More EF 100-400 f/4.5-5.6L IS II Talk [CR2]

[Lee Jay]

Ugh I took out my 70-200 2.8 Mk2 with the 1.4 today and mid shoot took it off and was much more pleased with the results, cropped or not. It's such a great lens, why degrade it? I know others would say it's such a great lens it can TAKE the hit but I just can't any longer. Thus the 100-400 Mk2 is up my alley.

One of these is from the 70-200II + 2x + 1.4x, the other from the 100-400L + 1.4x, both on the Canon 18MP 1.6-crop sensor. Honestly, I don't know which is which.

 

[docsmith]

Hope it is true. A smaller, lighter 100-400 II would be great. I'd prefer push pull, but the twist zoom won't make much of a difference to me. The key will be the IQ, especially with a 1.4TC. Whatever gives me the best IQ 400 mm and greater (that I can afford) is what I will end up with.

The lenstip review is in on the 150-600S. Better IQ (but not by much) at center and mid-frame than the Tamron 150-600, and Canon 70-300 and 100-400L. Some issues at FF edge with IQ, especially at 150 and 300 mm.

So, for me, Canon needs to beat that.

 

[Etienne]

I have the 70-200 2.8 IS II and 2x extender. While I like it's versatility, it is slow to focus and soft wide open. I am interested in this 100-400 mkII if it delivers fast performance, reasonable price, not too heavy and sharp wide open.
Otherwise I'll stick with the combo I have.

To be honest, I am hoping for a super sharp contrasty lightweight new 400 f/5.6 IS

 

[tron]

I believe we will see a 5DMkIV, a 6DMkII, a 1DxMkII before we see 100-400 II. Not to mention a 7DMkIII ;D ;D ;D ;D

I would like to ask CR if this proves yet another BS to refrain from mentioning it again and to stick to more plausible rumors please.

100-400 II rumors are good only for laughing!

 

[mrsfotografie]

Why even bother with the Tamron 150-600 and the Sigma on the way. I think they would be better off making something longer than 400mm.

Because a lot of people, myself included, would value something shorter in length and smaller in diameter than either the Tamron or the Sigma. The bag I would use for this lens won't take anything bigger than a 70-200/2.8 or the existing 100-400L in the retracted position. Further, the Tamron is a little heavy (not too bad) and the Sigma C is unknown. The Sigma S is way too heavy for me to handhold all day long. Finally, it's likely that this lens will out-focus the Tamron and SigmaC for moving subjects.

That's why.

If its about bag space and weight just get a teleconverter for the 70-200. Honestly for wildlife I would rather just use the 70-200 and crop than use the 100-400. The Tammy does well focusing in my experience.

Actually the 100-400 by itself is already lighter and smaller than the 70-200. If you're carrying both a 70-200 and a 100-400 in your bag, that's not a smart thing to do. Consider what you need and leave the rest at home is my motto (everything has to fit in my Lowepro Mini Trekker AW or it stays).

 

[Lee Jay]

Actually the 100-400 by itself is already lighter and smaller than the 70-200. If you're carrying both a 70-200 and a 100-400 in your bag, that's not a smart thing to do.

I don't. I carry one or the other (I use the same bag at home and at work, and I use the 70-200+2x at home and the 100-400 at work).

 

[Plainsman]

I believe we will see a 5DMkIV, a 6DMkII, a 1DxMkII before we see 100-400 II. Not to mention a 7DMkIII ;D ;D ;D ;D

I would like to ask CR if this proves yet another BS to refrain from mentioning it again and to stick to more plausible rumors please.

100-400 II rumors are good only for laughing!

...I think this is the real thing, both Sony and Nikon have had new ones and with a total of three low priced 150-600 zooms available in the next month or so it's now or never for Canon

 

[Nethawk]

^^ My thoughts as well. Canon must release this soon, the number of potential purchasers is dropping daily since Tamron & Sigma's releases.

 

[Plainsman]

As it is supposed to be very similar to the 70-300 I wouldn't be the least surprised that it was also designed at the same time by the same team!!
So if they've missed the boat on this one tough titty but humble pie if it turns out as sharp as the Sony @400.

 

[mrsfotografie]

As it is supposed to be very similar to the 70-300 I wouldn't be the least surprised that it was also designed at the same time by the same team!!
So if they've missed the boat on this one tough titty but humble pie if it turns out as sharp as the Sony @400.

Yes, even the conservative Canon will have to step in soon.

 

[JonAustin]

I believe we will see a 5DMkIV, a 6DMkII, a 1DxMkII before we see 100-400 II. Not to mention a 7DMkIII ;D ;D ;D ;D

I would like to ask CR if this proves yet another BS to refrain from mentioning it again and to stick to more plausible rumors please.

100-400 II rumors are good only for laughing!

