Is the EF 70-200mm f/4L IS II Still Being Announced This Month?

[slclick]

I totally get your frustration but we who want those two lenses updated are in the minority and the 70-200 crowd is much more vast.

I have doubt that you are correct and it makes good business sense for Canon to proceed accordingly. What I don't get is why no 50mm 1.4 has been offered. That I would consider, too.

Sorry to go off-topic.

I'm with you, some of these releases and lack of refreshes certainly are head scratchers.

 

[Cory]

Was weighing the 100-400 vs. 400 5.6.
The answer might be this + a 400 5.6.
:-*

 

[ddixon]

My 70-200 f4 (bought fall 2010) is not a great copy. It's merely OK on crop and pretty good on my 6D, but not amazing. So, I'm excited to see this new version - if it has improved sharpness.

 

[ewg963]

canon keep releasing EF lenses. kinda hints their upcoming ML cameras can handle EF lenses without hassle

I hope so as but as the old saying goes "time will tell".

 

[amorse]

I totally get your frustration but we who want those two lenses updated are in the minority and the 70-200 crowd is much more vast.

I have doubt that you are correct and it makes good business sense for Canon to proceed accordingly. What I don't get is why no 50mm 1.4 has been offered. That I would consider, too.

Sorry to go off-topic.

I just wonder if Canon is struggling in determining where to position the 50 1.4 and is humming and hawing over how to approach the problem. There seems to be two schools of thought on that lens - one who wants something faster than the 1.8 but the size and weight of the lens must be retained with decent quality, and the other group which would prefer Canon look to create a 50 1.4 where image quality is a priority and little else. Canon's offering for 85 1.4 indicates that the pickle jar size approach seems to be ideal, but that may not service the current users of the 50 1.4 who have to hand hold the camera for long periods and manage a relatively low profile lens.

Wild speculation continues!

 

[barton springs]

We <a href="http://www.canonrumors.com/the-canon-ef-70-200mm-f-4l-is-ii-is-coming-in-april-cr3/">reported in March of this year</a> that the upcoming Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L IS II was going to be announced this month.</p>
<p>I will say that I am pleasantly surprised about how many people seem to be looking forward to this lens.</p>
<span id="pty_trigger"></span>

I've always thought that the 4.0 versions of the 70/200mm are extremely underrated. I've owned both versions and my advice for the novice sports photographers with limited financial resources is to find a clean used non IS 4.0 on eBay or craigslist or new/used at B&H/Adorama. My assignment logistics always require speed to be never under 750 so no need for IS. The 4.0 IS is my go to long zoom for indoor handheld especially personal photography. I'm looking forward to the v2 but I'm pleased with v1 ...but it'll be even better so I'm in! BTW my company is all action sports assignments such as road races, short triathlons, IRON distance Tri's, ultra distance trial runs, & bike races ...so tri-pods are always being used for any lens longer than medium zooms 24-70 2.8L or the very popular 24/105 4.0L IS.

I personally will always have two of each version and believe me the back-ups come in handy when the shooters have a malfunction or forget to bring the lens which is stupid as hell except I did it once myself(!) as a novice

CANON rules

Rick
in Austin

 

[josephandrews222]

...I'm wondering if a reason that a new 70-200 f4 IS is likely is because of the fact that...

*when this lens is attached to my M6, and I turn on IS (on the lens), the IS is 'always on' (unless I turn off IS on the lens itself).

When attached to my 5DMk3, the IS only 'engages' when I press on the shutter-release button.

I had never discovered this 'feature', until earlier today when I aimed to compare 150mm focal length images captured with M6 + 18-150mm EF-M lens vs. M6 + adapter + 70-200 f4 IS lens.

CR readers...what say you?

Can I turn 'off' IS acquisition when using the 70-200 lens + M6 combo any other way than literally turning it off on the lens?

...and if not, is this a reason that a new lens is on the horizon?

I'm about to test my 17-55 f2.8 IS lens (with adaptor) to see if its IS acts the same way...a way that I'm sure kills M6 battery life.

 

[slclick]

...I'm wondering if a reason that a new 70-200 f4 IS is likely is because of the fact that...

*when this lens is attached to my M6, and I turn on IS (on the lens), the IS is 'always on' (unless I turn off IS on the lens itself).

When attached to my 5DMk3, the IS only 'engages' when I press on the shutter-release button.

I had never discovered this 'feature', until earlier today when I aimed to compare 150mm focal length images captured with M6 + 18-150mm EF-M lens vs. M6 + adapter + 70-200 f4 IS lens.

CR readers...what say you?

Can I turn 'off' IS acquisition when using the 70-200 lens + M6 combo any other way than literally turning it off on the lens?

...and if not, is this a reason that a new lens is on the horizon?

