Danny Green Talks the Canon EF 100-400 f/4.5-5.6L IS II

[Canon Rumors Guy]

<p>Canon Explorer of Light Danny Green has put the EF 100-400 f/4.5-5.6L IS II through the paces for the CPN. While there’s no way the article would say anything negative about the lens, all the positives about it are worth noting.</p>
<p><em>“This EF100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS II USM lens has the new, special Air Sphere Coating (ASC) technology that incorporate what Canon calls a low refractive index layer. It took me a while to get my head around this, but it’s fascinating. Basically, when light enters a lens, it slows down as it passes from the air through the glass. This slowing down in speed is what causes reflections and flare, causing problems such as ghosting and contrast degradation.”</em></p>
<p><em>“It works with an EF1.4x converter<sup>*</sup> too, unlike the old 100-400 which would only let you manual focus with it fitted. With this new lens you can use AF no problem with the central focusing point. Another big step forward.”</em></p>
<p><strong><a href="http://cpn.canon-europe.com/content/education/technical/danny_green_on_ef100_400mm_f45_56l_is_ii_usm_zoom.do" target="_blank">Read the full article at CPN</a> | <strong><strong>EF 100-400 f/4.5-5.6L IS II: <a href="http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1092632-REG/canon_9524b002_ef_100_400mm_f_4_5_5_6l_is.html/bi/2466/kbid/3296" target="_blank">B&H Photo</a> | <a href="http://www.adorama.com/CA1004002U.html?KBID=64393" target="_blank">Adorama</a> | <a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00PF39PEY/ref=as_li_tl?ie=UTF8&camp=1789&creative=390957&creativeASIN=B00PF39PEY&linkCode=as2&tag=canorumo-20&linkId=DR7JYMNZQZ4LVBHE" target="_blank">Amazon</a></strong></strong></strong></p>
<p><strong><span style="color: #ff0000;">c</span>r</strong></p>

 

[RS_RS]

“It works with an EF1.4x converter* too, unlike the old 100-400 which would only let you manual focus with it fitted. With this new lens you can use AF no problem with the central focusing point. Another big step forward.”

Rubbish. The original 100~400 will AF with an Extender 1.4× provided you are using a body with f/8 AF. If you are using a body with AF limited to f/5.6 the original 100~400 with Extender 1.4× will not AF, but presumably neither will ne new version.

 

[Maximilian]

“It works with an EF1.4x converter* too, unlike the old 100-400 which would only let you manual focus with it fitted. With this new lens you can use AF no problem with the central focusing point. Another big step forward.”

Rubbish. The original 100~400 will AF with an Extender 1.4× provided you are using a body with f/8 AF. If you are using a body with AF limited to f/5.6 the original 100~400 with Extender 1.4× will not AF, but presumably neither will ne new version.

Maybe Mr Green got a little bit confused by the lens performance.
But it's odd to see Canon Marketing didn't correct this statement in their own article.

 

[JonAustin]

Sure, it's a advert, with all the attendant hyperbole and the occasional error (as pointed out above), but the image gallery is impressive ... virtually all shot at 400 f/5.6; i.e., wide open at the long end of the zoom range. Too bad they didn't see fit to enable clicking on the images to open them at full resolution.

 

[East Wind Photography]

Um.. isn't that what refraction is supposed to do? I would beg to differ in that coatings play a larger part in internal reflections than "slowing down" the light as it goes from air to glass.

 

[hoodlum]

Danny also mentions that the 100-400 focuses as fast as the 500mm f4 ii.

 

[[email protected]]

One hopes that the 100-400 will come with the same black-box warning that the 70-200 comes with: "Do not photograph women older than 21 with this lens. The extreme sharpness of the lens may cause damage to the health of the photographer."

 

[chromophore]

Um.. isn't that what refraction is supposed to do? I would beg to differ in that coatings play a larger part in internal reflections than "slowing down" the light as it goes from air to glass.

Indeed. The bending of a light ray--refraction--can be regarded as a consequence of the slowing of light through a medium, thus talking about some new coating technology as if it mitigates this slowing is like saying "we made a coating that doesn't bend light." It's a very poor explanation for what this coating actually does.

The primary purpose of coating at a glass-air interface is to prevent reflections by creating a more gradual change in the refractive index at that interface--of course, the actual physics is more complex than that simple explanation, but the idea is that a very carefully constructed coating will improve transmission in the visible spectrum. My guess is that this new coating is simply an improvement over existing coatings, possibly being more efficient, thus allowing the use of more elements without suffering from too much transmission loss. Perhaps it is essentially Canon's counterpart to Nikon's nanocrystal coating (which is delicate and therefore cannot be applied to any external interface).

The other thing I found amusing about the article is how he says "fluorite coating"--that's incorrect. It's a fluorine coating. What is the difference? Fluorite is a crystalline solid composed of calcium and fluorine atoms. Fluorine coating as used in lenses is an optically transparent polymer applied as a thin layer--think a very thin, clear layer of Teflon. The fluorine atoms are strongly bound and are therefore nonreactive, exhibiting hydrophobic and oleophobic properties, making it easier to clean.