No question there've been a lot of false rumors about this fabled update in recent years, but it seems inevitable for Canon to release it someday. And I don't believe that a late start relative to the Tamron and Sigma releases will matter all that much; if it tests out to be a superior optic, plenty of Tammy & Siggy owners will elect to sell their current telezooms and upgrade to the Canon 100-400 II. (And for most of those who don't, it'll probably be because the new 100-400 is beyond their price range.)

Personally, I'm keeping my cash in my wallet in the belief that the 100-400 II will materialize, and that it will be worth the wait. I can do that because I don't need to shoot beyond 200mm very often, and when I do (for the time being), I ratchet my 5DIII up from its usual mRAW setting to full RAW, and then crop in post.

Of all the rumors about the 100-400 II, the only thing that puts me off a bit is the "wrong" placement of the zoom ring. But I console myself in the fact that -- had Canon opted to repeat the push/pull design -- my fingers would have to be placed that far out on the lens barrel to zoom, anyway.

 

[slclick]

The way I figure it, all my 3rd party lenses have been training for a wrong way zoom ring Canon

 

[Loswr]

The way I figure it, all my 3rd party lenses have been training for a wrong way zoom ring Canon

Reversed position with the focus ring, the zoom ring will still turn the 'right' way.

 

[slclick]

The way I figure it, all my 3rd party lenses have been training for a wrong way zoom ring Canon

Reversed position with the focus ring, the zoom ring will still turn the 'right' way.

Oh you know what I meant, just had to chime in with persnickety correctness! lol...oh and here's your emoticon...

 

[MrFotoFool]

If it is based on the 70-300L design, let us not forget that lens does NOT take 1.4x or 2x extenders. Any chance this new 100-400 would not take extenders?

 

[mrsfotografie]

If it is based on the 70-300L design, let us not forget that lens does NOT take 1.4x or 2x extenders. Any chance this new 100-400 would not take extenders?

Because it starts at 100 there's a good chance there will be enough room for a Canon extender

 

[Steve Balcombe]

If it is based on the 70-300L design, let us not forget that lens does NOT take 1.4x or 2x extenders. Any chance this new 100-400 would not take extenders?

Because it starts at 100 there's a good chance there will be enough room for a Canon extender

That's right, and surely Canon won't launch a MkII which is 'worse' than the old lens in such a significant way? A few weeks after launching the 7D with AF at f/8?

 

[birdingbilly]

As I posted on an earlier thread I saw this new lens being used last week, it was not a pre-production model. It does take extenders and will af at f/8.0 at least on the 1DX so I assume will also do so on the 7D II and 5D III. The canon rumours description of the lens are accurate (it looks very much like the 70-300) and I was told that it would be launched in November. I wouldn't be surprised if Canon don't do a deal to package it with the 7D II - makes obvious sense as potentially its a great combo.

 

[Maximilian]

If it is based on the 70-300L design, let us not forget that lens does NOT take 1.4x or 2x extenders. Any chance this new 100-400 would not take extenders?

Because it starts at 100 there's a good chance there will be enough room for a Canon extender

That's right, and surely Canon won't launch a MkII which is 'worse' than the old lens in such a significant way? A few weeks after launching the 7D with AF at f/8?

... and competition (Tamron, Sigma) that is offering more reach within the lens and no need of TC.
IMHO A 100-400 L II without TC capability would be a bummer! But Canon strategists sometimes follow different logics than we do.

 

[gregorywood]

This actually makes a whole lot of sense. A 100-400 is really just a scaled up 70-300 - about the same zoom range, just a third bigger. Why not scale up the design of the existing lens?

I'm not saying I like it, but I'll have to see in person if I could get used to having the zoom ring on the "wrong" side, compared to my other three zooms - the 17-40L, 24-105L, and 70-200/2.8L.

And, yes, of course it'll extend, same as the current one does. It makes little sense to contain such a long lens in a non-extending frame the way the 70-200s are.

As a relatively new owner of the 70-300L, and having been concerned pre-purchase about the zoom ring arrangement, I can say that it was a bit awkward at first, but I adjusted. There is a larger issue (at least for me) that I've not heard any one else mention. The heel of my hand tends to ride on or at the edge of the focus ring while I'm using the zoom ring. As a result, I'm often manually focusing against the autofocus and have produced more blurred images as a result. I bought the third-party tripod ring by Vello and it helps to leave it on and use it as a platform in my left hand. This allows me to get my hand off the focus ring and also improves my ability to more accurately and quickly use the focus ring. The only thing is that the design of the Vello ring is not optimal. It works, but it moves and I don't like the release mechanism. It is over $100 less expensive than the Canon version.

At any rate, the reversed focus ring/zoom ring does present some challenges, but they are manageable in light of an outstanding lens. I may have to drop the $160 for the Canon mount.

Greg