Canon Issues Product Advisory For the EF300mm f/2.8L IS II USM, EF400mm f/2.8L IS II USM, EF500mm f/

[Canon Rumors]

<p style="color: #000000;">To the Users of the EF300mm f/2.8L IS II USM, EF400mm f/2.8L IS II USM, EF500mm f/4L IS II USM, and EF600mm f/4L IS II USM Interchangeable Lenses for Canon Digital SLR Cameras</p>
<p style="color: #000000;"><strong>UPDATE:</strong>

Please see the changes to the “Identification Procedure” section below regarding the criteria for affected serial numbers. The identification procedure has been enhanced to include the first, second and third digits from the left in order to more precisely identify affected products.</p>
<p style="color: #000000;">Thank you for using Canon products.</p>
<p style="color: #000000;">Canon has released a firmware update for EF300mm f/2.8L IS II USM, EF400mm F2.8L IS II USM, EF500mm f/4L IS II USM and EF600mm f/4L IS II USM lenses. This firmware update will be performed by Canon Service Centers. Please contact us using the contact information listed at the bottom of this page.</p>
<p style="color: #000000;"><b>Firmware changes:

</b>Firmware Version 1.1.1 incorporates the following enhancement:</p>
<p style="color: #000000;">  1. Changes the control algorithm of the focus drive, and enhances the drive’s responsiveness for more precise

focus and adjustments. In particular, the new firmware enhances the AI servo AF capability of the lenses

to track objects that move irregularly in sports events, such as soccer or rugby.

<b>

Affected Products:

</b>Firmware Version 1.1.1 is for lenses with Firmware Version 1.0.0. If the lens’ firmware is already Version 1.1.1, it is not necessary to update the firmware.</p>
<p style="color: #000000;">Identification Procedure:

The first, second, and third digits from the left in the serial number (10 digits) for lenses equipped with Firmware Version 1.0.0 are as follows:</p>
<table style="color: #000000;" border="1" width="470" cellspacing="5" cellpadding="5">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td width="168">Lens name</td>
<td width="261">Serial numbers of affected products

(x presents any optional numbers)</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>EF300mm f/2.8L IS II USM</td>
<td><strong>790</strong>xxxxxxx through <strong>913</strong>xxxxxxx</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>EF400mm f/2.8L IS II USM</td>
<td><strong>790</strong>xxxxxxx through <strong>913</strong>xxxxxxx</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>EF500mm f/4L IS II USM</td>
<td><strong>880</strong>xxxxxxx through <strong>910</strong>xxxxxxx</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>EF600mm f/4L IS II USM</td>
<td><strong>880</strong>xxxxxxx through <strong>910</strong>xxxxxxx</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<p style="color: #000000;">Lenses with serial numbers other than those listed above are equipped with Firmware Version 1.1.1 or later.</p>
<p style="color: #000000;"><b>Support

</b>This information is for residents of the United States and Puerto Rico only. If you do not reside in the USA or Puerto Rico, please contact the Canon Customer Support Center in your region.</p>
<p style="color: #000000;">Please <a style="color: #666666;" href="http://usa.canon.com/cusa/registration/professional/lenses/ef_lens_lineup/" target="_blank">register</a> your EF300mm f/2.8L IS II USM, EF400mm f/2.8L IS II USM, EF500mm f/4L IS II USM or EF600mm f/4L IS II USM.  By registering, we will be able to notify you via email when future firmware updates become available.</p>
<p style="color: #000000;">Source: [<a href="http://www.usa.canon.com/cusa/support/consumer?pageKeyCode=prdAdvDetail&docId=0901e024805fb8c0" target="_blank">CUSA</a>]</p>
<p style="color: #000000;"><strong><span style="color: #ff0000;">c</span>r</strong></p>

 

[Antono Refa]

Re: Canon Issues Product Advisory For the EF300mm f/2.8L IS II USM, EF400mm f/2.8L IS II USM, EF500m

This advisory makes Sigma's USB dock look that much better,

 

[Loswr]

Re: Canon Issues Product Advisory For the EF300mm f/2.8L IS II USM, EF400mm f/2.8L IS II USM, EF500m

This advisory makes Sigma's USB dock look that much better,

Why is it better to pay for an accessory, when Canon has included the ability to update lens firmware directly into all recent bodies? That's how I updated the firmware on my EF 40mm f/2.8 STM.

Granted, if you need your supertele firmware updated (happily, mine came with the updated version), you need to send your lens to Canon...but that's their business decision (and they pay shipping), not because it's not possible for customers to update lens firmware.