I'm about to test my 17-55 f2.8 IS lens (with adaptor) to see if its IS acts the same way...a way that I'm sure kills M6 battery life.

fwiw, all my IS lenses work just fine on my M5

 

[Canondude2018]

LOL, I wonder how many suckers out there sold their 70-200mm 4.0 IS in anticipation for this piece of vaporware.

Imaginary lenses and cameras take great pictures and cost nothing.

 

[slclick]

LOL, I wonder how many suckers out there sold their 70-200mm 4.0 IS in anticipation for this piece of vaporware.

Imaginary lenses and cameras take great pictures and cost nothing.

I would imagine less than the number of fingers on a sawmill operators left hand.

 

[Random Orbits]

BTW ... I have the 70-200 f/2.8L IS II and I would still consider the new f/4 IS II. There are a lot of times that the f/2.8 stays home because it's just too heavy. There's a place for both in my kit: The f/2.8 when it just has to be so, and the f/4 when low weight is a priority.

Did you ever look at the 70-300L? It has a larger diameter but shorter packed length than the 70-200s. For bags designed for FF gear, the 70-300L can be packed vertically like a 24-70 rather than lying on its side. IQ is good. You lose a little bit in max aperture in the native 70-200 range but it beats carrying an extender.

 

[josephandrews222]

...I'm wondering if a reason that a new 70-200 f4 IS is likely is because of the fact that...

*when this lens is attached to my M6, and I turn on IS (on the lens), the IS is 'always on' (unless I turn off IS on the lens itself).

When attached to my 5DMk3, the IS only 'engages' when I press on the shutter-release button.

I had never discovered this 'feature', until earlier today when I aimed to compare 150mm focal length images captured with M6 + 18-150mm EF-M lens vs. M6 + adapter + 70-200 f4 IS lens.

CR readers...what say you?

Can I turn 'off' IS acquisition when using the 70-200 lens + M6 combo any other way than literally turning it off on the lens?

...and if not, is this a reason that a new lens is on the horizon?

I'm about to test my 17-55 f2.8 IS lens (with adaptor) to see if its IS acts the same way...a way that I'm sure kills M6 battery life.

fwiw, all my IS lenses work just fine on my M5

I found this--late to the party, I guess!

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/4123692

(thread title: Mount Adapter EF-EOS M issue on M5 + IS EF lenses)

 

[Michael Clark]

Obviously not.

 

[I Simonius]

if the mk2 f4L has the IQ of the f2.8Lmk2 (better than the 70-300) I'm buying it pronto.

one can hope

Don't need a fast 70-200 lens but do need a light(er) lens

 

[hendrik-sg]

Is the lens announced this month? Yes, the month it will be announced will be "this month" by then, but who knows which of the coming (infinie amount of) months will be the one.

But ok, as long as i dont know if my EF mount System is futureproof they can kiss my ass and print their money themselves, they will not get my money anyways.

lets take pictures instead of throwing money out of the window, we all have enough equipment, and if not it can be had used for a great price. And this lens is a robust one with great optical quality.

 

[Alexlin]

Every time there's a new L lens, a slew of people say that it isn't needed because the current one is just so damn good. Then the reviews come out showing (usually) that the new one blows the old one away.
Maybe Canon knows a thing or two that the fans don't?

Agree and it makes sense.
The must say the old lens perfect cuz they are the existing user. ;D and if the new comes, the old lens likely are not the best anymore.

Obviously, neither the F/2.8 nor F/4 are perfect.

 

[Don Haines]

Every time there's a new L lens, a slew of people say that it isn't needed because the current one is just so damn good. Then the reviews come out showing (usually) that the new one blows the old one away.
Maybe Canon knows a thing or two that the fans don't?

Agree and it makes sense.
The must say the old lens perfect cuz they are the existing user. ;D and if the new comes, the old lens likely are not the best anymore.

Obviously, neither the F/2.8 nor F/4 are perfect.

Also, sometimes materials/components are reaching end of life and just will not be available in a year or two,,,,, at which point Canon would have to re-do the design.... and if they do, then they will take advantage of newer materials, design tools, coatings, and higher precision machining to release an updated version, and it will be superior to the old one....

I have the 70-200 F4 IS lens. It is a great lens.... one of the best light telephoto lenses out there..... and I have no doubt that the new one will be significantly better. Will I buy one? Probably not... but then again the market for this lens is not existing owners, it is mostly new purchasers..... the same people who would have bought the old one, and for all those people it is like getting a free upgrade.


Lenses have steadily improved in quality. This is just another bump up the ladder.

 

[slclick]

Meanwhile I'm anxiously awaiting real life Tamron 70-120 f/4 reviews. (From the usual reputable suspects)