An EF 70-200 f/4L IS II in Mid January? [CR1]

[whatta]

24mm f/1.4L II (yes, version II vignets too much!)

isn't it very easy to fix (already in camera jpg)?

28mm f/1.8 (better performance at the large appertures)

a good apsc normal is missing from canon, make it 1.4

50mm f/1.4 (better performance at the large appertures)

change it to ring usm

 

[Cornershot]

Actually, it's not. Most of the body is plastic. It does have some metal parts like the zoom ring, the mount, the front ring that has the markings. Most of the rest of the outer body is white plastic.


It's already metal. An EF-S f/2.8 version would not be substantially lighter than the EF version - that's the way it works with telephoto lenses.
[/quote]

 

[nightbreath]

Actually, it's not. Most of the body is plastic. It does have some metal parts like the zoom ring, the mount, the front ring that has the markings. Most of the rest of the outer body is white plastic.

Are we speaking about the same lens? The EF 70-200 f/4.0L IS is metal, focusing/zooming rings are made of rubber (sorry if the word isn't chosen properly, this is what translator gave me). Here's an article about the lens: http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-70-200mm-f-4.0-L-IS-USM-Lens-Review.aspx

 

[Cornershot]

@Nightbreath, I own the lens and use it for work so know that it has a plastic body. That story you link to doesn't mention it but Ken Rockwell does. Plastic barrel with metal zoom and focus rings. The rings are not made of rubber. The rubber grip is added over the metal rings.

http://www.kenrockwell.com/canon/lenses/70-200mm-f4-is.htm



Are we speaking about the same lens? The EF 70-200 f/4.0L IS is metal, focusing/zooming rings are made of rubber (sorry if the word isn't chosen properly, this is what translator gave me). Here's an article about the lens: http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-70-200mm-f-4.0-L-IS-USM-Lens-Review.aspx

 

[Jedifarce]

<li>It will include a newer version of the Canon fluorine coating reducing light scatter within the lens.</li>
<li>The new coating will drastically increase the scratch resistance on the front element.</li>
<li>The lens will be fully metal, besides the zoom and focus rings.</li>
<li>The image quality is supposed to be the best as far as Canon zooms go (like version 1 was).</li>
<li>Mid January announcement.</li>

I think as long as you're careful and use an uv filter scratches can be minimized. However, I do like the 'fully metal' part, reminds me of my old Nikon AIS lenses.

Where the hell is the 200-400mm F/4 ?

 

[Jedifarce]

?


People might mistaken it for a sigma or nikon.

 

[neuroanatomist]

@Nightbreath, I own the lens and use it for work so know that it has a plastic body. That story you link to doesn't mention it but Ken Rockwell does. Plastic barrel with metal zoom and focus rings. The rings are not made of rubber. The rubber grip is added over the metal rings.

http://www.kenrockwell.com/canon/lenses/70-200mm-f4-is.htm

Sorry, but KR wouldn't know a fact if it bit him on the ass. While I don't have a 70-200mm f/4L IS, I do have a 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II, and KR indicates that the parts of the barrel of that lens are plastic as well - they certainly don't seem to be, based on thermal transfer compared to lenses with known plastic barrels, such as the EF 100mm f/2.8L Macro IS.

DPReview indicates that the barrel is metal, as does PhotoNotes.

 

[unfocused]

If all the relentlessly anal gadget freaks on this site can't tell whether or not the lens is plastic or metal I have to wonder if it matters.

 

[Cornershot]

It's not about being anal. The lighter weight and smaller size is something that I actually find useful for work. If the new lens were all metal and heavier, it would make a difference to me since my regular load is four lenses and two bodies. I take the 2.8 if I have to. And the f4 lens is a mix of plastic and metal. I'm sure the many 70-200mm F4 and F4/is owners can chime in.


Sorry, but KR wouldn't know a fact if it bit him on the ass. While I don't have a 70-200mm f/4L IS, I do have a 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II, and KR indicates that the parts of the barrel of that lens are plastic as well - they certainly don't seem to be, based on thermal transfer compared to lenses with known plastic barrels, such as the EF 100mm f/2.8L Macro IS.

DPReview indicates that the barrel is metal, as does PhotoNotes.
[/quote]

 

[neuroanatomist]

It's not about being anal. The lighter weight and smaller size is something that I actually find useful for work. If the new lens were all metal and heavier, it would make a difference to me since my regular load is four lenses and two bodies. I take the 2.8 if I have to. And the f4 lens is a mix of plastic and metal. I'm sure the many 70-200mm F4 and F4/is owners can chime in.

Cornershot, I owe you an apology - I checked out my 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II this morning, and the center part of the barrel (between the zoom and focus rings) does seem to be plastic, even on the f/2.8 lens. The rest of the barrel is metal.

 

[Cornershot]

Neuro, Canon does a pretty good job of hiding the fact. The stippled texture on the metal and plastic parts look pretty close. I tried to jab it with a multimeter to get a resistance reading but the coating insulates the surface pretty well.

 

[neuroanatomist]

@Cornershot, thanks, yes - I noticed the similarity of the finish. What I did notice was differential transmission of vibration, which the plastic seemed to do more efficiently.