EF 100-400 f/4.5-5.6L IS Replacement Coming in November [CR2]

[Canon1]

Yeah well... How about this CR3 from 2008??

Remember that CR had changend the rating system from 5+1 down to 3+1 grades.
Those CR4/5-stories would turn into a logic bomb if you miss that

I didn't remember that! A CR5 mush be like waking up and the 100-400 Mark III was just released.

 

[Lee Jay]

Time has passed this lens by - it is two years to late.

The 150-600 zoom is the new kid on the block...

Indeed, and like much of America's youth, the 'new kids' are big and overweight. The retracted 100-400L is the size of a 70-200/2.8, a very convenient size for a 400mm lens. Considering the optical improvements going from original to MkII of the 70-200/2.8 IS, a new 100-400 should be excellent. Mount a 1.4x TC behind it, you'll have a 140-560mm f/8 lens that will AF on recent higher-end bodies, deliver great IQ, and be a heck of a lot more portable than those "I'm not fat, I'm big-boned" new kids.

How quaint. You recommend using a lens 2/3 of a stop slower, thus requiring the use of a higher ISO with an f-stop that requires many autofocus compromises.

At least the Tamron is so soft at 600mm and f/6.3 that I don't consider it usable there. I'd rather use it at 400mm wide open or 600mm and f/8, making it no faster than a 100-400 with or without a TC. The Sigma Sport looks better, but it's too big and heavy. We don't know about the Sigma Contemporary yet.

 

[Gooniesneversaydie11]

long telephoto that is in the more reasonably priced category.

Only problem with that statement is that they did release a long telephoto with the 7D2. They released the 400mm DO mark 2 at photokina. A pretty good match I would imagine.

I don't think that most people would consider $6800 reasonably priced for a 400mm. I mean I guess in relation to what you get for your money, then yes, but not in terms of a lower price point. In my mind, sub $2000 is reasonably priced. That is the bracket that the original 100-400, 400 f/5.6L, 300 f/4L and MOST other non-white L lenses fall into. Someone that can afford the 400 DO can most likely afford the 1Dx (or its successor) so I do NOT think that lens was aimed at being a 7d mark II pairing.

 

[Loswr]

Time has passed this lens by - it is two years to late.

The 150-600 zoom is the new kid on the block...

Indeed, and like much of America's youth, the 'new kids' are big and overweight. The retracted 100-400L is the size of a 70-200/2.8, a very convenient size for a 400mm lens. Considering the optical improvements going from original to MkII of the 70-200/2.8 IS, a new 100-400 should be excellent. Mount a 1.4x TC behind it, you'll have a 140-560mm f/8 lens that will AF on recent higher-end bodies, deliver great IQ, and be a heck of a lot more portable than those "I'm not fat, I'm big-boned" new kids.

How quaint. You recommend using a lens 2/3 of a stop slower, thus requiring the use of a higher ISO with an f-stop that requires many autofocus compromises.

When the issue is portability, yes. The 1D X and 100-400L with 1.4xIII mounted fits in a Lowepro Toploader Pro 75 AW or even a regular backpack – it's a very portable combo. At 560mm f/8, the IQ of the 100-400 is similar to the larger, heavier Tamron at 600mm. If I want to compromise portability instead, I'd bring the 600/4L IS II which is 1.33-stops faster, has better AF and much better IQ, and can go to 840mm f/5.6 or 1200mm f/8 (still with better IQ than the Tamron at 600mm).

Or I'd buy the 300/2.8, which is about the same length as the retracted Tamron 150-600 (and shorter and lighter than the Sigma 150-600), and with the 2xIII is 1/3-stop faster, has better IQ and better AF. Sure, it's more expensive...but you always have to compromise somewhere. Personally, the higher cost isn't a big concern.

 

[AlanF]

Time has passed this lens by - it is two years to late.

The 150-600 zoom is the new kid on the block...

Indeed, and like much of America's youth, the 'new kids' are big and overweight. The retracted 100-400L is the size of a 70-200/2.8, a very convenient size for a 400mm lens. Considering the optical improvements going from original to MkII of the 70-200/2.8 IS, a new 100-400 should be excellent. Mount a 1.4x TC behind it, you'll have a 140-560mm f/8 lens that will AF on recent higher-end bodies, deliver great IQ, and be a heck of a lot more portable than those "I'm not fat, I'm big-boned" new kids.

How quaint. You recommend using a lens 2/3 of a stop slower, thus requiring the use of a higher ISO with an f-stop that requires many autofocus compromises.

When the issue is portability, yes. The 1D X and 100-400L with 1.4xIII mounted fits in a Lowepro Toploader Pro 75 AW or even a regular backpack – it's a very portable combo. At 560mm f/8, the IQ of the 100-400 is similar to the larger, heavier Tamron at 600mm. If I want to compromise portability instead, I'd bring the 600/4L IS II which is 1.33-stops faster, has better AF and much better IQ, and can go to 840mm f/5.6 or 1200mm f/8 (still with better IQ than the Tamron at 600mm).

