Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies. Read More.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS News & Rumors Lens Rumors and Predictions
Thread started 30 Mar 2017 (Thursday) 19:27
Prev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)

Any 200-400 f/4 IS II predictions?

 
StanNJ1
Goldmember
Joined Oct 2006
Mar 30, 2017 19:27 |  #1

Wouldn't mind having a 200-400 f/4 in my bag (or more likely in the trunk of the car) but even the used ones are pricey. Of course if a 200-400 f/4 IS II were to be released the first versions should come down in price. Any predictions?


1DX, ID MKIII, 24-70 2.8L, 70-200 2.8L, 16-35 2.8L, 100 macro, 600EX-RTs, ST-E3-RT, Einsteins, Kacey Beauty Dish with a cracked grid, yada yada
www.stansphotos.comexternal link
www.Facebook.com/LikeS​tansPhotosexternal link

LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)
Tom ­ Reichner
"I am a little creepy"
Tom Reichner's Avatar
Joined Dec 2008
Omak, in north-central Washington state, USA
Post has been last edited 7 months ago by Tom Reichner. 3 edits done in total.
Mar 31, 2017 00:11 |  #2

StanNJ1 wrote in post #18315264 (external link)
Any 200-400 f/4 IS II predictions?
Wouldn't mind having a 200-400 f/4 in my bag (or more likely in the trunk of the car) but even the used ones are pricey. Of course if a 200-400 f/4 IS II were to be released the first versions should come down in price. Any predictions?

My prediction is that a Canon 200-400 version 2 will not be released for at least 12 years. It is among the least likely lenses to be replaced, of all the Canon lenses. Thinking about a version two makes no sense whatsoever at this point.

What is it about the version one that you think so desperately needs improving?


"Your" and "you're" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one.
"They're", "their", and "there" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one.
"Fare" and "fair" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one. The proper expression is "peace of mind", NOT "piece of mind".

LOG IN TO REPLY
Snydremark
Myth-informed
17,862 posts
Gallery: 39 photos
Joined Mar 2009
Issaquah, WA USA
Mar 31, 2017 00:41 |  #3

Tom Reichner wrote in post #18315441 (external link)
My prediction is that a Canon 200-400 version 2 will not be released for at least 12 years. It is among the least likely lenses to be replaced, of all the Canon lenses. Thinking about a version two makes no sense whatsoever at this point.

What is it about the version one that you think so desperately needs improving?

Sounds like price :D


- Eric S.: My Birds/Wildlife (external link) (7D MkII, Canon 10-22 f/3.5-4.5, Canon 24-105L f/4 IS, Canon 70-200L f/2.8 IS MkII, Canon 100-400L f/4.5-5.6 IS)
"The easiest way to improve your photos is to adjust the loose nut between the shutter release and the ground."

LOG IN TO REPLY
ma11rats
Senior Member
ma11rats's Avatar
Joined Feb 2013
Az
Mar 31, 2017 01:57 |  #4

It's an $11,000 lens released 4 years ago. There's no way it's getting replaced before 2020, if it does at all. The first big white lens to be replaced will be one of the oldest two(both from '08 I think), the 200f2IS. Maybe, maybe the 800f5.6. 300,400,500,600, and the 200-400 are all pups.


www.matthewbeutelphoto​graphy.com (external link)
5D, 6D, 80D, 35f2IS, 135L, T 85f1.8VC, T 24-70f2.8VC, Tok 12-28f4

LOG IN TO REPLY
StanNJ1
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
Joined Oct 2006
Mar 31, 2017 22:39 |  #5

Tom Reichner wrote in post #18315441 (external link)
What is it about the version one that you think so desperately needs improving?

