waiting for a new 100-400mm lens
- Thread starter leecheeyee
- Start date
- Status
, do anybody know when it releases?
Well, if you were to believe in rumors, it released five years ago, maybe more. Its been rumored as being imminent at least that long.
Upvote
0
I don't know if it is going to be replaced, honestly. They went "L" status on the 70-300, and came out with the 200-400L (at least it's been announced).
If I was on the fence, and needed that long of a lens, I would just find a "cheap" 100-400. Or get the 70-300L
If I was on the fence, and needed that long of a lens, I would just find a "cheap" 100-400. Or get the 70-300L
Upvote
0
In FF camera, 300mm is not enough is some scenario. I don't like the IS function of the old version. There are only one class protection. Mostly, the old one is designed for film camera not for digital camera. About 200-400mm f/4. I like, but only care for the price. It would be more than 4000USD, it is out of my business.
Upvote
0
Aaron78 said:
But not unexpected from Canon.
Maybe it is just a marketing ploy for all of us to marvel at the bargain when it sells for $9000.
Upvote
0
birdman said:
Copied the following from another thread where I posted some info on the 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS L. Keep in mind many of these will likely apply to the rumored 100-400mm f/4-5.6 IS L, except, hopefully the focus/zoom ring reversal design of the 70-300. The 70-300L has a lot of positives, the section below talks about the negatives. This was originally written in context of a comparison with the 70-200 f/4 + 1.4x:
************************
Negatives on the 70-300mm:
1) slower aperture - yes, if you need the extra stops, this won't be the right lens. However, I've shot this at weddings and receptions with and without flash at ISO's up to 3200 on a 7D without issue. The reach on a 7D in a church or outdoor wedding outweighs the slower aperture when you need focal length.
2) The zoom and manual focus rings are reversed on this lens when compared to the 70-200, the 24-70, the 24-105, 16-35, etc..... In other words, the far ring is the zoom, the near ring is the manual focus. This is frustrating, for one, it breaks what you've learned to do with the zoom ring as you find yourself reaching for the wrong ring at times. Second, it makes you extend your arm further from your body, leading to a more unstable stance when shooting. I like to keep my arm close and tight to solidify my stance. On the 70-300 you have to move your arm further out to handle the zoom ring. It's a PITA, I have no idea why Canon did that. It's the #1 reason I could dump the lens if a new 100-400mm f/4-5.6 IS L were to appear.
3) The hood, filter mount and lens extension....the hood "looks" cheap....no fancy tulip design, it's a straight up barrel. It just looks dumpy...but it works. The filter mount is 67mm which means it does not fit the filters I use with the 70-200mm or several other lenses I have...so if you use polarizers or ND's, just know you might be buying more to fit it. Note the lens is not internal focus and extends 2.11" at 300mm full zoom.
4) Variable aperture - you need to account for that in your exposures, especially when shooting in manual mode and tracking/zooming in-out at the same time. The lens max apertures by natural focal length (unadjusted for crop 1.6x body) are:
f/4.0: 70-103mm
f/4.5: 104-154mm
f/5.0: 155-228mm
f/5.6: 229-300mm
**********************
Overall, if you want a solid, light weight, and sharp solution, the 70-300mm is a great choice, assuming you can deal with the reversed focus/zoom rings (god I hate that!!!).
I bought it to use on the 5D3 and the 1Dx in order to recover some of the focal length lost on a full frame body, when compared with the reach the 7D had with the 70-200mm. I'm selling my 5D2 and my 7D once I have the 1Dx in and I've become comfortable with the 5D3.
I wanted to recover some reach I'll lose when the 7D is gone, and I didn't want to have to rely on the 1.4x extender on the tele-zooms all the time. I didn't want the current 100-400mm and with no new version of that in sight yet, it came down to either this lens or the 300mm f/4 IS L prime and the 1.4x tele-extender III that I own. The zoom proved to be much more flexible for the same cost and overall sharpness.
If a new 100-400mm f/4-5.6 IS L comes out and does not have this dumb focus/zoom ring reversal, that would be the one reason I would sell this lens, however I would have to believe a new version of the 100-400mm would run about $2600 and not be available until 18 months after announcing it, given Canon's recent trends.
Upvote
0
H
HaveVoid
Guest
You can add me to the list of people that hope this lens will finally become a reality. I have heard fantastic things about the 70-300L though, but the loss of that last 100mm would be felt as I shoot primarily aviation.
More than anything, I hope the new 100-400 (if it happens) is just a bit more consistent. Some days, mine is fantastic, and then suddenly its soft, and then tack sharp again
More than anything, I hope the new 100-400 (if it happens) is just a bit more consistent. Some days, mine is fantastic, and then suddenly its soft, and then tack sharp again
Upvote
0
It has internal focusing, but it extends when you zoom. Two different things!sublime LightWorks said:
Upvote
0
L
Loswr
Guest
sublime LightWorks said:
That's a negative? So...you'd prefer a 'cooler' looking hood to one that's designed for optimal optical parformance? Let me guess - in that other thread, you listed the cool-looking distinctive white color of the lens as an advantage, right? (note that because the lens has no fluorite elements, there's no reason - other than 'cool-looking' aka marketing - for the lens to be white)
sublime LightWorks said:
Why no interest in the current 100-400mm? IMO, it's a very good lens. Could it use an update, especially the IS system? Yes, but it's certainly no slouch optically (it bests the 300/4 IS + 1.4x).
Upvote
0
the old 100-400 version is old design for film age. The IS function only supports 1 class protection. The pull- push focus is easy to dusted. Further more, there is no water resistance design. So, how can I take this lens in Africa jungle such as in Kenna, Nigeria take photo?
I can accept new version price around 1200USD~1500USD. Let's expect it.
I can accept new version price around 1200USD~1500USD. Let's expect it.
Upvote
0
leecheeyee said:
Even the price up to 2500USD, I think it is ok. There are some photo which toke in Dubai. I thank I would do my photographer favour in my sparetime as well as I can.
www.flickr.com/photos/leecheeyee
Upvote
0
L
Loswr
Guest
leecheeyee said:
FWIW, the 100-400mm has water/dust sealing at the zoom extension and under the switches - it lacks only the mount gasket for full sealing (the similarly-designed 28-300L has the gasket, and is a 'weather-sealed' lens).
I didn't have a dSLR the last time I went to Kenya, Tanzania, and Rwanda, but if I go back, I'd bring the current 100-400mm with no hesitation.
A new version will likely cost north of $2500.
Upvote
0
Now, I am traveling in Nigeria. The wet day is easy to destroy your luxurious lens. If nothing happens, it would ok. But nobody can guarantee no accident happen. For example, when you go out from an indoor cold environment, into a warm wet outdoor area, you would find your lens covers foggy. It would probably be wrecked without water-sealed.
Upvote
0
- Status
Similar threads