Also, this advisory is over two years old. This 'update' doesn't change anything. All they updated was the way they stated the affected serial numbers from 'xx0xxxxxx' to specify the first two digits, most likely to avoid confusion because they've now made enough copies of at least one affected lens that the second digit incremented up.

 

[AlanF]

Re: Canon Issues Product Advisory For the EF300mm f/2.8L IS II USM, EF400mm f/2.8L IS II USM, EF500m

This advisory makes Sigma's USB dock look that much better,

Why is it better to pay for an accessory, when Canon has included the ability to update lens firmware directly into all recent bodies? That's how I updated the firmware on my EF 40mm f/2.8 STM.

Granted, if you need your supertele firmware updated (happily, mine came with the updated version), you need to send your lens to Canon...but that's their business decision (and they pay shipping), not because it's not possible for customers to update lens firmware.

Also, this advisory is over two years old. This 'update' doesn't change anything. All they updated was the way they stated the affected serial numbers from 'xx0xxxxxx' to specify the first two digits, most likely to avoid confusion because they've now made enough copies of at least one affected lens that the second digit incremented up.

Thanks Neuro for letting me know that this is the update I got two years ago!

 

[helpful]

Re: Canon Issues Product Advisory For the EF300mm f/2.8L IS II USM, EF400mm f/2.8L IS II USM, EF500m

It is not Canon's fault.

Chuck Norris passed by a major sporting event two years ago, affecting hundreds of the super telephoto lenses present, which have been nervous about focusing on anything ever since.

 

[Dylan777]

Re: Canon Issues Product Advisory For the EF300mm f/2.8L IS II USM, EF400mm f/2.8L IS II USM, EF500m

Oh no....need to check my 400mm when I get home today.

 

[SoullessPolack]

Re: Canon Issues Product Advisory For the EF300mm f/2.8L IS II USM, EF400mm f/2.8L IS II USM, EF500m

This advisory makes Sigma's USB dock look that much better,

Why is it better to pay for an accessory, when Canon has included the ability to update lens firmware directly into all recent bodies? That's how I updated the firmware on my EF 40mm f/2.8 STM.

Granted, if you need your supertele firmware updated (happily, mine came with the updated version), you need to send your lens to Canon...but that's their business decision (and they pay shipping), not because it's not possible for customers to update lens firmware.

Also, this advisory is over two years old. This 'update' doesn't change anything. All they updated was the way they stated the affected serial numbers from 'xx0xxxxxx' to specify the first two digits, most likely to avoid confusion because they've now made enough copies of at least one affected lens that the second digit incremented up.

It's not always best to argue on principles. Sometimes you have to argue on reality. Yes, you do have to pay for an accessory, however, that accessory is very cheap (no offense if you have a low paying job). To many of us, especially those of us who are successful and run businesses, time is money. I don't get to go shooting whenever I want. I have opportunities, and they come and go. I'd rather spend a bit of money, and keep the lens at home, than send it in to get an update and wait a week or several weeks.

Furthermore, each time you ship something, you take a risk of it being misplaced, stolen, lost, or damaged. While you may get compensated for such an occurrence, it's just another added headache. Another added reason why being able to plop your lens onto a dock and update the firmware in a couple of minutes, even if it does cost ~$50, is so convenient.

 

[Maui5150]

Re: Canon Issues Product Advisory For the EF300mm f/2.8L IS II USM, EF400mm f/2.8L IS II USM, EF500m

It's not always best to argue on principles. Sometimes you have to argue on reality. Yes, you do have to pay for an accessory, however, that accessory is very cheap (no offense if you have a low paying job). To many of us, especially those of us who are successful and run businesses, time is money. I don't get to go shooting whenever I want. I have opportunities, and they come and go. I'd rather spend a bit of money, and keep the lens at home, than send it in to get an update and wait a week or several weeks.

Furthermore, each time you ship something, you take a risk of it being misplaced, stolen, lost, or damaged. While you may get compensated for such an occurrence, it's just another added headache. Another added reason why being able to plop your lens onto a dock and update the firmware in a couple of minutes, even if it does cost ~$50, is so convenient.

Then again, I generally send my bodies and most used lenses in once a year / twice a year for Canon to clean and recalibrate - most of which is covered for free through my CPS.

 

[Canon1]

Re: Canon Issues Product Advisory For the EF300mm f/2.8L IS II USM, EF400mm f/2.8L IS II USM, EF500m

This advisory makes Sigma's USB dock look that much better,

Why is it better to pay for an accessory, when Canon has included the ability to update lens firmware directly into all recent bodies? That's how I updated the firmware on my EF 40mm f/2.8 STM.

Granted, if you need your supertele firmware updated (happily, mine came with the updated version), you need to send your lens to Canon...but that's their business decision (and they pay shipping), not because it's not possible for customers to update lens firmware.

