Canon making a NEW 100-400 lens?

[StealthLude]

Few or more months back on this forum there was talk about Canon comming out with a new 100-400 lens...

I just wanted to bring up the topic again.

Anyone heard any word of such news? Or would it be safe to just get one now?

This happened to me already with the 70-200 f/4 lens, and soon after the f/4 with IS version comes out.

Thanks

[05Xrunner]

well if they do I hope they do Before Mid Feb. cause thats when i am ordering mine.

[WildWolf]

I would think that if Canon came out with a new 100-400, it would be significatnly more expensive. Just look at what canon did with the 85 L and MkII.

[CoolToolGuy]

There are many folks who wish Canon would update/upgrade the 100-400 L. Count me as one of them. Sometimes rumors get started by those that wish they were true :o We can only hope. . .

Have Fun,

[Dorman]

It'd be nice to see a new version but I'd still probably pick up the current version for the cost savings if I were in the market for a lens in this range.

[SYS]

If they're coming out with a newer version, I'd guess it's gotta be at least $500 more expensive....

[cjm]

yeah they are coming out with one, it is built very much like the 70-200 L lenses and is no longer a push pull lens. Man I gotta stop fibbing. :lol: In my dreams would they do this.

[Jaetie]

If they're coming out with a newer version, I'd guess it's gotta be at least $500 more expensive....

only cause they're going to give you the newest IS.

[Jaetie]

yeah they are coming out with one, it is built very much like the 70-200 L lenses and is no longer a push pull lens. Man I gotta stop fibbing. :lol: In my dreams would they do this.

come on, a push-pull is actually much easier to use on such a long telephoto than the twist-turn.

plus, if the ef 100-400mm turns out to be an internal focusing lens, the lens will be much longer than it is now, non-extended.

[ScottE]

I would like it better if they would come out with a 200-500 instead of another 100-400. It would partner well with a 70-200 and be more useful for birds and small animals.

[Lightstream]

come on, a push-pull is actually much easier to use on such a long telephoto than the twist-turn.

plus, if the ef 100-400mm turns out to be an internal focusing lens, the lens will be much longer than it is now, non-extended.


Ex-Bigma owner speaking. Prefer push pull apart from the damned dust because it does not involve so much twisting to rack it all the way out to 500. Canon needs to weather seal the next generation of 1-4's..

[cjm]

I would like it better if they would come out with a 200-500 instead of another 100-400. It would partner well with a 70-200 and be more useful for birds and small animals.Yeah I'd buy one of those. Wait I did the Tamron 200-500 version that is as light as a 70-200 f2.8 L unfortunately I am still unsure as to how sharp it is because its a outside lens and by the time I am off work, it is dusk :(

[kram]

A weather sealed latest gen IS - sound good. But seriously, if I could, I would just buy the current version and be so much happier :)

[gcogger]

This rumour has been cropping up every few weeks for the last few years!

[MrChad]

I'm not generally one to like a push-pull lens, mainly because I had to use some very horrid examples of them in my 35mm days.

That said, why does everyone want this lens upgraded? I doubt it will happen soon given the recent introduction not that long ago of the 28-300mmL IS which shares the build.

My buddy aquired one of these (100-400L), after using if for a brief period you simply forget that it's a push pull. It's instinctive and a truely wonderful lens. And the AF is very quick in deed. I doubt many better zooms stretching to 400mm can be had for the money.

If you've never tried one out you owe it to yourself...

[CoolToolGuy]

I'm not generally one to like a push-pull lens, mainly because I had to use some very horrid examples of them in my 35mm days.

That said, why does everyone want this lens upgraded? I doubt it will happen soon given the recent introduction not that long ago of the 28-300mmL IS which shares the build.

My buddy aquired one of these (100-400L), after using if for a brief period you simply forget that it's a push pull. It's instinctive and a truely wonderful lens. And the AF is very quick in deed. I doubt many better zooms stretching to 400mm can be had for the money.

If you've never tried one out you owe it to yourself...

I rented one, and was left wanting. It was soft at 400mm, and that seems to be common. Some suggest I rented a bad copy, but I just cannot seem to get excited about it. I picked up a refurb EF 35-350 L, and I am much more pleased with it. I call it my paparazzi lens, a role the 100-400 can't fill.

I had some bad experiences with push-pull zooms in the film days, too. My biggest objection is that it can be harder to zoom precisely when pushing/pulling than rotating.

