DxOMark Review: Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS II

[Canon Rumors]

One thing is certain with DxOMark reviews, they will always stir up debate. DxOMark has completed their review of the brand new Canon EF 100-400 f/4.5-5.6L IS II, which has been highly regarded since photographers got their hands on it. It fixed everything that was wrong with the previous version and performs far better in the real world.</p>
<p>From DxOMark:</p>
<blockquote><p>As the replacement for the original model, Canon have improved just about everything they can from operation through to optical quality. However it’s the performance at the long-end that’s crucial and while Canon have made advances most of the gains are in the outer field where users of Canon’s crop bodies aren’t so likely to benefit. Sure the chromatic aberration is lower and sharpness at the edges is better than the old model but users aren’t going to see any improvement in the center.</p>
<p>The new model is also up against a capable and more accessibly priced rival in the form of the Tamron 150-600mm though it’s larger still and somewhat disappointing at 600mm. For all that, the Canon is an attractive option and a strong choice for the long term… <a href="http://www.dxomark.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-100-400mm-F4.5-5.6L-IS-II-USM-review-Worthy-upgrade" target="_blank">Read the full review</a></p></blockquote>
<p><strong>Canon EF 100-400 f/4.5-5.6L IS II $2199: <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/DFF/d10-v21-t1-x574561" target="_blank">B&H Photo</a> | <a href="http://www.adorama.com/CA1004002U.html?KBID=64393" target="_blank">Adorama</a> | <a href="http://amzn.to/1fFufZe" target="_blank">Amazon</a></strong></p>

 

[NikonGuy]

The original model featured a push-pull mechanism to zoom in and out, along with a friction collar to prevent “zoom-creep,” along with a separate manual focus collar. The new model dispenses with that and adopts a more modern two-ring design, yet it retains the friction collar as a part of the zoom ring rather than the focus ring, as was on the earlier model.

Am I the only one who really misses the push'n'pull??

Imho it was way faster and also easier to recall a certain focal length with some training.

 

[Sashi]

Hated the push-pull. Keeps dropping out with a clunk in Safari jeeps.

Quick everyone, before pulling out the pitchforks look at the title; see, DxO, that's who we hate.
hehe forgotten about me already. 8)

 

[ahsanford]

Hated the push-pull. Keeps dropping out with a clunk in Safari jeeps.

Quick everyone, before pulling out the pitchforks look at the title; see, DxO, that's who we hate.
hehe forgotten about me already. 8)

I'm just daydreaming of how high the lens will be scored by DXO when 50 MP are sitting behind it.

(Spoiler: it will be very high.)

- A

 

[zim]

Hated the push-pull. Keeps dropping out with a clunk in Safari jeeps.

Quick everyone, before pulling out the pitchforks look at the title; see, DxO, that's who we hate.
hehe forgotten about me already. 8)

I'm just daydreaming of how high the lens will be scored by DXO when 50 MP are sitting behind it.

(Spoiler: it will be very high.)

- A

So this lens was 'tested' Nov. 2014 but just appears now? or has the test been around for a while and just not reported on?

I have DxO Optics Pro and the 5Ds lens profile for Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS II USM have been added so why would that camera not be available to select already?

 

[lol]

Am I the only one who really misses the push'n'pull??

No, you are not alone.

Back on topic, I haven't paid attention to DxO lens scores for a while, even longer than sensor scores. Are they any more meaningful now?

 

[zim]

Am I the only one who really misses the push'n'pull??

No, you are not alone.

Back on topic, I haven't paid attention to DxO lens scores for a while, even longer than sensor scores. Are they any more meaningful now?

Going by their scale of poor to excellent 21 is heading towards poor, what do yah think ;D

 

[IglooEater]

Am I the only one who really misses the push'n'pull??

No, you are not alone.

Back on topic, I haven't paid attention to DxO lens scores for a while, even longer than sensor scores. Are they any more meaningful now?

No they're no more meaningful now. I actually consider their lens tests even less useful than their camera tests. They've several times had a lens linked with the data from different lens, lense scores on the 5d II have been dramatically different from on the 1ds III, simple straightforward lens specs simply not understood (think canon 11-24 referred to as a midrange zoom on aps-c) etc. Eventually they get their mistakes (the ones people catch them on at any rate) straightened out, but you've got to wonder about their competence... :-/

 

[RGF]

Am I the only one who really misses the push'n'pull??

No, you are not alone.

Back on topic, I haven't paid attention to DxO lens scores for a while, even longer than sensor scores. Are they any more meaningful now?

I do not miss it. Always concerned that push pull would move air (and hence dust, sand, grit, especially while shooting in dusty environs in Africa) in to the lens.

Yes I was a good way to return to the same FL.

But as DxO and other have shown the new lens is much sharper.

 

[Canon Rumors]

Am I the only one who really misses the push'n'pull??

No, you are not alone.

Back on topic, I haven't paid attention to DxO lens scores for a while, even longer than sensor scores. Are they any more meaningful now?

I do not miss it. Always concerned that push pull would move air (and hence dust, sand, grit, especially while shooting in dusty environs in Africa) in to the lens.

Yes I was a good way to return to the same FL.

But as DxO and other have shown the new lens is much sharper.