Or I'd buy the 300/2.8, which is about the same length as the retracted Tamron 150-600 (and shorter and lighter than the Sigma 150-600), and with the 2xIII is 1/3-stop faster, has better IQ and better AF. Sure, it's more expensive...but you always have to compromise somewhere. Personally, the higher cost isn't a big concern.

As you know, I use the 300/2.8 II + 2xTC as my 600 of choice but I am also happy with the Tamron 150-600 when I need a zoom or less weight and volume. I found that the AF on the 100-400 + 1.4xTC was hopeless on the 5DIII whereas the Tamron is quite good. I'd be very tempted if Canon came out with a short retractable new 100-400 of higher quality for portability.

 

[tcmatthews]

Time has passed this lens by - it is two years to late.

The 150-600 zoom is the new kid on the block...

Indeed, and like much of America's youth, the 'new kids' are big and overweight. The retracted 100-400L is the size of a 70-200/2.8, a very convenient size for a 400mm lens. Considering the optical improvements going from original to MkII of the 70-200/2.8 IS, a new 100-400 should be excellent. Mount a 1.4x TC behind it, you'll have a 140-560mm f/8 lens that will AF on recent higher-end bodies, deliver great IQ, and be a heck of a lot more portable than those "I'm not fat, I'm big-boned" new kids.

How quaint. You recommend using a lens 2/3 of a stop slower, thus requiring the use of a higher ISO with an f-stop that requires many autofocus compromises.

When the issue is portability, yes. The 1D X and 100-400L with 1.4xIII mounted fits in a Lowepro Toploader Pro 75 AW or even a regular backpack – it's a very portable combo. At 560mm f/8, the IQ of the 100-400 is similar to the larger, heavier Tamron at 600mm. If I want to compromise portability instead, I'd bring the 600/4L IS II which is 1.33-stops faster, has better AF and much better IQ, and can go to 840mm f/5.6 or 1200mm f/8 (still with better IQ than the Tamron at 600mm).

Or I'd buy the 300/2.8, which is about the same length as the retracted Tamron 150-600 (and shorter and lighter than the Sigma 150-600), and with the 2xIII is 1/3-stop faster, has better IQ and better AF. Sure, it's more expensive...but you always have to compromise somewhere. Personally, the higher cost isn't a big concern.

For you price is not a concern. But for me personally I also like fishing. A 300/2.8 and a 600/4L add up to a good down payment on a nice boat. It might be a different if I was making money off my photography. Or if it was my only hobby.

As you said compromises. I can afford to save for a boat and buy the Tamron 150-600. I have been waiting for an updated 100-400L. It has been rumored sense before I joined CR. A updated 100-400 would likely be better than the Tamron 150-600. But as I stated previously it is now to late. I have a Tamron 150-600 on order. I have other lenses I plan on buying if a new 100-400L was announced it would likely head to the back of the line.

 

[wyldeguy]

long telephoto that is in the more reasonably priced category.

Only problem with that statement is that they did release a long telephoto with the 7D2. They released the 400mm DO mark 2 at photokina. A pretty good match I would imagine.

I don't think that most people would consider $6800 reasonably priced for a 400mm. I mean I guess in relation to what you get for your money, then yes, but not in terms of a lower price point. In my mind, sub $2000 is reasonably priced. That is the bracket that the original 100-400, 400 f/5.6L, 300 f/4L and MOST other non-white L lenses fall into. Someone that can afford the 400 DO can most likely afford the 1Dx (or its successor) so I do NOT think that lens was aimed at being a 7d mark II pairing.

That's fair. I think I missed your "reasonably priced" point. Although I believe that's still cheaper than the big white 400mm f2.8? Is it? That's a little more than the new DO. I hadn't looked into the new DO price wise. I should have assumed it was still pretty expensive given the technology. I know I couldn't afford either so it's all theoretical at this point.

 

[Mitch.Conner]

To be clear to all, when I asked if it was DO, I wasn't hoping that it's DO. To be honest, I don't care one way or another AS LONG AS THE IQ IS THERE.

I was merely remembering the announcement from September 17 of this year that more DO lenses are coming - and in the same announcement talking about the 100-400 replacement.... and then in the same announcement also mentioning that Canon has a patent on a 100-400 DO zoom.

Canon Rumors link here: Canon Confirms Replacement of 100-400 Coming, More DO & EF-M Lenses

CNET Source link here: Canon Reveals Details For Future Telephoto Lens Line
A new 400mm supertele is just the beginning. Canon also says it plans a replacement for its 100-400mm zoom and new compact models using diffractive optics.

