When is the New 100-400 Coming?

[greger]

I agree with brad-man and Marsu42, but I don't want to upgrade because I've only had mine for a month and am pleased
so far. I think stock of vs 1 will go quickly. The price of vs 2 will be the reason. As to when will we see this lens? Soon.
It will have no effect on sales of the new 200-400 lens as it is aimed at a different photographer than most of us.

 

[RGF]

If they wait for sales on the 200-400 it could be 6 months before the initial rush is over.

May use the demand to determine price - if there is resistant to the 200-400 they may price the 100-400 higher since they will think everyone is waiting for a lower priced alternative. If 200-400 sales are strong, then they go with a lower price since they have already milked the market.

Wait and wait and wait and eventually see - maybe

 

[mrsfotografie]

<p>Canon may also be waiting to see how the EF 200-400 f/4L IS 1.4x sells, would people really hold off buying it if a new 100-400 was available?</p>

HUH?? at a price of $12,000....compared to say...$3000 at the high end for a updated new 100-400...I dont think the 200-400 is even on anyones radar except for the high rollers who actually "use" the lens everyday for its intended use... I'll never buy a 200-400 at my level maybe rent a few times and thats it..

Agreed, there's really very little shared ground (market share) for these lenses. Now if Canon would release a 200-400 f/4 without the built-in TC, that would be something of a different story (I think Nikon has a great offering in this respect).

 

[JPAZ]

If they produce a 100-400 that's a "twist" and is as light and small as my 70-200 F/4 IS with 4 stop IS and IQ as good as what we've got now, and if the price is less than $2000, I would jump. But, that is impossible form an engineering and design and financial perspective.

 

[ddashti]

Canon would make a lot of money if the 100-400 were to be released alongside the 7D Mark II.
So either both will be released in July, or in 2014...

 

[tron]

If they produce a 100-400 that's a "twist" and is as light and small as my 70-200 F/4 IS with 4 stop IS and IQ as good as what we've got now, and if the price is less than $2000, I would jump. But, that is impossible form an engineering and design and financial perspective.

If I were to just guess (I obviously have NO inside information) I would say that it would look like the bigger (and heavier) brother of 70-300L ... Now the price would be higher too...

 

[viggen61]

Canon would make a lot of money if the 100-400 were to be released alongside the 7D Mark II.
So either both will be released in July, or in 2014...

+1

Though my wallet is hoping Canon staggers the introductions...

 

[viggen61]

If they produce a 100-400 that's a "twist" and is as light and small as my 70-200 F/4 IS with 4 stop IS and IQ as good as what we've got now, and if the price is less than $2000, I would jump. But, that is impossible form an engineering and design and financial perspective.

If I were to just guess (I obviously have NO inside information) I would say that it would look like the bigger (and heavier) brother of 70-300L ... Now the price would be higher too...

I'd hope so! I love the compactness of the current 100-400 at 100. Fits nicely in a sling backpack.

 

[iowapipe]

if you have sources to tell you that there are prototypes.
why don´t they tell you at least if it is a push-pull design or not?

Personally I doubt CR has any good inside information about Canon :-> though there's a beta tester around here that often comments on current prototypes and seems to be very reliable...

... but concerning your question, the answer most likely would be that there are several prototypes with different characteristics and designs, and only God and Canon knows which one they'll select for production.

We’re told that the current 100-400 still sells at an amazing clip and outpaces the 70-300L by a 4 to 1 margin.

Now *that* is a surprising and interesting piece of information, if it's true and since Canon is not in the habit of replacing best-selling lenses without a good reason it means one of these two things:

1. (less likely) The release of a new 100-400 will take some time after all because there's no immediate market pressure

2. (more likely) The new 100-400 will be much more expensive, i.e. generating more profit for Canon, and will be an "upgrade" to the existing lens rather than a replacement on the same level - more like 24-70 mk1 to mk2.

But, but but: the price of the mk2 when introduced was nearly the same as the mk1 when that lens was new on the market. So, while it seems to current buyers that the new version is so much more expensive, it is actually the fact that the old lens had come down in price quite a bit over the years.

I haven't looked up the price of the 100-400 when it was first introduced, but since lenses follow a similar trend across the board; I would assume the new lens would of course be more expensive than the old lens when it hits the market.

 

[veng]

I'm really surprised by the 4 to 1 out selling of the 70-300. The 70-300 is vastly superior to the 100-400 from 70-300mm. While no, it's not a great birding lens, it's extra 2 stops of IS and extra IQ are above and beyond the 100-400. As far as the method by which it zooms, is a complete non-issue.

 

[candyman]

I'm really surprised by the 4 to 1 out selling of the 70-300. The 70-300 is vastly superior to the 100-400 from 70-300mm. While no, it's not a great birding lens, it's extra 2 stops of IS and extra IQ are above and beyond the 100-400. As far as the method by which it zooms, is a complete non-issue.

I am surprised too.
The 300mm on crop 1.6 (for example 7D) is still 480mm. That is more than 300 or 400mm on FF.
Of course light conditions must be good - so there is a little limitation

 

[mrsfotografie]

I'm really surprised by the 4 to 1 out selling of the 70-300. The 70-300 is vastly superior to the 100-400 from 70-300mm. While no, it's not a great birding lens, it's extra 2 stops of IS and extra IQ are above and beyond the 100-400. As far as the method by which it zooms, is a complete non-issue.