Also, this advisory is over two years old. This 'update' doesn't change anything. All they updated was the way they stated the affected serial numbers from 'xx0xxxxxx' to specify the first two digits, most likely to avoid confusion because they've now made enough copies of at least one affected lens that the second digit incremented up.

It's not always best to argue on principles. Sometimes you have to argue on reality. Yes, you do have to pay for an accessory, however, that accessory is very cheap (no offense if you have a low paying job). To many of us, especially those of us who are successful and run businesses, time is money. I don't get to go shooting whenever I want. I have opportunities, and they come and go. I'd rather spend a bit of money, and keep the lens at home, than send it in to get an update and wait a week or several weeks.

Furthermore, each time you ship something, you take a risk of it being misplaced, stolen, lost, or damaged. While you may get compensated for such an occurrence, it's just another added headache. Another added reason why being able to plop your lens onto a dock and update the firmware in a couple of minutes, even if it does cost ~$50, is so convenient.

I've sent lenses and bodies to CPS for repair. Never had a problem and turn-around was very fast. For me, this is a minor inconvenience especially when considering how superior the lenses ACTUALLY perform in the field. Sigma has come leaps and bounds and I even own a couple, but there is no lens anywhere, by any manufacturer that comes close to the AF performance, IQ, and overall package that is a Canon V2 SuperTele... Full disclosure: I have a lens that falls into this update issue. Not upset at all.

 

[Loswr]

Re: Canon Issues Product Advisory For the EF300mm f/2.8L IS II USM, EF400mm f/2.8L IS II USM, EF500m

It's not always best to argue on principles. Sometimes you have to argue on reality. Yes, you do have to pay for an accessory, however, that accessory is very cheap (no offense if you have a low paying job). To many of us, especially those of us who are successful and run businesses, time is money. I don't get to go shooting whenever I want. I have opportunities, and they come and go. I'd rather spend a bit of money, and keep the lens at home, than send it in to get an update and wait a week or several weeks.

Furthermore, each time you ship something, you take a risk of it being misplaced, stolen, lost, or damaged. While you may get compensated for such an occurrence, it's just another added headache. Another added reason why being able to plop your lens onto a dock and update the firmware in a couple of minutes, even if it does cost ~$50, is so convenient.

As one who runs a successful business, which MkII super telephoto lens(es) do you own? (No offense if your business isn't successful enough for you to afford one.) Were they affected, and if so what was the turnaround time for Canon to update the firmware?

As I stated, my 600/4L IS II came with the updated firmware; I ordered the lens soon after its release, before the original advisory, but I received it after the advisory was issued. Given the timing, I expect there weren't too many affected lenses, especially the 500/600 II since they lagged and initial availability was limited.

To date, Canon has issued only 5 lens firmware updates. Four of them are covered by this advisory, the other I referred to above, which was available for download and application via camera body.

Many people choose Sigma lenses as a more economical option, particularly since the supertele lenses and many other high-end OEM lenses are so expensive. Since 3rd parties have to reverse engineer Canon's communication/AF/etc. protocols, changes implemented by Canon can (and have in the past on many occasions) affect compatibility with 3rd party lenses. It's good that Sigma offers the dock, to allow users to correct those problems. Of course, users with Sigma lenses that fail to maintain compatibility with a new Canon body or firmware update can look forward to weeks or possibly months for Sigma to release a fix that can be applied via that inexpensive dock, but I'm sure you've considered the effect that might have on productivity.

 

[Antono Refa]

Re: Canon Issues Product Advisory For the EF300mm f/2.8L IS II USM, EF400mm f/2.8L IS II USM, EF500m

This advisory makes Sigma's USB dock look that much better,

Why is it better to pay for an accessory, when Canon has included the ability to update lens firmware directly into all recent bodies? That's how I updated the firmware on my EF 40mm f/2.8 STM.

Granted, if you need your supertele firmware updated ... you need to send your lens to Canon

That's why.

 

[East Wind Photography]

Re: Canon Issues Product Advisory For the EF300mm f/2.8L IS II USM, EF400mm f/2.8L IS II USM, EF500m

So here's a question, how can one determine if an affected model has already had the new firmware installed? This would be more relevant for those that have picked up the MKII used.

 

[Daniel Flather]

Re: Canon Issues Product Advisory For the EF300mm f/2.8L IS II USM, EF400mm f/2.8L IS II USM, EF500m

To date, Canon has issued only 5 lens firmware updates. Four of them are covered by this advisory, the other I referred to above, which was available for download and application via camera body.