Have Fun,

[MrChad]

I rented one, and was left wanting. It was soft at 400mm, and that seems to be common. Some suggest I rented a bad copy, but I just cannot seem to get excited about it. I picked up a refurb EF 35-350 L, and I am much more pleased with it. I call it my paparazzi lens, a role the 100-400 can't fill.

I had some bad experiences with push-pull zooms in the film days, too. My biggest objection is that it can be harder to zoom precisely when pushing/pulling than rotating.

Have Fun,

I can't say that I'd see a huge difference between 300 and 400mm in subject FOV, however I think 400mm does a much better job of isolating the background that last little bit.

I'm with you for the size of lens I'd opt for the 28-300mm L, but I must admit 400mm had such a nice background isolation. And from my buddy's copies sharpness was better then any 200mm or 300mm I have used even at 400mm. I found it as pleasing in IQ, as my 70-200mm L for my needs though.

[Longwatcher]

I have been hoping for an upgrade for a couple of reasons
1. The IS is first gen, came out just after the original 75-300 IS lens. I would like to see 3rd Gen IS.

2. Could stand some minor optical improvement which all Canon lenses seem to be getting these days.

3. It is way over due for upgrade.

On the flip side, I do not want anything but Push Pull for this lens, unless it is better optically then my 70-200 across the board, as the Push-Pull zoom is it's best feature for what I use this lens for now, which is airshow pictures (or when I need more range then my 70-200/2.8L can get). twist zoom takes way too long to be able to follow a jet aircraft close up as it goes by you at 500+MPH.

Just my opinion,

[CoolToolGuy]

On the flip side, I do not want anything but Push Pull for this lens, unless it is better optically then my 70-200 across the board, as the Push-Pull zoom is it's best feature for what I use this lens for now, which is airshow pictures (or when I need more range then my 70-200/2.8L can get). twist zoom takes way too long to be able to follow a jet aircraft close up as it goes by you at 500+MPH.


I guess this is a personal preference, but my argument with push/pull is that if I want to adjust the zoom "just a little" to get the best framing, a twist action is more precise than a push/pull. I have had the problem with all sorts of situations including motorsports, and although I have not shot an air show in several years, I would consider it the same. In the pre auto-focus days, push/pull was usually mixed with the focus (one-touch zooms), so it was a bonus, but I'll take my zoom with a twist, please.

Have Fun,

[Sprout Crumble]

only cause they're going to give you the newest IS.

I often see this argument but it doesn't stand up IMO. When IS was first introduced it was new and unproven technology using difficult to manufacture components.
Now, these kind of small electronic components and processing technologies are considerably easier and cheaper to manufacture. I utterly fail to see how putting the latest IS on a lens would even be as expensive as the antiquated and originally expensive parts used previously.

Same logic applies to the 85L mk2. People said the $500 bought you faster focusing because of more modern parts. They fail to understand these parts are now commonplace when the weren't in 1989. Canon is having our pants down.

[Lightstream]

I often see this argument but it doesn't stand up IMO. When IS was first introduced it was new and unproven technology using difficult to manufacture components.
Now, these kind of small electronic components and processing technologies are considerably easier and cheaper to manufacture. I utterly fail to see how putting the latest IS on a lens would even be as expensive as the antiquated and originally expensive parts used previously.

Same logic applies to the 85L mk2. People said the $500 bought you faster focusing because of more modern parts. They fail to understand these parts are now commonplace when the weren't in 1989. Canon is having our pants down.

I wish they would introduce slipstream upgrades of the electronics, but then we'd all go nuts trying to get 'late versions' of the lens as evidenced by the date codes, and our investments would depreciate just like any other electronic, techno-toy on the market now. That is the whole root cause of the depreciation, the continuing improvement. Nobody wants yesteryear's computers.

Though I do agree that the IS components have become cheaper.. you should see the Nintendo Wii, while I'm no longer a computer gamer, that console is a prime example of how exotic gyrosensors have now become a mainstream technology. Move the controller around (in real space) and it detects your motion, feeding it back to the game..

[Monito]

The 100-400 was introduced in Nov. 1998. Not as aged as some other lenses in Canon's lineup, but the original 85 f/1.2 L was introduced at the same time and has been upgraded.

Push-pull is wonderful to use. Don't fear it too much regarding dust, that issue has been over-hyped mainly by those who don't have a push-pull. I can imagine a modern push-pull with a fixed rear element so no chamber airflow anyway.

I am considering getting this lens, but will probably wait until PMA and see what is announced. Even then I might pick up a used one going cheap from somebody moving up.

[Sprout Crumble]

The 85L was released in 1989

[Monito]

The 85L was released in 1989

I see. I transposed two digits. Sorry :)

[Kanonenfutter]

This is again the subject of heated rumors. Anyone with any substantive info on this?

