canon 100-400 f4

[kszczes]

Due to the push pull design of the canon 100-400 F4 IS does this cause more dust to collect on the sensor of a DSLR.

[timmyquest]

You will encounter people who claim that the lens is more prone to dust because it is being sucked into the crevices of the lens while zooming the lens out. Personally i think it's a load of crap...but then i've never owned the lens.

In either case, the lens doesn’t put your camera in any more harm then any other lens...

[CyberDyneSystems]

I solve this problem buy not pumping the lens in and out while under my sofa... ;)

Really I've never found it to be a problem.. but I don't shoot in areas filled with dust bunnies at eye level often.

[robertwgross]

I guess we are discussing the Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5 to 5.6 L IS lens.

We might have a discussion about whether the push-pull design will get dust into the lens structure. However, I don't think that is going to affect dust getting onto the camera's main image sensor, which is behind the shutter.

---Bob Gross---

[timmyquest]

which is behind the shutter.

Or more importantly...behind the rear element of the lens.

[BoySpot]

I read an awful lot of comments about the pumping of dust. Some of it sounded like people justifying why they don't like this way of zooming. I wondered about it because I was getting ready to buy it. The thing is, if it is going to pump dust, it is going to bring it into the lens, not into the sensor which has a nice element at the back of the lens in the way. I may be wrong (and often am) but I think it is a red herring. By the way, I eventually bought the lens and love it.

[CoolToolGuy]

Push-Pull, Shmush-pull - any lens that expands and contracts is susceptible to inhaling dust, regardless of how it is actuated. I think this is a legend that grew some legs.

I do think it is time for Canon to update this lens, and hopefully they will do away with the push-pull when they do. In the meantime, don't get to concerned about the dust issue - if you like it, get it.

Have Fun,

[RTMiller]

I have the 100-400 and never seem to have any problems.

When I push, it sucks the dust in. When I pull, it blows the dust out. The trick is to remember that for every push there must be an equal and opposite pull. This final pull not only helps expunge the dust, it makes the lense shorter and therefore easier to stow away.

[Jim_T]

I agree... If a lens can be extended, it's prone to sucking in dust.. It doesn't matter if you extend it by pulling it out directly, or twisting a ring.

I have one completely unscientific and unproven observation that I've noticed with the lens...

I was getting a considerable amount of dust on my sensor prior to purchasing my 100-400.. After I started using the lens, it seems I don't have nerar as much problem with sensor dust..

Could the air movement caused by the lens be cleaing out the mirror/shutter area of the camera :)

[Parson]

I'be been around photography long enough to remember when a "one-touch zoom" was the latest and greatest in zoom techonology. It was hailed as a great advance over the "two-touch" zoom that required you to zoom with one ring and focus with the other. The advent of autofocus pretty well negated the concept since a two-touch zoom could still be controlled with one ring while the camera controlled the focus. I've used both for over 40 years and both are just about as likely to pull dust into the lens. If the lens is constructed properly, as is the 100-400, the dust problem is minimal and will not exagerate the likelyhood of dust on the sensor. They are remote from each other and mutually sealed from exposure to one another.

Just as a side comment, if you're considering the 100-400 you can't go wrong! I've used most major types of zooms - Nikon 80-200, old Vivitar one-touch zooms, the Sigma 50-500 and 120-300, Tokina 80-200 AT-X Pro - you name it, I've probably used it or something very similar to it. You will not beat the 100-400L! It focuses fast, it's quiet and sharp as the proverbial tack. I personally love the push-pull (one-touch) construction and find it much faster than a twist ring to zoom.

Hope this helps.

Dave H.

[CyberDyneSystems]

Bob and Timmy,

the 100-400mm rear lens element is not fixed,. it too moves front to back during zooming,. and is not in any way sealed,. there is space around the rear element which dust can and will get around and into the camera body,. at ehich point with air movement possible and in fact likely ,. dust can and will find it's way around a shutter as well.

However,. Like CoolToolGuy says,. this is true of most zooms no matter what the method used to zoom,. This coupled with the fact that one must get dust into the lens beofre it can be pushed into the camera.. makes this lens no different from most zooms as far as dust potential is concerned, despite it's push pull design.

There are some Zooms that have a fixed sealed rear element,. like Canon's EF 70-200mm f/2.8 IS (and perhaps Timmy's non IS?) ... but this is not "the norm" these are Canons weather sealed lenses.

[johneo]

I don't notice any more dust using the 100-400 L lens but that might be because I only use it in an environmentaly sealed clean room and only when I'm wearing a clean suit. Kind of limits what I can shoot and I have yet to be able to use the 400 end but at least I don't have to worry about dust.

Don't worry about it! You'll get no more dust with that lens than any other ... it's a great lens!

[neil_r]

Why did I waste that money on a rocket blower, all I had to do was zoom my lens faster.... Oh well you live and learn.

N

[RJSorensen]

The copper hill kit cleans the sensor . . . shoot away and don't worry about what will happen anyway. I love my 100-400, btw.

