Well, Canon itself is showing MTF charts with BOTH 1.4 and 2x extenders so I suppose that answers the question of whether this lens works with them. It does.
Upvote
0
Introducing the Canon EF 100-400 f/4.5-5.6L IS II
- Thread starter Canon Rumors
- Start date
http://usa.canon.com/cusa/professional/products/lenses/ef_lens_lineup/lens_telezoom_pro/ef_100_400mm_f_4_5_5_6l_is_ii_usm
This worked for me... Quick glance shows me that with the 2.0X teleconverter it performs better than the original with no teleconverter. Across the range (as we'd hope/expect) performance looks to be hugely better. I'll be buying one.
This worked for me... Quick glance shows me that with the 2.0X teleconverter it performs better than the original with no teleconverter. Across the range (as we'd hope/expect) performance looks to be hugely better. I'll be buying one.
Upvote
0
Works with 1.4x & 2.0x Extenders / TCs
Official Tech Specs
Focal Length & Maximum Aperture 100-400mm 1:4.5-5.6
Lens Construction 21 elements in 16 groups
Diagonal Angle of View 24°-6°10'
Focus Adjustment Inner focus system / USM
Closest Focusing Distance 3.2 ft. / 0.98m
Zoom System Rotation Type
Filter Size 77mm
Max. Diameter x Length, Weight Approx: 3.7" x 7.6" / 94 x 193mm
Approx: 3.46 lbs. / 1570g (lens only, including removable tripod mount)
3.62 lbs. / 1640g (lens + tripod mount)
Official Tech Specs
Focal Length & Maximum Aperture 100-400mm 1:4.5-5.6
Lens Construction 21 elements in 16 groups
Diagonal Angle of View 24°-6°10'
Focus Adjustment Inner focus system / USM
Closest Focusing Distance 3.2 ft. / 0.98m
Zoom System Rotation Type
Filter Size 77mm
Max. Diameter x Length, Weight Approx: 3.7" x 7.6" / 94 x 193mm
Approx: 3.46 lbs. / 1570g (lens only, including removable tripod mount)
3.62 lbs. / 1640g (lens + tripod mount)
Upvote
0
Agreed. This thing looks like it will be a beast. I have the 2xII (not the newest) but I'm wondering how much difference there really is between the two.
Upvote
0
Re: Introducing the Canon EF 100-400 f/4.5-5.6L IS II
While I strongly disagree on the first point (I really like push-pull zoom) and wouldn't use anywhere near as strong words on the others either (having taken thousands of pictures with it and been happy with the results), I would definitely like better optics and IS and while the extra weight worries me (as I'd be hiking with it in the wilderness), I probably will upgrade mine if the new one is good enough. I'll wait for reviews first, though.Lee Jay said:
Upvote
0
lintoni said:Canon are making lenses with a Minolta mount?Jon_D said:Sabaki said:
yes we all have a prototype but we are still under NDA. :
Haha! Now I feel foolish! Especially with Jon_D's goo-goo eyes
I meant to ask how they compare via the MTF charts
Upvote
0
Re: Introducing the Canon EF 100-400 f/4.5-5.6L IS II
I use mine wide open at 400mm all the time and it takes sharp shots. The IS is a little weak I will agree.
Lee Jay said:
I use mine wide open at 400mm all the time and it takes sharp shots. The IS is a little weak I will agree.
Upvote
0
Re: Introducing the Canon EF 100-400 f/4.5-5.6L IS II
With the IS on, that setting will be hit and miss depending on where the IS elements happen to be at the time of the shot. If you're lucky and they are in the middle, they'll be great. If they are off to a side, they'll be terrible.
2n10 said:
With the IS on, that setting will be hit and miss depending on where the IS elements happen to be at the time of the shot. If you're lucky and they are in the middle, they'll be great. If they are off to a side, they'll be terrible.
Upvote
0
I see that the new lens has increased optical components by 4 elements and 2 groups. I wonder if that increase has only to do with the improved image stabilization because the fluorite and UD count remain the same.
Upvote
0
Re: Introducing the Canon EF 100-400 f/4.5-5.6L IS II
These things are relative - my 300/4L IS takes sharp shots, but my 70-300L is sharper. And my 300/2.8L IS II makes them both look poor.
The 100-400L had scope for improvement in just about every area. Let's hope the MkII lives up to all the possibilities and expectations...
2n10 said:
These things are relative - my 300/4L IS takes sharp shots, but my 70-300L is sharper. And my 300/2.8L IS II makes them both look poor.
The 100-400L had scope for improvement in just about every area. Let's hope the MkII lives up to all the possibilities and expectations...
Upvote
0
Looks like it works just like the Canon EOS-m to EF adapter, yes it is a screw and it you are so inclined you will want to Loctite it.
Upvote
0
Similar threads
