waiting for a new 100-400mm lens

[Loswr]

Note that the 100-400mm lacks the seal at the mount gasket that would otherwise make it a 'weather-sealed' lens like the 28-300mm.

Why, in your opinion, the 100-400 lacks this seal?

Timing. Canon started releasing 'weather- and dust-sealed' lenses in 1999, and the 100-400mm is from 1998 (whereas the 28-300mm is from 2004).

 

[leecheeyee]

Note that the 100-400mm lacks the seal at the mount gasket that would otherwise make it a 'weather-sealed' lens like the 28-300mm.

Why, in your opinion, the 100-400 lacks this seal?

Timing. Canon started releasing 'weather- and dust-sealed' lenses in 1999, and the 100-400mm is from 1998 (whereas the 28-300mm is from 2004).

As 100-400 v1 is too old to get, I have to wait.

 

[Loswr]

As 100-400 v1 is too old to get, I have to wait.

I must say, I really don't understand this attitude. There are lots of lenses that are even older, that doesn't change the fact that they're excellent lenses.

 

[Drizzt321]

As 100-400 v1 is too old to get, I have to wait.

I must say, I really don't understand this attitude. There are lots of lenses that are even older, that doesn't change the fact that they're excellent lenses.

You have to understand the mindset of us techno-geeks (assuming leecheeyee is one also). If it's more than 6 months, it's not new. If it's more than a year, it's starting to get aged. If it's more than 2 years, it's positively ancient.

At least, that's the way it is with electronics & almost anything to do with a microchip (including the CMOS sensors to a degree). Now I personally think with something that depends on physics to get the quality (such as lenses), a great lens is a great lens, even if with newer materials & designs it could be better.

That said, it would be nice for an updated design considering it's age & new things they can do with it. Unfortunately, it will probably be a pretty big jump in cost :\

 

[Loswr]

You have to understand the mindset of us techno-geeks (assuming leecheeyee is one also). If it's more than 6 months, it's not new. If it's more than a year, it's starting to get aged. If it's more than 2 years, it's positively ancient.

From your signature: 5D mark 2, 5D mark 3, EF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM, EF 135mm f/2L, EF 85mm f/1.8

24-105, released in 2005. 135L, released in 1996. 85/1.8, released in 1992. Dude, you better throw that old ancient crap in the bin and get some new lenses.

 

[Drizzt321]

You have to understand the mindset of us techno-geeks (assuming leecheeyee is one also). If it's more than 6 months, it's not new. If it's more than a year, it's starting to get aged. If it's more than 2 years, it's positively ancient.

From your signature: 5D mark 2, 5D mark 3, EF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM, EF 135mm f/2L, EF 85mm f/1.8

24-105, released in 2005. 135L, released in 1996. 85/1.8, released in 1992. Dude, you better throw that old ancient crap in the bin and get some new lenses.

Haha, you can have my 135L after you pry it off my camera after it's broken and shattered

 

[leecheeyee]

You have to understand the mindset of us techno-geeks (assuming leecheeyee is one also). If it's more than 6 months, it's not new. If it's more than a year, it's starting to get aged. If it's more than 2 years, it's positively ancient.

From your signature: 5D mark 2, 5D mark 3, EF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM, EF 135mm f/2L, EF 85mm f/1.8

24-105, released in 2005. 135L, released in 1996. 85/1.8, released in 1992. Dude, you better throw that old ancient crap in the bin and get some new lenses.

Let's talk about how to take a good picture.
A good picture must have a good subject firstly, and then composition to picture, shut down the shutter. Finnally, sofeware provisionning. Every step would be effected to our work. As a tourist, a powerful DSLR with convenient carry is important. Sometime, we have to get a faster auto focus function with light weight. So, we have to upgrade our device every 2,3 years after new version releases. Am I right?

 

[twdi]

Are there at least as good alternatives for the 100-400?

 

[Loswr]

Are there at least as good alternatives for the 100-400?

Depends on what you consider an alternative. There are a couple of other options to get you to 400mm f/5.6 - the 400/5.6 prime or the 300/4 IS with 1.4x extender. But if you think the 100-400mm is 'old'...well, both primes are even older. Else, your options are to get one of the fast supertele primes (several thousand $$$$), 3rd party options like the Bigma where you sacrifice IQ, or 3rd party options like the Sigma 120-300/2.8 with a TC (still a few thousand $). So...for 400mm, not really.

If you are ok with just 300mm, yes, there are options - notably the excellent 70-300mm f/4-5.6L IS.

 

[Drizzt321]

I actually recently came across the Tamron 200-500 f/5.0-6.3 looking for a super-telephoto to shoot the upcoming solar eclipse (going to be a looong drive up to Redding, CA). Haven't read a ton of reviews, but the ones I have makes it seem like it's a pretty decent lens.

 

[Kernuak]

So, we have to upgrade our device every 2,3 years after new version releases. Am I right?

I'm sure many professionals who make a living would disagree, not to mention many experienced hobbyists/amateurs/whatever other title you want to use. I also have the 100-400, don't have any signs of dust, although I don't use it much any more and want to sell it. However, the reason I don't use it much isn't because it isn't a good lens, but because I use the 300 f/2.8 with an extender. One of the main reasons is the extra stop of light it gives me and the faster focusing, although sometimes I lament the lightness of the 100-400. Note that the 300 f/2.8 isn't much newer than the 100-400 and it hasn't put me off using that lens or made me want to replace it with the MkII version.

 

[leecheeyee]

thank you everybody giving me so such nice advices. Let's terminate this subject discussion.

 

[IIIHobbs]

With the upcoming 200-400 F4 w/1.4x, how difficult, or even likely, would it be for Canon to simply manufacture the 200-400 f4 without the 1.4x as an alternative?!

This lens could be offered at a much lower price point than the 1.4x variant, but likely well above what the current 100-400 is going for (guess $5k).

Looking at the L Series line up, a 200-400 (non 1.4x) would fit well in the current line up of super-telephoto zooms and primes.

 

[dturano]

I picked up a used 100-400mm today, I was torn between a lot of lens and last minute decided to jump on a 100-400mm used, price sold me. I didn't even check the date code, I was checking quality, condition, and being that i never used this lens the push/pull which i loved. I took some test shots and was happy with the results, the good thing is I have a thirty day return policy and past that a 6 moth warranty on the lens.

The date code on mine is 2000 and after googling the code, i see it was sold on fredmiranda back in 05, i picked it up locally used in NY about 12 years after is was manufactured.

Canon may not offer a new version because they dont want to fix whats not broken, the lens is awesome, at least my copy, if they have a version II it would have to be better, but I think for the price point they are in the current lens works, while im sure they can improve the lens im not sure they could achieve drastic results without breaking price points.

 

[dturano]

in short, glad i didn't wait and grabbed the 100-400mm range i was looking for on a FF body. If a new once came out i would welcome it and sell my lens for a new version, even when new versions come out Ls hold a good resale value so its win win either way.

 

[Mt Spokane Photography]

Let's talk about how to take a good picture.
A good picture must have a good subject firstly, and then composition to picture, shut down the shutter. Finnally, sofeware provisionning. Every step would be effected to our work. As a tourist, a powerful DSLR with convenient carry is important. Sometime, we have to get a faster auto focus function with light weight. So, we have to upgrade our device every 2,3 years after new version releases. Am I right?

Lenses are not upgraded every two or three years. ten or twenty is more average. Bodies, on the other hand, get significant advances every 3-5 years, so upgrading them every 5 years usually results in significant advances in IQ, and even that depends on what you value. Some are quite happy with 10 year old bodies, they get images that they like and don't need higher ISO or better NR.