the extender and retain AF. Still this review still convinces me right now that I need this lens in my collection. The size of the Sigma makes me see of it as more of a wildlife only lens, and the Canon one more multipurpose. If the skies clear up today I'll take my Sigma out for its first test, and maybe I'll have a different opinion.

Love where Canon is going with their recent lenses, but of course could always wish for better prices, although they seem fine for professional photographers.

Not sure the review said anything that has not already been said a few times about this popular lens, but it was very clear and covered the two main options all in the one review.

I guess I keep watching for a deal on this one as I don't really need any other Canon lens.

 

[glness]

I thought this was an accurate, in-depth look at this lens. I might add one thing. Your review says, "Over its native focal length I would give the advantage to the Canon over the Tamron and Sigma variants in overall sharpness, particularly towards the periphery of the image." However, I think the advantage continues even with a 1.4 Extender III attached on the Canon. Yes, the 100-400 II with 1.4x III at 560mm has a ⅔ stop disadvantage (f/8.0 vs. f/6.3) compared to the 600mm nominal focal length of the Tamron 150-600 and both Sigma 150-600 lenses, but the 100-400 II's image quality at 560mm with 1.4x III attached exceeds that of the Tamron and Sigma lenses at 600mm especially at the periphery. Take a look at the comparisons here to see the actual difference:

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=972&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=5&API=2&LensComp=929&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=5&APIComp=0

AlanF in this forum has also posted some other useful comparison tools. Thanks again for your thorough review. All the lenses above represent good options for photographers, but your review helps provide another wonderful decision-making resource for people trying to find the best lens for their shooting situations!

 

[AlanF]

It's really worth mentioning how well the 100-400mm II goes with the 7DII. At 400mm on the 7DII at f/5.6, it has better resolution (longer reach) than the Tamron or Sigma C at 600mm on FF. They also have to be used at f/8 for the best images, so the 7DII gets a stop extra of light, which compensates for the small sensor.

 

[Sabaki]

Hi Dustin

Thank you so very, very much for this review.

I really love my 400 f/5.6 but I've found myself in more than a few situations where it's fixed focal length has inhibited me and thus I began considering selling it for the 100-400 mkii. You've pretty much made up my mind now for me.

Do you have experience with the 400 f/5.6 and if do, how would you compare IQ and AF to the 100-400 mkii?

Really hope you reply to this.

Thanks!

 

[Marauder]

Thanks for another great review Dustin! I just recently (Black Friday) purchased the 7D II and I am now considering replacement of my Canon 100-400 model 1. The new lens sounds awesome--just wish the price would come down a bit here in Canada, but that's unlikely unless out $ recovers substantially!

Still, lots of food for thought! 8)

 

[sleepnever]

Good review. I agree with all of it, having used the original 100-400 Mk1 and then rented the Mk2 at least twice before purchasing it on Canon's big refurb sale this year for $1495!

I mainly do landscapes and while I know the power of a prime, I needed versatility to go with my wide angle and this lens fit. It is plenty sharp, the 1.4x III extender works great on my 5D3 and gives me the focal ranges I like.

Some shots of mine using this lens. Some are landscape, some are close range, some are test shots. These are all handheld btw.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/sleepneverstudios/19895790151/
https://www.flickr.com/photos/sleepneverstudios/19846354085/
https://www.flickr.com/photos/sleepneverstudios/18615075085/
https://www.flickr.com/photos/sleepneverstudios/18424509618/
https://www.flickr.com/photos/sleepneverstudios/18425243050/
https://www.flickr.com/photos/sleepneverstudios/15967491879/

 

[hockeydad]

I agree with most of this review. I prefer the push-pull zoom of the original 100-400. With the zoom ring I have to swing my hand completely over the top the lens or reposition my hand to continue to the end of the zoom. This causes difficulty in tracking a subject and lost opportunities to capture images. As for not performing in light-challenging situations, this lens beats the original 100-400 hands down. I have found nearly no hunting/searching for auto focus in low-light situations and the focus is at least twice as fast. This was a problem with the original lens. I find the image quality to be marginally better than the original 100-400. I had to hold the original 100-400 slightly off its extremes, say 110-390mm for good images. I can fully extend and retract with the new lens and get good images.
I really like my Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS II!

 

[stochasticmotions]

I bought this lens shortly after it came out, had the original for about 8 years. Most of my shooting is with this lens (and sometimes the kenko 1.4X teleconverter). There is a very noticeable improvement in sharpness on the new lens across the frame and the image stabilizer is definitely better. I still find that I prefer the push/pull zoom for quickly finding and pulling in on a moving subject, but the implementation of the twist zoom on the new lens is one of the smoothest I have used. The only downside that I have noticed is that I have more dust on the inside of the new lens in 3 months than I saw on the original in 8 years. Not sure why, but it is very surprising.

 

[Pieter]

Yes - just to add another enthusiastic confirmation of the power of the 7D II and this lens. For me this combination effectively replaced the cumbersome set of 5D III, 300mm f/4, a 1.4x TC, and the 100 mm f/2.8 macro lens for handheld nature photography, due to the combination of long reach, short focusing distance, and the high pixel count of the amazing 7D II. I'd say the lens is worth the money - and the 7D II is actually somewhat of a bargain. Here's a recent picture-

 

[tomscott]

Great review

Have to agree the 100-400mm and 7DMKII is an epic combo. Stick the 1.4 III in for those pinch moments and its a truly incredible package.

 

[AJ]

I thought this was an accurate, in-depth look at this lens. I might add one thing. Your review says, "Over its native focal length I would give the advantage to the Canon over the Tamron and Sigma variants in overall sharpness, particularly towards the periphery of the image." However, I think the advantage continues even with a 1.4 Extender III attached on the Canon. Yes, the 100-400 II with 1.4x III at 560mm has a ⅔ stop disadvantage (f/8.0 vs. f/6.3) compared to the 600mm nominal focal length of the Tamron 150-600 and both Sigma 150-600 lenses, but the 100-400 II's image quality at 560mm with 1.4x III attached exceeds that of the Tamron and Sigma lenses at 600mm especially at the periphery. Take a look at the comparisons here to see the actual difference:

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=972&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=5&API=2&LensComp=929&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=5&APIComp=0

AlanF in this forum has also posted some other useful comparison tools. Thanks again for your thorough review. All the lenses above represent good options for photographers, but your review helps provide another wonderful decision-making resource for people trying to find the best lens for their shooting situations!

Comparison at 400 mm
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=972&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=4&API=2&LensComp=929&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=3&APIComp=1
Comparison to the Sigma contemporary at 560/600 mm
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=972&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=5&API=2&LensComp=990&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=7&APIComp=2
Less of a difference...

 

[CanoKnight]

Following on the heels of 100-400 II I have no doubt the 200-600 4.5/5.6 is going to be every bit as stellar. The price is the big question.

 

[Jan Jasinski]

I can confirm the IS is incredible on this lens!
Below is handheld at 1/5th!

 

[Click]

Pretty cool shot, Jan.

 

[scyrene]

Yes - just to add another enthusiastic confirmation of the power of the 7D II and this lens. For me this combination effectively replaced the cumbersome set of 5D III, 300mm f/4, a 1.4x TC, and the 100 mm f/2.8 macro lens for handheld nature photography, due to the combination of long reach, short focusing distance, and the high pixel count of the amazing 7D II. I'd say the lens is worth the money - and the 7D II is actually somewhat of a bargain. Here's a recent picture-

Awesome shot, Pieter!

 

[scyrene]

I can confirm the IS is incredible on this lens!
Below is handheld at 1/5th!

Nice. Is that mode 2?