Canon EF 400mm f/5.6L IS Mentioned [CR1]

Canon Rumors Guy

EOS-1D X Mark III
CR Pro
Jul 20, 2010
9,270
2,056
Canada
www.canonrumors.com
HTML:
<p>It’s been a long time since anyone gave a mention to a replacement for the Canon EF 400mm f/5.6L, one of Canon’s best optical performers. We were told a few years ago that Canon was going to be replacing all of the 400mm lenses in their lineup. The EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II was first and then the EF 400mm f/4 DO IS II, which caught us a bit by surprise. Soon after we got the EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS II, which is as highly regarded as we thought it would be. That leaves one of the best kept secrets in Canon’s lens lineup, the EF 400mm f/5.6L.</p>
<p>We’re now told that an IS version of this prime is in the works and if things go to plan, we’ll see it some time in 2016. Canon does recognize a need for such a lens, especially for birders who like the lower weight and price when compared to the faster primes and the zoom.</p>
<p>More to come…</p>
 

Maximilian

The dark side - I've been there
CR Pro
Nov 7, 2013
3,629
2,791
Germany
Interesting - though also not really believable after the 100-400 II appeared.
[CR1] seems to be right rating because there are a lot more lenses that need an update.

But for those wanting this lens I hope this is also true.
 
I gave up waiting on this lens, but I think I'd buy one in a heartbeat if they actually made it. The best thing about the 400 f/5.6 is that with its small size and weight you can almost always take it with you - I can't say the same with my 300 f/2.8 IS II.
 

procentje20

EOS M6 Mark II
Mar 19, 2013
77
0
41
Netherlands
blog.quicksetup.nl
mackguyver said:
I gave up waiting on this lens, but I think I'd buy one in a heartbeat if they actually made it. The best thing about the 400 f/5.6 is that with its small size and weight you can almost always take it with you - I can't say the same with my 300 f/2.8 IS II.

Small size? Isn't it as large as a tamron 150-600?

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Lens-Product-Images.aspx?Lens=278&LensComp=0&LensComp2=929

I always thought the lens lookes like a 200mm with a 2x converter attached.
 

Khufu

...
Aug 2, 2013
334
0
35
Merseyside, UK
www.facebook.com
It's definitely not though, the closest lens element is way down the barrel, maybe between 1/2 - 2/3 of the length away!

I totally get where Mackguyver's coming from; this thing's only as excessive to "lug around" as chucking a small flask of coffee in your bag... It's much slimmer and lighter than other >400mm lenses! Certainly a better tool than the lens left at home ;)
 

Chaitanya

EOS R
Jun 27, 2013
1,467
650
35
Pune
I would like to see 400 f/4 or 500f/5.6 lens in line up costing around 2500-3500$. this would be a serious step before the 300 f/2.8 and longer/faster/expensive lenses in Canon super-tele lineup.
 
Yes, it's all relative. It was my "big" lens before I got the 300 f/2.8, but it now seems quite small in comparison. It's long, but not large in diameter, so it will fit into most medium to large camera bags/backpacks without any problems.
 

Don Haines

Beware of cats with laser eyes!
Jun 4, 2012
8,265
1,945
Canada
If true, this is a lens that I would quickly add to my kit... The IQ of the series II long Canon primes is staggering!
 

DominoDude

EOS R
Feb 7, 2013
959
1
::1
If this one becomes a reality, I can easily see myself trading in my old 400/5.6L to get it. Apart from the MFD (~3.5m), and the aperture, it's very hard to see any drawbacks with the current model. I just love it, and so does many other birders around here.
 

hoodlum

EOS 90D
Jul 11, 2012
155
34
www.flickr.com
I wonder if Canon would make a DO version to reduce the size and weight even further. This would provide more market separation between the 100-400. Nikon was able to produce their 300mm f4 "DO" for just under $2k.
 

fabioduarte

I'm New Here
Aug 8, 2014
20
3
Brazil
www.instagram.com
I doubt there will be an upgrade until Nikon launches its own 400mm f/5.6.

I am hoping there is an upgrade though, as the IS would be very helpful in some situations. BTW, I own a 400mm f/5.6L.

Regards.
 

StudentOfLight

I'm on a life-long journey of self-discovery
Nov 2, 2013
1,444
5
39
Cape Town
Any chance of this being an EF-S 400/5.6 IS?

EF-S will reduce the size, weight and cost, making it easier for Canon to compete on price against the Sigma and Tamron 150-600 offerings. The Sigma and Tamron perform admirably on full frame but on APS-C the IQ isn't really mind-blowing.

Look how the current 400/5.6 with 1.4xTC on APS-C fares against the Tamron at 600mm on full frame.

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=929&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=5&API=2&LensComp=278&CameraComp=736&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=1&APIComp=0

The Tamron is better in the center of frame but the corners are unwhelming. The Sigma isn't way better than the Tamron either. So there's definitely a gap to aim at in terms of price and performance and with EF-S the lens will not be competing directly with the Canon's newer EF lens offerings.
 

dhofmann

EOS M6 Mark II
Nov 3, 2011
66
0
Chaitanya said:
I would like to see 400 f/4 or 500f/5.6 lens in line up costing around 2500-3500$.

