leecheeyee said:Waiting for 100~400mm f/4~5.6 IS II.
Mt Spokane Photography said:Until someone comes up with a better lens, Canon has no real incentive to improve a already good lens.
Lee Jay said:My 70-200/2.8L IS II with 2x TC III performs as well at f/5.6 and 400mm as does my 100-400L when the IS on the 100-400 is turned off. With the IS on, the 70-200 is more consistently sharp and has vastly better IS and handling.
neuroanatomist said:leecheeyee said:Waiting for 100~400mm f/4~5.6 IS II.
Probably at least 10 years, if ever.The current lens is f/4.5-5.6, so we'll either see an f/4.5-5.6 II an f/4-5.6 (no II, since aperture range is different). Assuming it's the latter, you'll have to wait for that lens to be updated.
No way. These two are not similar. They differ by a digit in the price and by a few Kilograms in weight not to mention the size ;Diaind said:Better start saving for the 200-400 with 1.4 built in as it looks to be current replacement
I wonder if your lens has problems?Lee Jay said:Mt Spokane Photography said:Until someone comes up with a better lens, Canon has no real incentive to improve a already good lens.
The 100-400L is a so-so lens. It's capable of great shots, but it has problems. Wide open, its sharpness varies with IS element position much more than it should. IS performance is terrible (I mean, really, really terrible). Handling is lousy because the natural place to put your hand is on the lock ring or AF ring. The AF ring should be farther out and not turned by turning the lock ring so you aren't accidentally manually focusing when you don't intend to be.
We're getting f/8 AF back, and we're getting higher pixel counts. We need a 100-400 that's designed with the 1.4x TC III in mind, that has vastly better IS and better handling, and that stays sharp wide open regardless of where the IS elements happen to be.
My 70-200/2.8L IS II with 2x TC III performs as well at f/5.6 and 400mm as does my 100-400L when the IS on the 100-400 is turned off. With the IS on, the 70-200 is more consistently sharp and has vastly better IS and handling.
tron said:Boo hoo I want one too :-[kubelik said:... still hoping the 400 f/5.6 L IS gets replaced by a 500 f/5.6 L IS ...
Yes! As many of us who want a rather big white L telephoto that does not cost a 5 digit amount :kubelik said:tron said:Boo hoo I want one too :-[kubelik said:... still hoping the 400 f/5.6 L IS gets replaced by a 500 f/5.6 L IS ...
glad to see I'm not the only one!
neuroanatomist said:Lee Jay said:My 70-200/2.8L IS II with 2x TC III performs as well at f/5.6 and 400mm as does my 100-400L when the IS on the 100-400 is turned off. With the IS on, the 70-200 is more consistently sharp and has vastly better IS and handling.
Copy issue?