The new 100-400 seems to be just as susceptible to internal dust as the original was. It might actually be worse....

 

[JonAustin]

The original model featured a push-pull mechanism to zoom in and out, along with a friction collar to prevent “zoom-creep,” along with a separate manual focus collar. The new model dispenses with that and adopts a more modern two-ring design, yet it retains the friction collar as a part of the zoom ring rather than the focus ring, as was on the earlier model.

Am I the only one who really misses the push'n'pull??

Imho it was way faster and also easier to recall a certain focal length with some training.

I have the new lens, and am among those who prefer its twist zoom design over the previous push/pull, but can't you still zoom this lens in and out by push/pull?

 

[AlanF]

Am I the only one who really misses the push'n'pull??

No, you are not alone.

Back on topic, I haven't paid attention to DxO lens scores for a while, even longer than sensor scores. Are they any more meaningful now?

I do not miss it. Always concerned that push pull would move air (and hence dust, sand, grit, especially while shooting in dusty environs in Africa) in to the lens.

Yes I was a good way to return to the same FL.

But as DxO and other have shown the new lens is much sharper.

The new 100-400 seems to be just as susceptible to internal dust as the original was. It might actually be worse....

Have you done a comparison? How much dust is there in the ones you have seen?

 

[MiG31_Foxhound]

I was a *very* early adopter of this lens, as I had been waiting the better part of a year for the focal length but was reticent to buy the old one KNOWING for certain this was in the pipeline. I had been weighing it against the Tammy and upcoming (at the time) Sigma offerings but assumed Canon's cropped 400 would be as good or better than either alternative at 600mm.

First off, image quality is amazing. Here's a shot of a blast furnace I took for my industrial history professor as part of a summer internship. This is with a 2x TC III: http://i.imgur.com/8FBn7ul.jpg Under really intense scrutiny, I can spot some blurring and CA on the right side of the structure - starts directly above the treeline. Also, there's some lost contrast. Here's the same shot with just the 100-400 doing the work: http://i.imgur.com/2UHRsf3.jpg

I'm not positive what DxO's testing process entails, nor am I familiar enough with the original 100-400 to comment, but this lens is spectacular, to my eye. It does what I need it to do better than I had anticipated it would. Add to this superb IS and surprisingly fast and accurate AF and I rank it just below my 70-200/2.8 IS II.

Edit: Almost forgot to verify that YES you can push/pull this lens quite easily. I do it all the time at my part time job shooting youth flag football. Their closing speed is incredible, so push-pull works well for that application. Simply loosen the tension ring, grip the hood, and do your thing.

 

[LSXPhotog]

Man, I really don't understand DxO. I've used both versions of the 100-400 lens and I always found the images of the version one to be soft. When I used the newest version, I felt it rivaled my 70-200 f/2.8L IS II in sharpness, color, and aberration. For them to say it's not an improvement in sharpness at center makes me feel like either I'm on crack, or they're on crack.

 

[MikeT]

Man, I really don't understand DxO. When I used the newest version, I felt it rivaled my 70-200 f/2.8L IS II in sharpness, color, and aberration. For them to say it's not an improvement in sharpness at center makes me feel like either I'm on crack, or they're on crack.

I concur... I find my 100-400mm IS II to be every bit as enjoyable/sharp/high quality as my 70-200mm IS II. It is now my preferred outdoors lens, whereas the 70-200mm is my preferred indoor lens.

 

[Canon Rumors]

Have you done a comparison? How much dust is there in the ones you have seen?

I'm going to do a little article this week, all 5 that I have are full of dust.

 

[zim]

Am I the only one who really misses the push'n'pull??

No, you are not alone.

Back on topic, I haven't paid attention to DxO lens scores for a while, even longer than sensor scores. Are they any more meaningful now?

I do not miss it. Always concerned that push pull would move air (and hence dust, sand, grit, especially while shooting in dusty environs in Africa) in to the lens.

Yes I was a good way to return to the same FL.

But as DxO and other have shown the new lens is much sharper.

The new 100-400 seems to be just as susceptible to internal dust as the original was. It might actually be worse....

Where do you get that from?

 

[Diltiazem]

At 400mm the original version was pretty sharp at the center, new version is still a little better. The improvement outside the center and at shorter FLs is quite noticeable though.

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=972&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=4&API=1&LensComp=113&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=7&APIComp=0

 

[Diltiazem]

"while Canon have made advances most of the gains are in the outer field where users of Canon’s crop bodies aren’t so likely to benefit. Sure the chromatic aberration is lower and sharpness at the edges is better than the old model but users aren’t going to see any improvement in the center."

There is significant improvement in the midframe too, so crop bodies surely will benefit.

 

[ahsanford]

Have you done a comparison? How much dust is there in the ones you have seen?

I'm going to do a little article this week, all 5 that I have are full of dust.

Aren't these lenses weather sealed?

That's like saying a car has great brakes. There is no scale/standard/criteria to make a claim other than gasketing and rubberized elements exist in places throughout the design. No one ever had to substantiate that it worked well formally.

Some background on how it varies: http://www.thephoblographer.com/2013/02/14/how-a-lens-becomes-weather-sealed/#.Vaw8mbdKg40

It's one of the great claims of the industry that no one seems to wants to prove...

- A