A Classic EF Lens Reaches the End of Production

[neuroanatomist]

...but my wife and I witnessed the murder of a mole (trigger warning: if you are too sensitive to the more brutal facts of life, don't scroll down).

Oh, that just looks like they're playing. This is also not with the EF 100-400L, but with its grandchild the RF 100-500L. Mr. Cooper doesn't play with his food.

"Hawk’s Prey"

EOS R3, RF 100-500mm f/4.5-7.1L IS USM @ 500mm, 1/250 s, f/7.1, ISO 12800

...and neither does his cousin, Red.


EOS 1D X, EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM @ 200mm, 1/80 s, f/2.8, ISO 320

Both of those were taken at my house.

 

[HeavyPiper]

One from my old files with the EF 100-400mm L. Cropped.

 

[justaCanonuser]

Oh, that just looks like they're playing. This is also not with the EF 100-400L, but with its grandchild the RF 100-500L. Mr. Cooper doesn't play with his food.

"Hawk’s Prey"
View attachment 228907
EOS R3, RF 100-500mm f/4.5-7.1L IS USM @ 500mm, 1/250 s, f/7.1, ISO 12800

...and neither does his cousin, Red.

View attachment 228908
EOS 1D X, EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM @ 200mm, 1/80 s, f/2.8, ISO 320

Both of those were taken at my house.

great images! You have nice neighbors (as long as you aren't commenting from a prey's viewpoint).

In fact, the stork finally swallowed the mole, after he stabbed the poor guy several times with and afterwards flattened him with his beak.

 

[GMCPhotographics]

The EF 400mm f/5.6 L had quite a following, who thought it very sharp. Then along came the EF 100-400mm ii that was sharper than the prime, had excellent IS, not much heavier and was a zoom. A splendid lens, fully worth its price. Fortunately, it morphed into the RF 100-500 so I don't miss my two 100-400s.

I had the EF 400mm f5.6 L for a long while, which I replaced with the EF 100-400mm f5.6 II LIS. The Prime was amazing for locking on and tracking Birds in flight "coming towards you" shots and was pretty amazing at that one trick. The zoom was way more versatile and superior in every area except when birds came at you head on. I still use this lens with an adapter as my main long tele / short wilde life lens. It takes a 1.4x TC really well, but not the 2x TC so much.

In terms of sharpness, the prime was a legend, however our cameras got more sophiticated and our sensors more densly populated with pixels. In time our camreas became sharper than some of our lenses. The EF 100-400mm f5.6 II LIS was an answer from Canon to higher resolving sensors. Many of the earlier EF lenses were refereshed with sharper optics, the EF 35mm f1.4 II L for example. optically, there's not much between it and the current VCM RF versions (optically).

I'd like to trade it up for the RF 100-500, however, that's a lot of cash for a mild upgrade and I'm still getting great results from my EF zoom. Sure, the RF lens is lighter, doesn't need an adapter, has a removable collar (not just the foot), has slightly better AF and IS and had a bit more reach. That's a lot of £££ for mild upgrades across the board. Perhapse I should flip my EF 100-400mm f5.6 LIS II before it gets too battered and looses too much of it's resale value. It's probably more an economics choice more than the features / specs of the newer lens.

 

[GMCPhotographics]

Here's a few images from my EF 100-400mm f5.6 LIS II, both with a 1.4x TC on a R6mkII.

 

[AlanF]

I had the EF 400mm f5.6 L for a long while, which I replaced with the EF 100-400mm f5.6 II LIS. The Prime was amazing for locking on and tracking Birds in flight "coming towards you" shots and was pretty amazing at that one trick. The zoom was way more versatile and superior in every area except when birds came at you head on. I still use this lens with an adapter as my main long tele / short wilde life lens. It takes a 1.4x TC really well, but not the 2x TC so much.

In terms of sharpness, the prime was a legend, however our cameras got more sophiticated and our sensors more densly populated with pixels. In time our camreas became sharper than some of our lenses. The EF 100-400mm f5.6 II LIS was an answer from Canon to higher resolving sensors. Many of the earlier EF lenses were refereshed with sharper optics, the EF 35mm f1.4 II L for example. optically, there's not much between it and the current VCM RF versions (optically).

I'd like to trade it up for the RF 100-500, however, that's a lot of cash for a mild upgrade and I'm still getting great results from my EF zoom. Sure, the RF lens is lighter, doesn't need an adapter, has a removable collar (not just the foot), has slightly better AF and IS and had a bit more reach. That's a lot of £££ for mild upgrades across the board. Perhapse I should flip my EF 100-400mm f5.6 LIS II before it gets too battered and looses too much of it's resale value. It's probably more an economics choice more than the features / specs of the newer lens.

The EF 100-400mm II was and still is a superb lens. Posted below are the real MTF values measured by Uncle Roger, averaged over several copies of it and the EF 400mm f/5.6. Apart from the extreme corners, the zoom beats it on contrast and increasingly so for higher resolution. Nowadays with the R5ii, AF acquisition seems instantaneous for BIF with my telephotos, and it was certainly damn fast with the EF 100-400mm II on DSLRs using a 9 point centre setting. I really love the RF 100-500mm, and it works well with the 2xTC at 1000mm. I was out yesterday and the 2x extender on when a tiny Longtailed Tit suddenly appeared 10m away, I took a quick shot at 1000mm, a crop from the centre posted below. The shutter speed was too low at onky 1/100s but it was still sahrp enough (I don't like going below 1/500s as these small birds twitch rapidly and IS in any case is a bit dodgy when cropping such long focal lengths).