Well, you will note that the 100-400 and the DO lenses are mentioned as separate matters.

The 100-400mm zoom is a good example. Canon introduced it in 1998 with its first-generation image stablization technology, which counteracts some camera shake, and still sells it for $1,700. But a new model is in the works, said Canon technical advisor Chuck Westfall in an interview here at the Photokina show Monday. "It's definitely on the boards for replacement," he said, though declining to say when.

In addition, Canon is working to spread a technology called diffractive optics, or DO, into more lenses, he added -- maybe even cheaper lenses.

CR mentioned these as separate matters, but then added the information about the patent anecdotally- which confused some and started a couple of threads. I would have said I don't think the 100-400 II will be a DO, but then I am not sure there is a 100-400 II to begin with!

[In any case, just because Chuck Westfall mentioned a 100-400 replacement, do not start planning a bank robbery. He specifically mentioned (without being asked) how they were working on AF illumination in the 5DIII, which never materialized. So Canon USA has little idea about what Canon Inc. does.]

I can't find a link for Chuck Westfall mentioning af illumination on the 5d3. Where is that? Was it after the 5d3 came out, as in a firmware update? That's my biggest complaint with my 5d3. Any chance it will still come?

 

[AvTvM]

I can't find a link for Chuck Westfall mentioning af illumination on the 5d3. Where is that? Was it after the 5d3 came out, as in a firmware update? That's my biggest complaint with my 5d3. Any chance it will still come?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=8EIdV4mAcpo#!
8:30 min. onward

I don't see a chance for it still to come. Or only, if the 5D III is still not succeed another 2 years from now ... like the 7D firmware update after 4 years ... ;D

 

[Mitch.Conner]

I can't find a link for Chuck Westfall mentioning af illumination on the 5d3. Where is that? Was it after the 5d3 came out, as in a firmware update? That's my biggest complaint with my 5d3. Any chance it will still come?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=8EIdV4mAcpo#!
8:30 min. onward

I don't see a chance for it still to come. Or only, if the 5D III is still not succeed another 2 years from now ... like the 7D firmware update after 4 years ... ;D

Thanks!

Well, that was 2 years ago. He did say that they were going to wait and see what other issues come up, BUT - yeah, it's been a while.

I'll hope that it's still coming, but I shouldn't get my hopes up.

 

[dolina]

This rumor wont just die. ;D

 

[atosk930]

http://www.usinflationcalculator.com/

$2,099 - $2,399 is my guess for this, just based on inflation alone, and that assumes that $1899 was close to correct back in '08

I love using the 70-200 2.8 that i got last year during the holiday rebates. I imagine IF - and that's a big IF - it is released, then I'll start seriously looking at it either 1-2 years down the road during another holiday season rebate.

Oooo ooooh a CR2 rumor for the 100-400L MkII. Where have I seen one of those before? Oh, yes...it was way back in October, 2010.

In the meantime, I've missed so many shots like this:

Yeah well... How about this CR3 from 2008??


Canon EF 100-400 f/4-5.6L IS [CR3]
JUNE 27, 2008 CANON LENSES
It's coming
The source that spoke of the 5 new lenses from Canon claims the 100-400 is indeed getting an upgrade. It'll be slightly faster and possess a 5 stop IS. He wasn't sure whether or not it would be a push/pull design or not.

Canon EF 100-400 f/4-5.6L IS = $1899 USD

Comments

 

[sagittariansrock]

To be clear to all, when I asked if it was DO, I wasn't hoping that it's DO. To be honest, I don't care one way or another AS LONG AS THE IQ IS THERE.

I was merely remembering the announcement from September 17 of this year that more DO lenses are coming - and in the same announcement talking about the 100-400 replacement.... and then in the same announcement also mentioning that Canon has a patent on a 100-400 DO zoom.

Canon Rumors link here: Canon Confirms Replacement of 100-400 Coming, More DO & EF-M Lenses

CNET Source link here: Canon Reveals Details For Future Telephoto Lens Line
A new 400mm supertele is just the beginning. Canon also says it plans a replacement for its 100-400mm zoom and new compact models using diffractive optics.

Well, you will note that the 100-400 and the DO lenses are mentioned as separate matters.

The 100-400mm zoom is a good example. Canon introduced it in 1998 with its first-generation image stablization technology, which counteracts some camera shake, and still sells it for $1,700. But a new model is in the works, said Canon technical advisor Chuck Westfall in an interview here at the Photokina show Monday. "It's definitely on the boards for replacement," he said, though declining to say when.

In addition, Canon is working to spread a technology called diffractive optics, or DO, into more lenses, he added -- maybe even cheaper lenses.

CR mentioned these as separate matters, but then added the information about the patent anecdotally- which confused some and started a couple of threads. I would have said I don't think the 100-400 II will be a DO, but then I am not sure there is a 100-400 II to begin with!

