Canon 100-400...updated version finally coming out soonish? Maybe?

[Jack Breakfast]

Recently I've spoken to a couple of people who are "in the know" and have "inside information" and APPARENTLY the long-awaited 100-400 replacement might even come out next year? Please forgive me if I'm getting into that dastardly "Canon Rumor" territory. But a 100-400 without the push-pull, sharp at 400 wide open, updated IS etc etc...has anyone any thoughts on this matter? I have the 70-300L now and it's terrific, but an updated 100-400 would be a dream-come-true for so many folks! I didn't buy the 100-400 this year b/c too many folks have copies that aren't sharp at 400 and I suppose I'm hoping the replacement will come out one of these years...

[Andrew Merwin]

This rumor has been floating around for at least 2 years. I would not hold my breath waiting for an updated version.

[Jack Breakfast]

"At least" are the operative words. I only mention this because I know someone who knows someone who knows someone who works for Canon...apparently the wheels are in motion...that said it is quite possibly a load of horse pucky! And I'll bet it is, too! Nobody knows anything. Well, a few people do, but they'll be keeping their mouths shut tight...hmm...

[John Chardine]

I think it's a reasonable rumour. Canon has sold a tonne of these lenses and it is getting long in the tooth now.

While we are on a wish list for the future, I would like a new 400/5.6 with IS, or a standard (non-DO), L-series 400/4 made to the series II super-tele standard!

[Jack Breakfast]

John
The idea behind the new 100-400, or so I'm told, is that the lens would have a 5.6 max. aperture and would be on par with the 400 prime's IQ at 400mm!! Hard to believe...almost impossible...

[Markus Jais]

It would be great to have a newer and even better 100-400, hopefully without the push-pull zoom, even better sharpness and maybe a magnification ration of at least 1:4 which would make this a killer lens for large flowers, dragonflies, etc.
It it does come out, I hope Canon doesn't go nuts with the price!

Markus

[Andrew Merwin]

It would be great to have a newer and even better 100-400, hopefully without the push-pull zoom, even better sharpness and maybe a magnification ration of at least 1:4 which would make this a killer lens for large flowers, dragonflies, etc.
It it does come out, I hope Canon doesn't go nuts with the price!

Markus

That would be really great.

[Sid Garige]

Here is some info on VII 100-400 I read some time back on canon rumors.
http://www.canonrumors.com/2012/06/c...4-5-6l-is-cr2/

[Andrew Merwin]

Here is some info on VII 100-400 I read some time back on canon rumors.
http://www.canonrumors.com/2012/06/c...4-5-6l-is-cr2/

I saw that. However, I have been reading about a new 1-4 lens on CR for about 2 years. That said, there will probably be a new 1-4 in 2013.

FWIW Department: Arite posted the following about the 1-4 in 2000:

"Confession #1: Though I still consider it the best lens in the world for photographing birds in flight (see FAQs on web site for details), I no longer carry my beloved "toy lens"--the Canon 400mm f/5.6 L--on my shoulder as my auxiliary intermediate telephoto. It has been replaced by the Canon 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L Image Stabilizer zoom lens. I have been using the 1-4 more and more every day and--contrary to some reports from other users--have been making razor sharp images at all focal lengths with wide open to moderately stopped down apertures. In addition, I have it used it wide open, handheld with the 1.4X tele-converter with excellent results (with static subjects) at 560mm. For bird photography, the versatility of this lens is unmatched; I find myself making images that I would never even have thought of before--especially of groups of birds in their surroundings. And though it is heavier than the 400 f/5.6L, it is also a superb flight lens. At Bosque Del Apache NWR late this fall, I used the 1-4 on a tripod before sunrise for "bird-scapes" and then again almost exclusively for the spectacular blast-offs. I only wish that the zoom were a bit smoother. I am even considering selling one of my 400 f/5.6s; I never ever thought that I'd say that when the 1-4 first came out....."

[Roman Kurywczak]

I for one don't care.......the push pull had to be the bane of all of us. I "liked" the 100-400 IS.......but the push pull now seems to be way outdated. Hand holding was fair at best........but compared to other lenses.....poor. I think you should look at the Sigma 120-300 f/2.8. An alternative i will be reviewing soon....... which with initial impressions.....will blow that out of the water. Don't belive me......1000's have had a hate/love relationship with that lens since the beginning....me included! I have been lloking for a replacement for a long time....and given my test drive of the 120-300.......won't even be close. Stay tuned........

[Sid Garige]

Roman,

I used previous non IS version of 120-300 sigma and it is a great lens. Looking forward to seeing your review.

-sid

[Daniel Cadieux]

.......the push pull had to be the bane of all of us. I "liked" the 100-400 IS.......but the push pull now seems to be way outdated

Funny thing is that the push/pull is one of the things I love about this lens!! I find it so easy to track an incoming bird and zooming out as it approaches. Not saying it is the very best lens in the world, I do believe your experiences with it, but it is alot better lens than what most say. I'm looking forward to your Sigma review too!

[Jack Breakfast]

Yes! I was very close to buying the 100-400 but opted for the much newer 70-300 instead. I'd known two folks whose copies of the 100-400 were not sharp wide-open at the long end. But who knows? Anyhow, there's no need to delve into rumor territory. Hopefully my "friend of a friend's inside source" is right and the new 100-400 will come out next year. Somehow I doubt it, though...