 

[AcutancePhotography]

What is the difference? Fluorite is a crystalline solid composed of calcium and fluorine atoms. Fluorine coating as used in lenses is an optically transparent polymer applied as a thin layer--think a very thin, clear layer of Teflon. The fluorine atoms are strongly bound and are therefore nonreactive, exhibiting hydrophobic and oleophobic properties, making it easier to clean.

Never knew that. Thanks for explaining it. Always a good day when I can gets some learnin'

 

[gsealy]

Is that picture of Green with the "new" lens really the new lens? I am under the impression that the new lens is not the push/pull variety for zoom. Maybe I have the wrong idea?

 

[-Gamer-]

Is that picture of Green with the "new" lens really the new lens? I am under the impression that the new lens is not the push/pull variety for zoom. Maybe I have the wrong idea?

The barrel extends via a twist zoom not push/pull. Theres a video of it on Canon Watch, the second page I think now.

 

[tron]

Psoing with his finger touching the focusing ring...

And we have to believe he is about to take a well ... autofocused picture? ;D

Seriously now what is the opinion of 70-300L owners?

 

[tron]

“It works with an EF1.4x converter* too, unlike the old 100-400 which would only let you manual focus with it fitted. With this new lens you can use AF no problem with the central focusing point. Another big step forward.”

Rubbish. The original 100~400 will AF with an Extender 1.4× provided you are using a body with f/8 AF. If you are using a body with AF limited to f/5.6 the original 100~400 with Extender 1.4× will not AF, but presumably neither will ne new version.

Maybe Mr Green got a little bit confused by the lens performance.
But it's odd to see Canon Marketing didn't correct this statement in their own article.

This was too stupid to tell even for a simple Canon user not a ... "Canon Explorer" :

 

[Mt Spokane Photography]

“It works with an EF1.4x converter* too, unlike the old 100-400 which would only let you manual focus with it fitted. With this new lens you can use AF no problem with the central focusing point. Another big step forward.”

Rubbish. The original 100~400 will AF with an Extender 1.4× provided you are using a body with f/8 AF. If you are using a body with AF limited to f/5.6 the original 100~400 with Extender 1.4× will not AF, but presumably neither will ne new version.

Maybe Mr Green got a little bit confused by the lens performance.
But it's odd to see Canon Marketing didn't correct this statement in their own article.

I noticed that when I saw it earlier.

Based on my experience, advertising agency writers probably wrote it paraphrasing what he actually said and getting it wrong. Advertising people are not usually very technical, but have creative imaginations

 

[gsealy]

Is that picture of Green with the "new" lens really the new lens? I am under the impression that the new lens is not the push/pull variety for zoom. Maybe I have the wrong idea?

The barrel extends via a twist zoom not push/pull. Theres a video of it on Canon Watch, the second page I think now.

\

Got it - thanks!

 

[Maximilian]

Based on my experience, advertising agency writers probably wrote it paraphrasing what he actually said and getting it wrong. Advertising people are not usually very technical, but have creative imaginations

I am a technican in a technical company. And I have experience with those creative imaginations of those advertising people brought to our customers and bringing all of them back into reality. : : :
Each article about tech stuff should be read at least once by someone knowing before it's released

 

[justawriter]

Someone also needs to go to Canon Marketing and take away their thesaurus. In order, Green laughs, explains, continues, explains, advises, continues, reveals, reflects, laughs, laughs, (That's two laughs in one paragraph, so it must have been funny), reveals, continues, says, continues, affirms, and concludes. My old writing instructor told me to use say or said most of the time, reserving other verbs for emphasis. This is not good writing style.

 

[dslrdummy]

Sure, it's a advert, with all the attendant hyperbole and the occasional error (as pointed out above), but the image gallery is impressive ... virtually all shot at 400 f/5.6; i.e., wide open at the long end of the zoom range. Too bad they didn't see fit to enable clicking on the images to open them at full resolution.

Yeah, seems they were all at f5.6 and mostly at 1/250. On the one hand, its impressive to be able to get relatively sharp shots (as far as we can tell) wide open. On the other hand, f5.6 would have been imperative to maintain an acceptable shutter speed (marginal at 1/250 @400mm handheld you would think) and an iso below 1,000. Bearing in mind not everyone has the luxury of a 1DX.

 

[Omni Images]

I found it strange that at the bottom of page two, the asterisk about the 1.4 extender ..

* AF with Extender is only possible with EOS-1 series cameras, EOS 7D Mark II and EOS 5D Mark III (with firmware update).

That for such a new body, the 7DmkII would need a firmware update already .... surely they would have matched them already to work ...

 

[Monchoon]

I found it strange that at the bottom of page two, the asterisk about the 1.4 extender ..

* AF with Extender is only possible with EOS-1 series cameras, EOS 7D Mark II and EOS 5D Mark III (with firmware update).

That for such a new body, the 7DmkII would need a firmware update already .... surely they would have matched them already to work ...

I noticed that as well, good call.