100-400 II is in my hands - initial impressions

I did use the 100-400 original and the 70-300L side by side with no issues but I always looked at my longer zoon as my 400mm wildlife lens. I shoot a lot of landscape with the 70-300L and there is a big difference between 100mm and 70mm for landscape. not to mention I do love the 70-300L and without hood it fits in my jacket pocket. hmmmmmm

AnnieMacD wrote in post #17327171
Have you ordered one, David? (I'm told mine will ship on Monday - can't wait )

Wow, congrats! I would have had it pre-ordered, but I have had a trip planned and didn't want it getting shipped in my absence. I suspected Canon would surprise us with an early shipping, but couldn't count on it.

I can hardly wait to see the reviews...I'm sure it's going to be amazing.

So is the difference between the I and II is the weather sealing, glass (how much better) and what else??

I think the big thing for most folks is the old one has push/pull zoom and the new one is twisty. Well, that and better glass, better IS, and... wait for it... bragging rights. I can't wait to see some real-world photos from the II.

The main things exciting to me in version II are: 4-stop IS vs 2-stop IS, additional aperture blade for better OOF blur, sharper across zoom range, and superior performance with TC's. I simply don't care about push-pull vs twist, Canon would do a great job with the ergonomics either way.

ed rader wrote in post #17327045
I liked push/pull too and defended it on many occasions but I'm ready to move on to improved optics, weathersealing and IS. whether I have to twist the lens or push/pull it is of no consequence to me.

When I first got my 100-400L I really didn't care for the push-pull at all. But the lens has become my go-to lens. It fits what I do best, so I finally got used to it. It really is very handy at times.

Especially when I am outdoors and want a close up shot of wildlife and one with a little background view. It is quick and easy to switch between the two shots, much better than twist. However I prefer the feel of the twist much better than the push-pull. So I will likely upgrade at sometime, but for now I figure even with the trade-in the extra cost has better priorities at the moment.

ed rader wrote in post #17327199
I did use the 100-400 original and the 70-300L side by side with no issues but I always looked at my longer zoon as my 400mm wildlife lens. I shoot a lot of landscape with the 70-300L and there is a big difference between 100mm and 70mm for landscape. not to mention I do love the 70-300L and without hood it fits in my jacket pocket. hmmmmmm

If you can afford it, I would hang onto the 70-300L. It is nice to have a smaller, lighter telephoto option in your kit for those times you want to travel lighter. Like you, I think of my 100-400L as more of a wildlife lens, but I simply do not have enough space in my travel bag to bring along both telephotos. So, the 100-400L will do double duty as a landscape telephoto, too, when I bring it along for wildlife and leave the 70-200 f/4 IS at home. The 30mm difference at the short end of the zoom ranges does not affect me, as I also travel with a 24-105L. Anyway, on our Alaska trip last summer I just left the 100-400L on the 7D all the time, even for my landscape shots. The gap between 105mm on the 5D3 and 160mm equivalent FOV on the 7D at the short end was never an issue.

Scott M wrote in post #17327990
If you can afford it, I would hang onto the 70-300L. It is nice to have a smaller, lighter telephoto option in your kit for those times you want to travel lighter. Like you, I think of my 100-400L as more of a wildlife lens, but I simply do not have enough space in my travel bag to bring along both telephotos. So, the 100-400L will do double duty as a landscape telephoto, too, when I bring it along for wildlife and leave the 70-200 f/4 IS at home. The 30mm difference at the short end of the zoom ranges does not affect me, as I also travel with a 24-105L. Anyway, on our Alaska trip last summer I just left the 100-400L on the 7D all the time, even for my landscape shots. The gap between 105mm on the 5D3 and 160mm equivalent FOV on the 7D at the short end was never an issue.

Don't worry. He can!

GeoKras1989 wrote in post #17327151
Isn't there something in the POTN rules that requires you to post, as your first shot with a new lens, a duck?

Ducks, please!

We take this very seriously here. Ignoring this would earn you several demerits!

CyberDyneSystems wrote in post #17328746
We take this very seriously here. Ignoring this would earn you several demerits!

I just read that in Senior's voice.

yeah I can and I already know I wont sell the 70-300L . it's just too useful to me and doubles as a wildlife lens in a pinch. the new 100-400L is very similar to the 70-200L f2.8 II in size and weight and I've never owned it or the version I because it was just too big.

I was going to go to southern Utah in the spring but I just may head up Yellowstone/tetons instead with my new wildlife lens

Since the issue has been resolved (poster has been banned), could the moderators kindly restore the message posted by Vipergts831 on page 2 of this thread? This may prove educational to some us. Thanks.

Yeah actually, there is a lot of difference, I have been doing some research...will be adding this one to the shopping list.