Dust inside Canon 100-400mm f4.5-5.6 L II (?)

[MJ]

Hello everyone,

It doesn't pump anymore but still extends/retracts, unlike for example the 70-200mm, 200-400mm zooms...

Not beating around the bush, what's the deal with internal dust?

This thread is for every owner of the recently released successor of the 'dust pump', who uses the lens a lot in harsh outdoor conditions.

 

[candyman]

Why this thread? And why not for 24-70II, 70-300L, 24-105 etcetera. The same question. Just saying.


This title brings some 'negative' shadow on a lens that works great!
I shot with my 100-400II in harsh conditions next to the sea with a very strong wind - sand all over the place, in humid conditions - did over 23000 photos in those specific locations and do not have any problem with internal dust. Like with other equipment, just take care of it. Put a filter, exchange lenses in place without wind (for example step into a car), use some lenscoat and do proper cleaning when back home (or before putting it into the camerabag)


Happy shooting!

 

[Loswr]

...successor of the 'dust pump', who uses the lens a lot in harsh outdoor conditions.

I'm curious – how much dust was in your original 100-400L? I owned one for many years, used it outdoors in wind and dust, and yet had no dust in it.

What effect do you think a little dust in a lens will have on your images?

 

[MJ]

This title brings some 'negative' shadow on a lens that works great!

Thanks for your input Candyman!
I didn't mean to cast a negative shadow on this great lens. I'm just wondering how effective that new weather sealing actually is, since the lens still retracts - compared to the older version of this lens.

So, from both of your experience (you and neuroanatomist), there does no issue with internal dust?

 

[MJ]

What effect do you think a little dust in a lens will have on your images?

Thanks for your input, neuro!
From what I have heard a little dust inside the lens is not too much of an issue, but I'm very fussy with my gear in general. (had bad experiences with dust traveling through a lens eventually making it to the camera sensor in the desert of California...)

 

[Mt Spokane Photography]

I've seldom seen significant dust in any lens, but I've cleaned a few. It makes zero difference, but when I go to sell it, some buyers seem to think its important.

Like Neuro, I've never had dust in my 100-400mm MK I or MK II, but if out in dusty conditions, putting a filter on the front reduces the chance of getting any inside.

I did buy one 400mm L used, it had a low price because the seller had problems with dust affecting his images.

I brought it home, looked it over, and cleaned off the dust on the rear element, and it was fine. It wasn't a frequently used lens, and was apparently left sitting with the rear cap off.

 

[Loswr]

FWIW, on the original 100-400L the switches and focus ring/zoom extension were weather sealed – the lens lacked only the mount gasket.

 

[JPAZ]

I recently upgraded (?) the 100-400 from a mk i to a mk ii. It was not because of the dust issue. It was because the mk I was not as sharp as I'd like and a filter seemed to make it a little worse. Right now, I don't have a filter on the mkii but will put one on it soon. It is too new and I am still trying it out.

And actually, I've taken some mighty fine photos with the old 'push-pull' but some (especially wildlife) were a bit disappointing.

 

[Hector1970]

I've shot alot with the 100-400mm II and have no dust issue.
Maybe if you are living in a desert if might be more difficult.