I am surprised too.
The 300mm on crop 1.6 (for example 7D) is still 480mm. That is more than 300 or 400mm on FF.
Of course light conditions must be good - so there is a little limitation

I'm not so surprised considering most people probably use the 100-400 on a crop, that gives you 640 mm equivalent Add to this the fact the 100-400 is still the best way to get to 400 mm with IS on a budget, and that it 'collapses' to a very reasonable size as mentioned earlier, still make this lens a winner.

 

[Rick]

<p>The new 100-400 does indeed exist and is being actively tested, however Canon is in no rush to announce the lens. We’re told that the current 100-400 still sells at an amazing clip and outpaces the 70-300L by a 4 to 1 margin.</p>

This is an astounding number if true.

Good Lord, people. If you want lower prices and/or better lenses, quit buying these lenses to simply keep up with the Joneses. And, quit listening to fanbois.

 

[neuroanatomist]

<p>The new 100-400 does indeed exist and is being actively tested, however Canon is in no rush to announce the lens. We’re told that the current 100-400 still sells at an amazing clip and outpaces the 70-300L by a 4 to 1 margin.</p>

This is an astounding number if true.

Good Lord, people. If you want lower prices and/or better lenses, quit buying these lenses to simply keep up with the Joneses. And, quit listening to fanbois.

By all means...don't buy a great zoom lens which offers 400mm with IS, delivers excellent IQ, and costs only $1500. That will force Canon to release a better version costing at least $1000 more (and incidentally driving up the cost of the current version by a few hundred dollars).

 

[bdunbar79]

<p>The new 100-400 does indeed exist and is being actively tested, however Canon is in no rush to announce the lens. We’re told that the current 100-400 still sells at an amazing clip and outpaces the 70-300L by a 4 to 1 margin.</p>

This is an astounding number if true.

Good Lord, people. If you want lower prices and/or better lenses, quit buying these lenses to simply keep up with the Joneses. And, quit listening to fanbois.

By all means...don't buy a great zoom lens which offers 400mm with IS, delivers excellent IQ, and costs only $1500. That will force Canon to release a better version costing at least $1000 more (and incidentally driving up the cost of the current version by a few hundred dollars).

Yeah you morons! Quit buying gear!! Sheeesh!

 

[veng]

I'm really surprised by the 4 to 1 out selling of the 70-300. The 70-300 is vastly superior to the 100-400 from 70-300mm. While no, it's not a great birding lens, it's extra 2 stops of IS and extra IQ are above and beyond the 100-400. As far as the method by which it zooms, is a complete non-issue.

I am surprised too.
The 300mm on crop 1.6 (for example 7D) is still 480mm. That is more than 300 or 400mm on FF.
Of course light conditions must be good - so there is a little limitation

I'm not so surprised considering most people probably use the 100-400 on a crop, that gives you 640 mm equivalent Add to this the fact the 100-400 is still the best way to get to 400 mm with IS on a budget, and that it 'collapses' to a very reasonable size as mentioned earlier, still make this lens a winner.

If the IS was equal, and the IQ was equal, I'd agree. But the IS is 2 stops better, which I personally find incredibly important on something as long as 300-400mm. Yes, it's 400mm, but it's not that much longer than 300mm, and it is considerbly larger and heavier than the 70-300.

Then again, the vast majority of people buying camera gear are quite ignorant of what they're buying, so perhaps it shouldn't surprise me that much that people buy the longest thing they could afford.

 

[wickidwombat]

i'm waiting for the river of tears that comes with this lens being made of engineering plastic and not metal
if that flood co-incides with the even bigger flood that comes when the 7Dmk2 does not deliver better image quality than a 1Dx everyone had better have their arks all built and weather tested

 

[dallasdave]

wasn't this supposed to be out last year? the year before? the year before? the year before? the year before?

lol

 

[Caps18]

So they will have a $12,000, 200-400 f/4 (280-560 f/5.6) lens and a ~$1,000-$2,000, 100-400 f/4-f/5.6 lens? It might take a few seconds longer to add the 1.4x, but it would then be a 140-560mm f/5.6-f/8...

I didn't win the lottery last week, so I know which one I would go for (the 300mm f/4 IS ).

 

[dlleno]

So they will have a $12,000, 200-400 f/4 (280-560 f/5.6) lens and a ~$1,000-$2,000, 100-400 f/4-f/5.6 lens? It might take a few seconds longer to add the 1.4x, but it would then be a 140-560mm f/5.6-f/8...

I didn't win the lottery last week, so I know which one I would go for (the 300mm f/4 IS ).

+1 on that! The 100-400 will not step on the 200-400's toes, which probably means it won't raise any eyebrows with respect to its optical performance with a TC attached. I doubt Canon will stray too far from its original market (It will still be king of the airshow, for example) which is to use it naked. that said, I'd like to see optical performance on par with the 70-200 f/2.8 II, though, and maintain good IQ with a 1.4x attached, but I'm afraid the cost would be enough make the 300 f/2.8 attractive.