[TammieO]

I really like the push/pull design and I haven't had to clean my sensor yet.

[Michael A. Housewert]

Photo Buffs,

I just received this lens today, but I am unsure if I made the right choice. The reviews on Luminous Landscapes (suggests lack of clarity) have me rethinking before I use this lens or return it for something else.

Please give me your feed back. Are there other opinions or reviews that I can read.

Thank you,

Mike Housewert

[BoySpot]

Rather than trust everyone else's reviews (although plenty of people on this forum love the lens) why not take some shots with it and see what you think. Your opinion is the only one that is going to matter in the end anyway and this isn't a cheap lens to make a mistake on. People justify why they bought it or justify why they didn't. Give it a go and then decide.

[Mr. Pickles]

It does tend to "attract" more dust than the twist variety. If you have one and are scared, then suck slowly, and expell quick. Minimizes the dust coming in, and maximizes the dust blowing.

[Dean S]

Hi Guy's

Well I just got my 10D back from it's service and using my 300mm L the pictures are spotless but, using my 100-400mm L IS the images are covered in spots and bits! Looking through the lens minus camera body shows loads of specks in the lens itself. The spots go out of focus at the 400 end, but still show on images of the sky.

Dean S

[condyk]

For me, the people to take notice of are those who have owned or do own the lens, otherwise you're going on rumour which is never that helpful. Trouble is that some say there is a problem and others say there isn't. When I looked into it I found it difficult to come to a conclusion other than it may well depend under what conditions you shoot and how you use the lens ... and how lucky you are.

What it did make me do was look at potential alternatives and so I am now looking most seriously at the 300mm f4 IS L and TCon combo. However, if I found a well priced 100-400mm IS L on offer I would possibly still buy it. So, the dust rumours around the 100-400mm IS L didn't put me off too much, but certainly they affect how desirable I now find this lens as I will partly use it in dusty conditions.

There is another issue being discussed at the moment about the IS motor, which is something that does worry me a bit more. I don't think its known how much of a problem this is either tho'.

You just have to try and get to some facts based on what owners say and then draw a conclusion.

[Sporty]

The dust issue is not really a major one for me, it's certainly not a 'deal-breaker'. But I am in the market for a long tele. I have mostly L glass and was considering this lens. I have seen and heard great things of the Sigma 120-300 f2.8 though, and even coupled with a 1.4x converter will be longer (though not as short too!) as the Canon and a stop faster. The main 'purchasing factor' for me is image quality. Has anyone used both of these lenses, I'd be very interested in how they perform side-by-side. I've got to make a desicion in a couple of months, so I've a bit of time to make my mind up.

[Jon]

I use the 100-400 a lot, and not always in the cleanest of conditions, but I haven't had much sensor dust at all. So I seriously doubt that the "push-pull" makes a dimes worth of difference in dust collecting.

[Cadwell]

The dust issue is not really a major one for me, it's certainly not a 'deal-breaker'. But I am in the market for a long tele. I have mostly L glass and was considering this lens. I have seen and heard great things of the Sigma 120-300 f2.8 though, and even coupled with a 1.4x converter will be longer (though not as short too!) as the Canon and a stop faster. The main 'purchasing factor' for me is image quality. Has anyone used both of these lenses, I'd be very interested in how they perform side-by-side. I've got to make a desicion in a couple of months, so I've a bit of time to make my mind up.

I own both. If image quality is your prime concern, buy the Sigma. The 100-400L has it's good points but optically the Sigma is better.

[DamienB]

On a D60, I never had any serious problems with dust. On the 1D2, I find it attracts dust much more readily and a single day's usage of the 100-400 will deposit a good number of dust specks on the sensor - enough to make it worth cleaning.

With a 400 prime mounted, I get no dust whatsoever naturally, and non-tele zooms with twist action do not appear to deposit any dust either. The dust depositing action of the 100-400 is one of the reasons I now use it very rarely on the 1D2.

[dmwierz]

BTW, I own a copy of the Sigma 120-300mm f/2.8 EX APO IF HSM , and use it all the time on dusty baseball and softball fields. The IF in the lens designation means it has an Internal Focus mechanism - the elements move inside the lens and the outside tube stays the same length. As a result, there is no air exchanged between inside the lens and outside. Also as a result of lens never changeing length, the front element's orienation never changes (nice for using a circular polarizing lens, for example).

Personally, I never understood why a push-pull lens would take in any more dust than a screw lens - both designs move the lens in and out, thereby increasing and decreasing the volume of air inside the lens, usually by the same amount. People claim the push-pull is faster and this is why it sucks in more dirt. Sounds technically suspect, if you ask me. Volume is volume. IF , and it's a big IF , you suck any dust into the lens, and IF a push-pull is faster (debatable), then all you would do is suck in the same amount of dust at a faster rate.

However, as pointed out earllier, this dust would never make it past the final element of the lens, thus it wouldn't pose a threat to the camera's sensor.

In any event, the Sigma is a VERY good lens, and is a big money-maker for many sports shooters.