Thinking about this but wanting your thoughts....

[CarlTN]

So I got your quote mixed up with random orbits, but you're both saying similar things...my mistake though. In any case, to have the 70-300L and never use it, makes zero sense to me. You should definitely sell it to someone who will use it.

Yes, but I live in a part of the world where second hand (used) is not quite as appreciated. Even if the lens in question is mint. That, and I have never tried to sell anything second hand here. I started a thread about it here:

http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=20156.0

Not sure what I will do with it, but for now it just sits in a case in a cabinet.

Thanks to eBay and websites like it, it shouldn't matter what part of the world you're in.

 

[CarlTN]

Yes, but I live in a part of the world where second hand (used) is not quite as appreciated. Even if the lens in question is mint. That, and I have never tried to sell anything second hand here. I started a thread about it here:

http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=20156.0

Not sure what I will do with it, but for now it just sits in a case in a cabinet.

I like the 70-300L for travel because it's lighter/more compact than the other options (70-200 or 100-400). I picked up a used 100-400L, and between the 70-200L II, 70-300L and 100-400L, I'm guessing that it'll be 100-400L that gets sold.

Do you think this will be the year the 100-400 gets replaced? And if so, will it be an 80-400 or similar, like Nikon did?

 

[Random Orbits]

Do you think this will be the year the 100-400 gets replaced? And if so, will it be an 80-400 or similar, like Nikon did?

I would like to think so, but I'm not holding my breadth. It's time to replace it. According to AlanF and others in this forum, the Tamron can do as well as the 100-400L at 400mm. I woud expect the 100-400L replacement to do significantly better at 400mm, and depending on how much better it is, it could bring up the debate as to which is better: upres-ing the 100-400L II or using the Tamron at a longer focal length. And if Canon could do that, then the 100-400L II will be a winner: better AF, better IQ and significantly smaller and lighter. Even if the 100-400L replacement comes out this year, I'd probably wait until next Christmas when the prices soften a bit.

The 100-400mm range is fine as long as the IQ is high. According to TDP crops, the Nikon 80-400 softens significantly from 300 to 400mm. I'd much rather have a smaller zoom range and better IQ at the long end. That and f/4.5 at 80 or 100mm isn't all that exciting either.

 

[CarlTN]

Do you think this will be the year the 100-400 gets replaced? And if so, will it be an 80-400 or similar, like Nikon did?

I would like to think so, but I'm not holding my breadth. It's time to replace it. According to AlanF and others in this forum, the Tamron can do as well as the 100-400L at 400mm. I woud expect the 100-400L replacement to do significantly better at 400mm, and depending on how much better it is, it could bring up the debate as to which is better: upres-ing the 100-400L II or using the Tamron at a longer focal length. And if Canon could do that, then the 100-400L II will be a winner: better AF, better IQ and significantly smaller and lighter. Even if the 100-400L replacement comes out this year, I'd probably wait until next Christmas when the prices soften a bit.

The 100-400mm range is fine as long as the IQ is high. According to TDP crops, the Nikon 80-400 softens significantly from 300 to 400mm. I'd much rather have a smaller zoom range and better IQ at the long end. That and f/4.5 at 80 or 100mm isn't all that exciting either.

I agree. I like my Sigma 120-400, especially for the price (I plan to sell it because I also bought the 70-300L...it has even more uses for me). I feel this Sigma is a better buy than the current 100-400 Canon. 120 is not quite as wide as 100, but it's far wider than 150mm. It's also half a pound lighter than the Tamron 150-600 (and about $200 less costly). So if you don't need 600mm, I feel it's a decent choice. If you need 600 and don't need wider than 150, the Tamron is likely better overall...a clear winner even. From the pictures I've seen online, the Tamron has better background bokeh than either the Canon 100-400 or this Sigma 120-400...but it's still not as good as the Canon 70-300L. I can't believe how smooth its bokeh is at all focal lengths. And its contrast is mind-blowing, for a zoom, in my opinion.