[FlyingPhotog]

Ok so the 400mm f/4 DO didn't set the world on fire but why couldn't the DO manufacturing process (which was supposed to yield lighter and cheaper?) be applied to other lenses?

[Keith R]

Ok so the 400mm f/4 DO didn't set the world on fire but why couldn't the DO manufacturing process (which was supposed to yield lighter and cheaper?) be applied to other lenses?
They could - it's the price of DO lenses (certainly the 400mm DO) that's the problem.

[raghu75]

TIme for a 100-400 f4 IS

[Longwatcher]

I just read a rumor that it is coming up in Spring 2009. but it is unreliable rumor at this time.

[MrChad]

TIme for a 100-400 f4 IS

Have you seen the size and price of the Nikkor 200-400mm/4 VR? Good heavens you can have it...

[John_TX]

I have a feeling a new 100-400 IS will be released soon...as I'm really tempted to buy the current version. If I do, it's guaranteed the new version with updated IS will be released within a couple of months. That's just the way it works.
Anyone want to contribute to my lens fund? Consider it an investment in getting the Mk II version of this lens in your hands quicker! :lol:

[Collin85]

If I contribute to your lens fund, how does that get the lens into my own hands quicker? ;) Oh, you trickster you!

[FlyingPhotog]

I have a feeling a new 100-400 IS will be released soon...as I'm really tempted to buy the current version. If I do, it's guaranteed the new version with updated IS will be released within a couple of months. That's just the way it works.
Anyone want to contribute to my lens fund? Consider it an investment in getting the Mk II version of this lens in your hands quicker! :lol:

Define "Soon..."

The next major photo expo isn't until (IIRC) late Feb or early Mar .. PMA in Vegas

[ak_powder_monkey]

they need a 200-400 f4 or a 200-500 f5.6

[Collin85]

they need a 200-400 f4 or a 200-500 f5.6

+1 .........

[John_TX]

+ 1 here too on a 200-400 f4 IS or 200-500 f5.6 IS

[FeXL]

... but I'll take my zoom with a twist, please.

Word.

Borrowed one for an afternoon to try. Couldn't get past the push-pull.

[telles75]

100-400 f4L and I am game :)

[Mike55]

200-500 5.6 IS twist zoom.

Sign me up for that one. I have no interest in a redone 100-400. I have a very good 420 IS right now at 5.6.

[PurelySwift]

200-400 f4 L IS please please please at PMA!

[motion_projekt]

200-400 f4 L IS please please please at PMA!

100-400 f/2 IS USM and i'd be happy!

[muscleflex]

the push pull aint so bad once you've used it a few times..
if the 1-4 lens is getting an update, i would think they'll just update the IS on it as it's 1st gen i believe compared to the 70-200 f4 IS

[muscleflex]

100-400 f/2 IS USM and i'd be happy!

lol - would you be able to afford it tho? ;)

[motion_projekt]

lol - would you be able to afford it tho? ;)

holy cr@p i meant f/4

haha!

no one would be able to afford it. not to mention carry the darned thing. LOL.

[telles75]

A better IS and having a fixed f4 would be amazing for this lens. It would be way more expensive though, not sure I could afford it :(

[John_TX]

A better IS and having a fixed f4 would be amazing for this lens. It would be way more expensive though, not sure I could afford it :(
I'm afraid such a lens would run at least $3k and weight at least 4-4.5 pounds.

[JohnnyG]

I'm all for a new 100-400 but please make it push-pull like the original!

I love my 100-400, but would like to see a new one!!!

[FlyingPhotog]

I'm afraid such a lens would run at least $3k and weight at least 4-4.5 pounds.

Probably half again more on both counts...

The Nikon 200-400 weights 7lbs and costs $5k.

Can't imagine a model from Canon being less in either way.

[photoguy6405]

Word.

Borrowed one for an afternoon to try. Couldn't get past the push-pull.

The only lens I had for many years, an old Vivitar 28-85mm. was a push-pull and I thought that's how they all were. It took me awhile to get used to the other kind.

[chupacabra31]

Would be great to see the new gen or an even better version of IS integrated into this lens. I also think it would be cool if they could somehow make the lens sharper at f 5.6. But one thing the OP forgets is that there WILL be production issues so you will have to wait 6 months to get a sharp copy afters it's release lol!

[PurelySwift]

Push-pull = dust pump
I'm happy some people like this current design, but I'm in for a twist zoom.

