• The Canon Rumors Forum has officially been shut down as of July 10, 2026.

    All data will be deleted on September 16, 2026.

    the ad free experience will return by July 17, 2026.

How long and how much: new 100-400L

Status
Not open for further replies.
Jan 20, 2012
263
0
6,876
I may have missed recent mentions of a new 100-400L but am thinking ahead about:
1. how much to save/allocate from limited funds for future purchases, and
2. How long before we see this lens.

I want something longer than what I have now: 70-200 series II. I do have a Canon 2x extender II. I'd probably sometimes use the Extender on the 100-400 if I bought that, as I won't be buying, say, a 400 f2.8. I don't photograph birds. This is for landscapes, sports, commercial (stills) editorial work.

I wonder what the likely cost of a new 100-400 will be? $2500? What does everyone think?

jonathan7007
 
jonathan7007 said:
I may have missed recent mentions of a new 100-400L but am thinking ahead about:
1. how much to save/allocate from limited funds for future purchases, and
2. How long before we see this lens.

I want something longer than what I have now: 70-200 series II. I do have a Canon 2x extender II. I'd probably sometimes use the Extender on the 100-400 if I bought that, as I won't be buying, say, a 400 f2.8. I don't photograph birds. This is for landscapes, sports, commercial (stills) editorial work.

I wonder what the likely cost of a new 100-400 will be? $2500? What does everyone think?

jonathan7007

Yes thats about the range I expect Canon to sell it at.... so much so that the current model might go up to 1500 used.
 
Upvote 0
People keep predicting a replacement, and have been for the last 7 or more years.
IMHO, its wishful thinking. There is really no competition for the existing lens, Nikon has been rumored to have a improved 80-400mm coming, but their existing one is more expensive and inferior.
Why make a slightly better one for 2-3 times the price?
For the quality and price, the 100-400mmL is a bargain.
 
Upvote 0
Mt Spokane Photography said:
Why make a slightly better one for 2-3 times the price?

Canon accounting could give you the answer as to why this is an excellent idea :-> ...

But to the op: Except for their IS primes Canon seems to be very conservative and they release new products only when pressed by the competition - like the new 24-70 mk2 since the Nikon that is better than the mk1. So we might really expect a new 14-24 uwa lens, but there is little pressure to produce a new 100-400L since people who want better iq currently have to go for the much more expensive tele primes.
 
Upvote 0
Love my Canon 100-400mmL. I'd expect the new one to be $2400-$2600 but don't think there is a rush on the 100-400Lii because the 70-300L is presumably doing well and the APS-C equivalent to 112mm-480mm. When I was on safari in Kenya last year lots of people had the 70-300L.

On a side note, saw the 100-400mm in use as the handheld surveillance camera on Cinemax's Strikeback a few episodes ago. I for one like the push/pull, wonder if Canon will keep that one the ii version.
 
Upvote 0
Marsu42 said:
Mt Spokane Photography said:
Why make a slightly better one for 2-3 times the price?

Canon accounting could give you the answer as to why this is an excellent idea :-> ...
Actually, Canon likes to sell lenses, not have them priced so high that they do not sell. Thats why they continue to make the non IS version of the 70-200mm L lenses, something for everyone that Nikon cannot match.
For the super telephotos, its a different story. At that level, price is not as big of a issue as it is for the high volume lenses. The Development cost, tooling, etc are long paid for on the 100-400mmL, so its all gravy. thats what the money people like, profit and no risk.
 
Upvote 0
Marsu42 said:
Mt Spokane Photography said:
Actually, Canon likes to sell lenses, not have them priced so high that they do not sell.

If you ever meet some Canon exec, please be sure to tell them that - I wonder if they aren't being a bit too excessive even with the newest "standard" lens prices for their own good.
Thats why we do not see a whole flurry of upgraded high end lenses. The cost to develop and tool a new one is high -really high! The 24-70mmL and the 70-200mmL had to be done, and they sell in large quantities such that as soon as tooling and development is paid off, prices will drop.
Many wish for a new ultra wide zoom, it will cost a lot more due to fewer sales, but it needs to be done as well. There is really no reason to put out another high priced lens, sales are in a tailspin as it is, the 24-70mm L MK II will be dropping in price soon.
 
Upvote 0
well_dunno said:
Any experiences? Anything specific I should check?
Without expensive equipment it is very difficult to tell how good your specific sample is (I had this problem when I bought my 70-300L). The one method I could imagine and tired is compare the new lens to an older one that you know is a good copy and sharp (in my case the 100L). Then match this difference to the expected difference from the iso crops of http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx ... and if you are not satisfied try afma or replace the new lens.
 
Upvote 0
Marsu42 said:
well_dunno said:
Any experiences? Anything specific I should check?
Without expensive equipment it is very difficult to tell how good your specific sample is (I had this problem when I bought my 70-300L). The one method I could imagine and tired is compare the new lens to an older one that you know is a good copy and sharp (in my case the 100L). Then match this difference to the expected difference from the iso crops of http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx ... and if you are not satisfied try afma or replace the new lens.

Thanks!! :)
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.