The 200mm f/2 is $6,000. A 400mm f/4 won't be any cheaper because the size of the objective lens is the same on both and the 400mm would be longer.
 

Don Haines

Beware of cats with laser eyes!
Jun 4, 2012
8,265
1,945
Canada
StudentOfLight said:
Any chance of this being an EF-S 400/5.6 IS?

EF-S will reduce the size, weight and cost, making it easier for Canon to compete on price against the Sigma and Tamron 150-600 offerings. The Sigma and Tamron perform admirably on full frame but on APS-C the IQ isn't really mind-blowing.

Look how the current 400/5.6 with 1.4xTC on APS-C fares against the Tamron at 600mm on full frame.

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=929&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=5&API=2&LensComp=278&CameraComp=736&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=1&APIComp=0

The Tamron is better in the center of frame but the corners are unwhelming. The Sigma isn't way better than the Tamron either. So there's definitely a gap to aim at in terms of price and performance and with EF-S the lens will not be competing directly with the Canon's newer EF lens offerings.

Making a 400mm EF-S lens would only be a small fraction smaller and lighter than an EF version, and despite having a crop body, I would not touch it. At least for me, far better to have a lens that can be used on both crop and FF bodies....
 

AccipiterQ

EOS 90D
Sep 11, 2014
179
236
I would grab this in a second. Since the jump from currently from 400 5.6 is to the 500 4.0, the price gulf is enormous between the two. I have the 5.6 already, and really the only weakness is no IS.
 

Finn M

EOS M50
Mar 3, 2015
32
0
Norway
I don't see any point in making this lens. A new EF 400/5,6L IS will get about the same price as the new and very sharp EF 100-400/4,5-5,6L IS II. It will maybe be a bit lighter, but not by much.

Canon should instead make a EF 500/5,6 IS. This will be a great lens for bird shooters, much better than a 400mm which is a bit too short, especially for smaller birds.
Even better would be a DO version: after Nikon launched their new and very compact AF-S 300/4 PF VR I think we will see many new DO lenses also from Canon to a much lower price in the coming years.
 

9VIII

EOS 5D Mark IV
Feb 8, 2013
1,843
0
First off: QUIT TEASING US IT'S NEVER GOING TO HAPPEN!

Unless we get a CR3 with pictures of a press release showing a 400f5.6IS, or maybe ten different CR2 references, I will not believe it.


fabioduarte said:
I doubt there will be an upgrade until Nikon launches its own 400mm f/5.6.

Ha! And that's even less likely that Canon making a second one.

The deal is that the 400f5.6, as-is, nearly performs as well as all the V1 Big Whites. That seriously devalues a lot of hardware. They made V2 Big Whites to rectify that, but from an amature's perspective the main thing missing is still just IS, the competition for IQ is still close enough.
Even without adding IS, look at the 100-400MkII VS the 400f5.6 when both have a 2XTC, the zoom still sucks. Make that prime lens perform any better and you're encroaching on the Big White market again...
Which would actually make this:

StudentOfLight said:
Any chance of this being an EF-S 400/5.6 IS?

Make sense.
An EF-S 400f5.6 being completely incompatible with 90% of their high end bodies (and all TC's) means it would have almost no affect on Big White sales, but would give us crop shooting amatures a break.
(Note, size and weight of lenses doesn't change with sensor size, they just get to be sloppy with corner performance is all, which I would still prefer that they not do so we can have a nice even frame and 0 vignetting on crop. Given the unusual amount of distortion at 400mm I almost think the 100-400MkII actually was designed with crop in mind as much or more than full frame).
We know Canon loves artificially limiting their products for a given market, this makes the most sense to me, the next most likely event would be them adding IS without making any changes to the lens design (taking a page out of the Nikon playbook).

In any case, I just got some pretty decent shots of a moose at 1/350sec handheld (as slow as you would want to go for anything moving, and yes gopher shooting practice helps), which makes me wonder if IS isn't just an excuse to be lazy more than anything. Then considering the new 400DO, I'm betting that we've got everything we're going to get.
I'll have the 100-400MkII by the end of the year if only because of the excellent Maximum Magnification, IS will be nice for the flowers (low movement landscape shots), and it does perform better at f5.6 than the old prime (which is best at f8) so it is an upgrade when used bare.
That lens was basically made with me in mind and I would be a fool to pass it up.
 

e_honda

EOS M6 Mark II
Jul 28, 2013
73
0
StudentOfLight said:
Any chance of this being an EF-S 400/5.6 IS?

I doubt it. The only EF-S primes right now are the 24mm pancake and 60mm macro. It'd be quite a step to then just make its 3rd EF-S prime a 400mm tele. I see your logic behind it, but I just don't see it happening.