Not sure what thread you are reading


1DX, ID MKIII, 24-70 2.8L, 70-200 2.8L, 16-35 2.8L, 100 macro, 600EX-RTs, ST-E3-RT, Einsteins, Kacey Beauty Dish with a cracked grid, yada yada
www.stansphotos.comexternal link
www.Facebook.com/LikeS​tansPhotosexternal link

LOG IN TO REPLY
Tom ­ Reichner
"I am a little creepy"
Tom Reichner's Avatar
Joined Dec 2008
Omak, in north-central Washington state, USA
Post has been last edited 7 months ago by Tom Reichner. 3 edits done in total.
Apr 01, 2017 02:48 |  #6

.

StanNJ1 wrote in post #18316302 (external link)
Not sure what thread you are reading

I am reading this thread that you created about a replacement for the Canon 200-400mm f4 zoom lens. It should have been obvious that I was reading this very thread, as I quoted not only your original post, but also your thread title.

A lens is replaced with a new version when they come up with something that addresses inherent weaknesses in the existing version. They don't invest hundreds of millions of dollars to create an updated lens for no actual reason.

Therefore, if you think that a replacement may be on the near horizon, logic would assume that you feel that there is some inherent weakness in the existing 200-400mm. So I am asking you what it is about the existing 200-400mm that you think necessitates a replacement?

.


"Your" and "you're" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one.
"They're", "their", and "there" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one.
"Fare" and "fair" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one. The proper expression is "peace of mind", NOT "piece of mind".

LOG IN TO REPLY
StanNJ1
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
Joined Oct 2006
Apr 01, 2017 08:31 |  #7

Tom Reichner wrote in post #18316386 (external link)
.

Therefore, if you think that a replacement may be on the near horizon, logic would assume that you feel that there is some inherent weakness in the existing 200-400mm. So I am asking you what it is about the existing 200-400mm that you think necessitates a replacement?

.

Please read my original post again and tell me where I say anything close to what you are assuming.


1DX, ID MKIII, 24-70 2.8L, 70-200 2.8L, 16-35 2.8L, 100 macro, 600EX-RTs, ST-E3-RT, Einsteins, Kacey Beauty Dish with a cracked grid, yada yada
www.stansphotos.comexternal link
www.Facebook.com/LikeS​tansPhotosexternal link

LOG IN TO REPLY
Overread
Goldmember
Overread's Avatar
Joined Mar 2010
Apr 01, 2017 09:11 |  #8

StanNJ1 wrote in post #18315264 (external link)
Wouldn't mind having a 200-400 f/4 in my bag (or more likely in the trunk of the car) but even the used ones are pricey. Of course if a 200-400 f/4 IS II were to be released the first versions should come down in price. Any predictions?

When the 70-200mm f2.8 IS L MII came out the original versions of that lens ROSE in secondhand price. When a new top end lens hits the market its original version can climb in secondhand price because they instantly become of limited quantity; still have top rate optics and the newer versions are often priced MUCH higher.

I sold my 70-200mm f2.8 IS L MI for about the same price I bought it for new when upgraded to the MKII


Tools of the trade: Canon 400D, Canon 7D, Canon 70-200mm f2.8 IS L M2, Sigma 120-300mm f2.8 OS, Canon MPE 65mm f2.8 macro, Sigma 150mm f2.8 macro, Tamron 24-70mm f2.4, Sigma 70mm f2.8 macro, Sigma 8-16mm f4.5-5.6, Raynox DCR 250, loads of teleconverters and a flashy thingy too
My flickr (external link)

LOG IN TO REPLY
Monkey ­ moss
Senior Member
Monkey moss's Avatar
906 posts
Joined Apr 2012
Bristol, England
Apr 01, 2017 15:01 |  #9

StanNJ1 wrote in post #18316508 (external link)
Please read my original post again and tell me where I say anything close to what you are assuming.

I've read the thread and I thought Tom's response was on point and probably what most people were thinking.