[Daniel Cadieux]

Another thing to consider is price. Canon has priced all of its new or revamped lenses much higher than before. New improved coatings, new IS, "better" zoom function, f/4 rather than f/4.5 (all rumours of course)...I wouldn't be surprised if they near doubled the price of the lens.

[Andrew Merwin]

Funny thing is that the push/pull is one of the things I love about this lens!! I find it so easy to track an incoming bird and zooming out as it approaches. Not saying it is the very best lens in the world, I do believe your experiences with it, but it is alot better lens than what most say. I'm looking forward to your Sigma review too!

I agree with Daniel. I have always liked this lens. It is light, versatile & the IQ has never been a problem with my edition. I frequently hike with it at altitude. When & if there is a new one, I would consider buying it if the price seemed reasonable.

[Jack Breakfast]

It never occurred to me that the new version (which may never arrive) could cost three grand! Four? I couldn't imagine! Those grubbers ought to keep the price low! You know, I've never even held the 100-400 in my hands. Perhaps I'd love the push/pull, who could know? Perhaps I should have tried one out before buying the 70-300...manzolito, that extra 100mm makes a big difference, I'm quite sure! That said, it is important to be happy with what one has! Some people have real problems, after all...I hate myself!

[Ian Cassell]

Interesting discussion. I went back and forth in my decision making and settled on the 400 prime, but I would be interested to see what Canon comes up with. As for the Sigma, I've been looking at that one too. Robert O'Toole took one to Alaska and I've been waiting for his review. I've been following the thread on that lens on POTN and, although the images have been good, there have been a fair number of problems with the IS or AF failing (I think Robert's first copy had problems too). The nice thing about the Sigma is that it is an f/2.8 -- meaning it will AF with a 2X TC on a crop-sensor camera.

[BobbyPerkins]

For me personally buying a newer improved lens of something I basicly already have doesn't accomplish much. I guess at the time I wanted the most bang for the buck, and decided to go with the versatality of the zoom and IS, and was not dissapointed. At 400mm I get very sharp images and not to mention some really sweet backgrounds (when I'm paying attention). I remember reading a forum where Jim Neiger bought a 400 5.6 prime as he bought into the sharpness hype, and then decided to sell it as there was no vast difference sharpness wise and preferred the IS & versatality of the zoom. If I didn't have it, or a 400mm equivelant, and they updated it I would certianly consider it. The fact I have it, I wouldn't bother replacing it until I can replace it with something that would make a significant difference in the field, like a 500 or 600mm prime. Until then I'm pretty content with the 100-400.
Most the people that complain about sharpness at 400mm I think have older versions, or have alot of "aquired skill" yet to aquire. One example for me: I remember I thought I had sharpness "issues" and then I got BreeseBrowser. When I previewed images in BreezeBrowser with "IQ" checked I was blown away at just how sharp my images could really be from camera RAW to post-processing. I think Adobe's Bridge was more to blame then my lens was. So I started using BreezeBrowser to really evaluate critical sharpness as I believe Arthur Morris does. Thank's Artie.
For bird photography, I'll replace my 100-400IS when I can get something bigger like a 500 or 600mm that with really make a significant difference out there in birdland.

[Sid Garige]

The nice thing about the Sigma is that it is an f/2.8 -- meaning it will AF with a 2X TC on a crop-sensor camera.

I used it quite a few times Ian during my first trip to Bosque. I did not like the quality with 2x. Since there is no focus limiter switch focusing is not fast and lens tends to hunt a lot in entire focal lenght. You dont see this with out Teleconverters.

-Sid

[Ian Cassell]

Sid, from what I understand, there is a big difference between the old 120-300 and the new one. I've seen images taken with the new one and the 2X which look quite good to my (minimally trained) eye. I do understand that it significantly slows down the AF, however. I'll be interested in reading Roman's review Robert has some outstanding images on his Sigma blog. His review on that site is quite glowing, but that is to be expected considering the venue. It is true that they did not include a focus-limiter switch and I just don't understand that!

[Sid Garige]

Sid, from what I understand, there is a big difference between the old 120-300 and the new one. I've seen images taken with the new one and the 2X which look quite good to my (minimally trained) eye. I do understand that it significantly slows down the AF, however. I'll be interested in reading Roman's review Robert has some outstanding images on his Sigma blog. His review on that site is quite glowing, but that is to be expected considering the venue. It is true that they did not include a focus-limiter switch and I just don't understand that!

Ian,

Lets shoot an email to Robert and Roman and see if they can provide us wit full reg images with 2x and also comment of focusing speed with 2x. I will shoot an email to Robert and Roman.

-Sid

[Ian Cassell]

Sounds great, Sid. I'd love to see the responses. As it doesn't seem that I'll be able to afford the 500/4 (even used) in the forseeable future, I've been going back and forth in my mind between a used Canon 300/2.8 IS and the new Sigma. I'm particularly interested in behavior with the 2X as I already own the 400/5.6 and it is the extra reach that I'm looking for more than the ability to zoom.

[Elliotte Rusty Harold]

Recent experience is that Canon gives us something like two years or more lead time between the initial announcement of a telephoto lens and actual availability. (Shorter lenses seems to be available much closer to announcements: I don't know why.) If you need the lens now I wouldn't wait. The current 100-400 is an excellent lens.