[chupacabra31]

Push-pull = dust pump
I'm happy some people like this current design, but I'm in for a twist zoom.

Personal preference, but I quite like the push/pull system over the twist, especially in a lens this size. The twist is kind of awkward in a lens this big.

[JWright]

I don't think this lens is going to be updated any time soon. Considering the number of them I'm seeing, it appears to be one of Canon's better sellers. Why mess with success?

[ObiDamnKenobi]

I agree with John. Don't think canon really feel the need to upgrade this lens, there is no contest. The 2 new sigma -400 and -500 proved to be not on the same level. And there is nothing in the same FL with IS. (Except nikon 200-400, but that's also $5000.)

A lot of people seem to confuse what they want canon to do with what canon will to do. I think canon has proved they don't give a crap about what people want. Direct print anyone..?

[geester1]

Cannon used to make an FD lense, it was awesome! I'm glad there are rumours they are going to make 100-400mm lens.

[05Xrunner]

Cannon used to make an FD lense, it was awesome! I'm glad there are rumours they are going to make 100-400mm lens.
???? the 100-400L has been out for like what 10years now

[Karl Johnston]

If they do come out with a new version. I'd want a 100-400 f4 USM IS with internal focusing.

Or am i dreaming?

[John_TX]

If they do come out with a new version. I'd want a 100-400 f4 USM IS with internal focusing.

Or am i dreaming?

Dreaming. Constant F4 would probably cost at least $4k and be about 2-pounds heavier.

[pendulum15]

I would love a constant f4 200-400 or 100-400 IS, Don't care if it is as big/expensive as the nikon 200-400..... Or maybe a 120-300 2.8 *IS*, but any those would make me very happy :D

[TheHoff]

Dreaming. Constant F4 would probably cost at least $4k and be about 2-pounds heavier.

The conversation here is literally repeating itself from the top of the same page.

[John_TX]

The conversation here is literally repeating itself from the top of the same page.

I thought it sounded familiar, but I was too lazy to re-read the thread, haha.
Canon needs to hurry up and update this lens so the speculation will finally end!

[jdizzle]

This discussion will never end. People are asking for something Canon will never update. If you aren't happy with the 100-400, go buy a Nikon body and a 200-400 VR and your gtg. :) Just don't think about the cost. ;)

[MDJAK]

This discussion will never end. People are asking for something Canon will never update. If you aren't happy with the 100-400, go buy a Nikon body and a 200-400 VR and your gtg. :) Just don't think about the cost. ;)


Hey, that's not a bad idea. Why didn't I think of that.

Wait, I did think of that, thank you.

Yes indeed, the Nikon 200-400 f4 is an amazing lens. I love it.

I think Canon will come out with the equivalent one of these days.

me

[CyberDyneSystems]

The trouble with a 100-400mm update is the lens still sells like hotcakes.
Canon may update it, it is very behind the times compared to most other White L lenses, but still, it (and the 30mm f/4 and the 400mm f/5.6 of the same generation) are in no danger of losing market sales.

[CyberDyneSystems]

This discussion will never end. People are asking for something Canon will never update. If you aren't happy with the 100-400, go buy a Nikon body and a 200-400 VR and your gtg. :) Just don't think about the cost. ;)

Yes, $5,000.00 and 7 pounds vs. $1,200.00 and two pounds,.. these lenses are comparable... :rolleyes: :lol:

[JohnnyG]

An update to the 100-400 would be great as long as it's still push-pull! I love mine!!!:D:D:D

[motion_projekt]

The conversation here is literally repeating itself from the top of the same page.

its an endless cycle!:rolleyes:

[AdamJL]

I would love a constant f4 200-400 or 100-400 IS, Don't care if it is as big/expensive as the nikon 200-400..... Or maybe a 120-300 2.8 *IS*, but any those would make me very happy :D

me too. So long as it has the Nikon's superb IQ of course.

[motion_projekt]

me too. So long as it has the Nikon's superb IQ of course.

as long as it doesnt have the nikon glass price tag. :p

[jdizzle]

Hey, that's not a bad idea. Why didn't I think of that.

Wait, I did think of that, thank you.

Yes indeed, the Nikon 200-400 f4 is an amazing lens. I love it.