Jon :cool::oops::D:cry::confused::(:lol:
Gear: 5Diii, 16-35 f4, 24-70 f2.8 ii, 70-300L, 35mm f2 IS, 85mm 1.8
My Flickr (external link)

LOG IN TO REPLY
StanNJ1
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
Joined Oct 2006
Apr 01, 2017 17:07 as a reply to Monkey moss's post |  #10

I'll have what the two of you are drinking. Must be a wild trip


1DX, ID MKIII, 24-70 2.8L, 70-200 2.8L, 16-35 2.8L, 100 macro, 600EX-RTs, ST-E3-RT, Einsteins, Kacey Beauty Dish with a cracked grid, yada yada
www.stansphotos.comexternal link
www.Facebook.com/LikeS​tansPhotosexternal link

LOG IN TO REPLY
gjl711
They have pills for that now you know.
gjl711's Avatar
53,218 posts
Joined Aug 2006
Deep in the heart of Texas
Apr 01, 2017 17:26 |  #11

I'm thinking Tom was spot on. Isn't the question you posed, "Any predictions when a replacement for the 200-400 coming?" or am I seriously misreading the title and OP. If so, I think Tom was pretty spot on. The 200-400 is a very new and very expensive lens. A replacement is probably a decade away. It's one of Canon's best right now and there are many other lenses that need a refresh before getting to the 200-400.


Not sure why, but call me JJ.
I used to hate math but then I realised decimals have a point.
.
::Flickr:: (external link)
::Gear::

LOG IN TO REPLY
StanNJ1
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
Joined Oct 2006
Apr 01, 2017 18:49 |  #12

Boy this thread is a load of fun. So let's recap for those playing at home.

Me: I would like to add this lens to my bag. Any predictions for a new version? ( was asking those wiser than me if they had any predictions which may have caused me to hold off looking for a used one)

Tom: What is it about version one that you so desperately think needs improving?

Huh??? When did I say that? I don't know the first thing about this lens other than what I read about its features. So not only did I not understand where he was coming from but I didn't appreciate the snarkiness that he apparently intended So I responded in like.

Tom: If you think that a replacement may be on the near horizon, logic would assume that you feel that there is some inherent weakness in the existing 200-400mm. So I am asking you what it is about the existing 200-400mm that you think necessitates a replacement?

Again....huh?

Others: Yeah what Tom said

Me: Internetting can sure be fun.


1DX, ID MKIII, 24-70 2.8L, 70-200 2.8L, 16-35 2.8L, 100 macro, 600EX-RTs, ST-E3-RT, Einsteins, Kacey Beauty Dish with a cracked grid, yada yada
www.stansphotos.comexternal link
www.Facebook.com/LikeS​tansPhotosexternal link

LOG IN TO REPLY
gjl711
They have pills for that now you know.
gjl711's Avatar
53,218 posts
Joined Aug 2006
Deep in the heart of Texas
Apr 01, 2017 18:58 |  #13

I think Tom was basically saying that the lens is so good now, why are they going to do a re-spin and was asking what you perceive needs to be fixed. I mean heck, if you look at the MTF50 results the 200-400 does as good as the 400 f/2.8 prime when at f/4. That's just crazy sharp. I'd love to see the price drop in half, then in half again, but I'm just not seeing Canon messing with this one for quite some time. :)


Not sure why, but call me JJ.
I used to hate math but then I realised decimals have a point.
.
::Flickr:: (external link)
::Gear::

LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)

1,057 views & 6 likes for this thread
Any 200-400 f/4 IS II predictions?
FORUMS News & Rumors Lens Rumors and Predictions


Not a member yet? Click here to register to the forums.
Registered members get all the features: search, following threads, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, settings, view hosted photos, own reviews and more...


AAA

Send feedback to staff    •   Jump to forum...    •   Rules    •   Index    •   New posts    •   RTAT    •   'Best of'    •   Gallery    •   Gear    •   Reviews    •   Polls

COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies. Privacy policy and cookie usage info.

POWERED BY AMASS 1.4version 1.4
made in Finland
by Pekka Saarinen
for photography-on-the.net
Spent 0.00134 for 6 database queries.
PAGE COMPLETED IN 0.09s
Latest registered member is sunstorm
811 guests, 367 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 6106, that happened on Jun 09, 2016