[In any case, just because Chuck Westfall mentioned a 100-400 replacement, do not start planning a bank robbery. He specifically mentioned (without being asked) how they were working on AF illumination in the 5DIII, which never materialized. So Canon USA has little idea about what Canon Inc. does.]

I can't find a link for Chuck Westfall mentioning af illumination on the 5d3. Where is that? Was it after the 5d3 came out, as in a firmware update? That's my biggest complaint with my 5d3. Any chance it will still come?

I doubt it. Here's the post and the accompanying video.

http://www.canonrumors.com/2012/05/canon-eos-5d-mark-iii-ai-servo-af-point-issue/

 

[dryanparker]

This may have been covered in a previous post, but...

Does anyone know if a lens this size can have an internal zoom movement like the 70-200? If extends like the 70-300, any concerns about weather sealing?

 

[dryanparker]

This may have been covered in a previous post, but...

Does anyone know if a lens this size can have an internal zoom movement like the 70-200? If extends like the 70-300, any concerns about weather sealing?

BTW, I realize the 200-400 is internal, so I guess I'm referring to the possibility of a 100-400 with internal zoom that won't cost $5000. Hand-holdable form factor similar to the 70-200...?

 

[Lawliet]

Does anyone know if a lens this size can have an internal zoom movement like the 70-200? If extends like the 70-300, any concerns about weather sealing?

It would have to be at least as large as it would be as a fully extended lens. Without DO objects the current 100-400 in its full glory would be a guideline.
The standard zooms are sealed despite being variable length, that should work just as well for a telezoom.

 

[CaptainZero]

Time has passed this lens by - it is two years to late.

The 150-600 zoom is the new kid on the block...

Indeed, and like much of America's youth, the 'new kids' are big and overweight. The retracted 100-400L is the size of a 70-200/2.8, a very convenient size for a 400mm lens. Considering the optical improvements going from original to MkII of the 70-200/2.8 IS, a new 100-400 should be excellent. Mount a 1.4x TC behind it, you'll have a 140-560mm f/8 lens that will AF on recent higher-end bodies, deliver great IQ, and be a heck of a lot more portable than those "I'm not fat, I'm big-boned" new kids.

How quaint. You recommend using a lens 2/3 of a stop slower, thus requiring the use of a higher ISO with an f-stop that requires many autofocus compromises.

When the issue is portability, yes. The 1D X and 100-400L with 1.4xIII mounted fits in a Lowepro Toploader Pro 75 AW or even a regular backpack – it's a very portable combo. At 560mm f/8, the IQ of the 100-400 is similar to the larger, heavier Tamron at 600mm. If I want to compromise portability instead, I'd bring the 600/4L IS II which is 1.33-stops faster, has better AF and much better IQ, and can go to 840mm f/5.6 or 1200mm f/8 (still with better IQ than the Tamron at 600mm).

Or I'd buy the 300/2.8, which is about the same length as the retracted Tamron 150-600 (and shorter and lighter than the Sigma 150-600), and with the 2xIII is 1/3-stop faster, has better IQ and better AF. Sure, it's more expensive...but you always have to compromise somewhere. Personally, the higher cost isn't a big concern.

That's what it is for me. I'm not a pro, but there are only two lenses that go on my 7D. The 10-22 that I use everyday for real estate pictures, and the 100-400, that I use for reach. When I go on vacation, downhill skiing (or just about anything else I do), I have the gripped 7D with the 100-400, and my 5D3 with the first version 24-70 on it, in a backpack. Is it a bit of a PIA? Yes, but you can get some great shots on a ski hill with that combo. Portability is key for me, and most people wouldn't call this set up portable.

 

[birdingbilly]

I have seen this lens in use in the field this weekend. It is very much like the 70-300L (at first that's what I thought it was), it has the same extend on zoom design as the 70-300L, can be used with convertors, is fairly light (I think lighter than the 70-200) and has the unusual lens hood retractable slot as described by canon rumours. I was told to expect it in November. Cost I would guess around £1,800. It will sell like hot cakes with the 7D II I should think.

 

[Lee Jay]

I have seen this lens in use in the field this weekend. It is very much like the 70-300L (at first that's what I thought it was), it has the same extend on zoom design as the 70-300L, can be used with convertors, is fairly light (I think lighter than the 70-200) and has the unusual lens hood retractable slot as described by canon rumours. I was told to expect it in November. Cost I would guess around £1,800. It will sell like hot cakes with the 7D II I should think.

Having the zoom ring on the "wrong" side compared to my 70-200 would be a pretty big bummer. I've used a 70-300 once, and didn't like it.

 

[birdingbilly]

The zoom ring is at the front and is wide, the focus ring is nearer the mount and is much thinner and is not flat (in the same way the focus ring on the 500 f/4 is not flat all be it much wider of course)