I think Canon will come out with the equivalent one of these days.

me
I'm glad you're happy with it Mark! Congrats! :)

[jdizzle]

Yes, $5,000.00 and 7 pounds vs. $1,200.00 and two pounds,.. these lenses are comparable... :rolleyes: :lol:
Of course they don't compare but, it would be nice to see Canon make a lens of this caliber one day. I bet that this lens would cost more than Nikons 200-400 and would probably be around 6k-ish. :)

[BrantG]

All they have to do is make the AF faster and better IS. How hard can that be. lol

[metalman1010]

This discussion will never end. People are asking for something Canon will never update. If you aren't happy with the 100-400, go buy a Nikon body and a 200-400 VR and your gtg. :) Just don't think about the cost. ;)

Hmmm I do remember this exact same discussion about the 200mm f/1.8 lens. Nikon came out with the 200mm f/2 VR and WOW Canon comes out with a 200mm f/2 IS to combat it.

Sounds to me like Canon listened to the consumer complain.

I personally know that for sports shooting alone there is a gap between the 200mm and 400mm range that could easily be gotten by Canon that would have people purchasing in droves.

If they ever came out with a consistant f/4 lens that zoomed between 100-400mm or 200-400mm I think alot of people who couldn't afford or justify the 400mm f/2.8 pricetag would be lining up around the block to pick up that lens in a second. I think they could pull it off at less than the 300mm f/2.8 IS lens is at around $2500-3000.

And I for one would be in that line!

Ross

[MrChad]

Hmmm I do remember this exact same discussion about the 200mm f/1.8 lens. Nikon came out with the 200mm f/2 VR and WOW Canon comes out with a 200mm f/2 IS to combat it.

Sounds to me like Canon listened to the consumer complain.

I personally know that for sports shooting alone there is a gap between the 200mm and 400mm range that could easily be gotten by Canon that would have people purchasing in droves.

If they ever came out with a consistant f/4 lens that zoomed between 100-400mm or 200-400mm I think alot of people who couldn't afford or justify the 400mm f/2.8 pricetag would be lining up around the block to pick up that lens in a second. I think they could pull it off at less than the 300mm f/2.8 IS lens is at around $2500-3000.

And I for one would be in that line!

Ross

If you NEED a 200-400/4 you likely purchased a Nikkor and body to shove on the back of it, because the body in many cases is like an expensive lens cap for that thing.

Canon makes a lens between 200 and 400mm, I think it's called a 300mm.

There is nothing wrong with the current 100-400mm. It's light, relatively cheap for the range and best in class of any lens in this AF that I know of. I've used my buddies lots of times, great lens.

[cfibanez]

Here is the latest from CR (http://www.canonrumors.com/2008/12/ef-100-400-f4-56l-is-cr2/) on the features of a possible update to the 100-400L coming early next year:

- Push/Pull design gone
- Lens is faster at f/4
- New coating ala the 24L
- 4 stop IS
- Weather sealed
- “Sharpest zoom I’ve ever used.”
- Announcement Feb. 2009

[Karl Johnston]

If you wanted an extra fstop.. why not just use the lens to its f4 potential to the max focal length you can acheive before going higher?

[MrChad]

Here is the latest from CR (http://www.canonrumors.com/2008/12/ef-100-400-f4-56l-is-cr2/) on the features of a possible update to the 100-400L coming early next year:

- Push/Pull design gone
- Lens is faster at f/4
- New coating ala the 24L
- 4 stop IS
- Weather sealed
- “Sharpest zoom I’ve ever used.”
- Announcement Feb. 2009

why this isn't true? Who would buy and f/4L prime for $5000+ if they made a 100-400/4?

Physics says this lens would be huge. If you told me a new 4-5.6 or 3.5-5.6 was on the way I might buy it. But an f/4L? One look at the super expensive Nikkor says this just isn't so.

[S.Horton]

100-400 f4L and I am game :)

200-400 f/4 like the Nikkor........ :cool:

[ultimakf7]

why this isn't true? Who would buy and f/4L prime for $5000+ if they made a 100-400/4?

Physics says this lens would be huge. If you told me a new 4-5.6 or 3.5-5.6 was on the way I might buy it. But an f/4L? One look at the super expensive Nikkor says this just isn't so.

From CR... the title says it's f/4-5.6

[Karl Johnston]

Originally Posted by MrChad
why this isn't true? Who would buy and f/4L prime for $5000+ if they made a 100-400/4?

Try more like 10 =( k

[lowcrust]

What f/4 prime is 10k?

[40DAndy]

I've got my fingers crossed for this. a 100-400L or something of this equivalent is certainly going to be my next lens purchase

[pendulum15]

What f/4 prime is 10k?

400 f/4 DO.... :(

[motion_projekt]

400 f/4 DO.... :(

where did you see that?

http://www.samys.com/product_detail.php?item=3641

[bbbig]

I know Canon will release one soon, because I just ordered mine today. :D