There was the 200/2 IS issue ith the 5d3, among other teles.

http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=5044.0

 

[Loswr]

Re: Canon Issues Product Advisory For the EF300mm f/2.8L IS II USM, EF400mm f/2.8L IS II USM, EF500m

So here's a question, how can one determine if an affected model has already had the new firmware installed? This would be more relevant for those that have picked up the MKII used.

Serial number, or mount the lens to a post-2012 camera and go the firmware menu, which will show versions for both the body and the attached lens.

 

[Loswr]

Re: Canon Issues Product Advisory For the EF300mm f/2.8L IS II USM, EF400mm f/2.8L IS II USM, EF500m

To date, Canon has issued only 5 lens firmware updates. Four of them are covered by this advisory, the other I referred to above, which was available for download and application via camera body.

There was the 200/2 IS issue ith the 5d3, among other teles.

http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=5044.0

Was the fix for that issue a lens firmware update? The Canon service advisory mentions only 'repair'.

 

[Daniel Flather]

Re: Canon Issues Product Advisory For the EF300mm f/2.8L IS II USM, EF400mm f/2.8L IS II USM, EF500m

To date, Canon has issued only 5 lens firmware updates. Four of them are covered by this advisory, the other I referred to above, which was available for download and application via camera body.

There was the 200/2 IS issue ith the 5d3, among other teles.

http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=5044.0

Was the fix for that issue a lens firmware update? The Canon service advisory mentions only 'repair'.

I'm not sure, since image quality was not an issues, I never sent mine in.

 

[Loswr]

Re: Canon Issues Product Advisory For the EF300mm f/2.8L IS II USM, EF400mm f/2.8L IS II USM, EF500m

To date, Canon has issued only 5 lens firmware updates. Four of them are covered by this advisory, the other I referred to above, which was available for download and application via camera body.

There was the 200/2 IS issue ith the 5d3, among other teles.

http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=5044.0

Was the fix for that issue a lens firmware update? The Canon service advisory mentions only 'repair'.

I'm not sure, since image quality was not an issues, I never sent mine in.

I had assumed not, since Canon has a page where they list firmware updates; the 300-600 MkII update is listed there, even though you need to send your lens in for that.

 

[scyrene]

Re: Canon Issues Product Advisory For the EF300mm f/2.8L IS II USM, EF400mm f/2.8L IS II USM, EF500m

Bugger. Mine still has the original firmware. Not sure I want the hassle of sending the lens in though. How much of a difference is it likely to make? I don't have any complaints about AF with the bare lens.

 

[Loswr]

Re: Canon Issues Product Advisory For the EF300mm f/2.8L IS II USM, EF400mm f/2.8L IS II USM, EF500m

It's not always best to argue on principles. Sometimes you have to argue on reality. Yes, you do have to pay for an accessory, however, that accessory is very cheap (no offense if you have a low paying job). To many of us, especially those of us who are successful and run businesses, time is money. I don't get to go shooting whenever I want. I have opportunities, and they come and go. I'd rather spend a bit of money, and keep the lens at home, than send it in to get an update and wait a week or several weeks.

Furthermore, each time you ship something, you take a risk of it being misplaced, stolen, lost, or damaged. While you may get compensated for such an occurrence, it's just another added headache. Another added reason why being able to plop your lens onto a dock and update the firmware in a couple of minutes, even if it does cost ~$50, is so convenient.

As one who runs a successful business, which MkII super telephoto lens(es) do you own? (No offense if your business isn't successful enough for you to afford one.) Were they affected, and if so what was the turnaround time for Canon to update the firmware?

As I stated, my 600/4L IS II came with the updated firmware; I ordered the lens soon after its release, before the original advisory, but I received it after the advisory was issued. Given the timing, I expect there weren't too many affected lenses, especially the 500/600 II since they lagged and initial availability was limited.

To date, Canon has issued only 5 lens firmware updates. Four of them are covered by this advisory, the other I referred to above, which was available for download and application via camera body.

Many people choose Sigma lenses as a more economical option, particularly since the supertele lenses and many other high-end OEM lenses are so expensive. Since 3rd parties have to reverse engineer Canon's communication/AF/etc. protocols, changes implemented by Canon can (and have in the past on many occasions) affect compatibility with 3rd party lenses. It's good that Sigma offers the dock, to allow users to correct those problems. Of course, users with Sigma lenses that fail to maintain compatibility with a new Canon body or firmware update can look forward to weeks or possibly months for Sigma to release a fix that can be applied via that inexpensive dock, but I'm sure you've considered the effect that might have on productivity.

There's a perfect example of that very risk in this thread:

http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=18992.0

The OP's Sigma 24-105/4 was locking up the 6D to which it was attached. The OP reported the lens firmware update released this month corrected the problem...a problem which the OP reported ~10 months ago.