Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS II USM, reviewed by CyberDyneSystems

just so there's no confusion, the rebate was $600, not the cost of the lens.

Excellent review. They are some fantastic pics BTW.

I just did it. I just purchased this lens since Adorama had a decent price on it and I've passed on it for the last 2 or 3 years since I sold the 400 5.6 prime. I've been without a side kick ever since I sold the 400 5.6 and I just missed having a side kick for those impromptu up close sudden shots. Does anyone use the lens coat? If so, what's your thoughts on it?

Thanks...

mat vanella wrote in post #18757972
Excellent review. They are some fantastic pics BTW.

Thank you kindly.

Methodical wrote in post #18771633
I just did it. I just purchased this lens since Adorama had a decent price on it and I've passed on it for the last 2 or 3 years since I sold the 400 5.6 prime. I've been without a side kick ever since I sold the 400 5.6 and I just missed having a side kick for those impromptu up close sudden shots. Does anyone use the lens coat? If so, what's your thoughts on it?

Thanks...

Congrats, you'll love it.
I have only one lens coat, and that is for the big 500mm.

CyberDyneSystems wrote in post #18771648
Congrats, you'll love it.
I have only one lens coat, and that is for the big 500mm.

I rented the lens from Canon when it first arrived and it produced some really nice images and I was giddy, but I just could not part ways with $2200. Then I thought that I'd sell the 400 5.6 prime and 1D3 and subsidize the purchase, but I couldn't part ways with the 1D3 because the market was just too low for a body that's still great and has such low shutter count, so I'd been without my sidekick (400 5.6) ever since. I've had a price watch with CPW setup for this lens since after the rental and yesterday it dropped to $1535 (actually got an email from Adorama with this deal, too) and the ship tipped and Adorama separated me from my money.

With regard to the lens coat, I was looking at photos of it on this lens and they had a piece for the zoom portion which I thought was odd because it won't allow zooming if it's on that part. So, it looks like a waste of money for this lens. I will get the lens and see if it's even necessary.

I may have missed it, but what camera body do you use with this lens?

Thanks...

Methodical wrote in post #18772021
...

I may have missed it, but what camera body do you use with this lens?

Thanks...

All of them?
My go to set up would be my 7D2,. best when paired with the 500mm on the 5D4.
But I use it on the 5D4 almost as often, especially if I am NOT shooting two bodies.

I've used it on 5D3 before I upgraded to the 4, and 1D4 as well. It's all good

Gotcha. I have to figure out my best combo will be - 1D4 or 1Dx - since the 7D2 is usually running the 600. As a standalone, it will mostly be used with the 7D2 most likely.

CyberDyneSystems wrote in post #18703625
December 17 2014,
https://photography-on-the.net …read.php?t=1411​834&page=1

Canon EF 100-400 f/4.5-5.6L IS II USM First Impressions Review

I received my 100-400mm MkII this morning on a gray dismal day, but was anxious to get out with it and I had time, so I put it on the 1D4 for familiarity, pocketed the 1.4x II just in case, and off to the beach I went.

In your gear list is a 70-200 SP .. I'm assuming Tamron. Has owning this lens changed your use of frequency of use for the 70-200mm?

mdvaden wrote in post #18776411
In your gear list is a 70-200 SP .. I'm assuming Tamron. Has owning this lens changed your use of frequency of use for the 70-200mm?

Not really because,

- I always shot the 100-400mm WAY more than I did any 70-200mm I have owned going back to version 1';s of all of them.

- I got the 100-400mm before i got the tamron SP.

I break out the 70-200mm for people/performances when I need the faster aperture. I have even tried to live without it for a few years, when i sold my Canon,. but eventually I realized the hole was to big, and picked up the Tamron used to fill the gap.

CyberDyneSystems wrote in post #18776898
Not really because,

- I always shot the 100-400mm WAY more than I did any 70-200mm I have owned going back to version 1';s of all of them.

- I got the 100-400mm before i got the tamron SP.

I break out the 70-200mm for people/performances when I need the faster aperture. I have even tried to live without it for a few years, when i sold my Canon,. but eventually I realized the hole was to big, and picked up the Tamron used to fill the gap.

Thanks for sharing.

I was just wondering, after seeing your pampas grass inflorescence photo with the 135mm substitute note.

I must have been a bad boy this year, Santa didn't drop off a shiny new 100-400L ii for me. Thankfully i have saved halfway for it. I had the version one and loved it, although i wasn't a fan of the pump action. Can't wait to get my mitts on the new one.
Merry Christmas everyone and be good for Santa.

Excellent review and follow up comments.

I got my copy a fortnight ago and love it to bits, but does anyone else have a problem with the manual focussing ring?

I've been using my lens at a race track and find that when zooming in and out following cars/bikes, I keep nudging the manual focus rig causing the auto focus to hunt a little. This hasn't caused me serious problems but I think it may have lost me a few sharp images. Anyway I've taped the focussing ring up now and will see if that will sort my problem.

John

I was just talking to someone about this yesterday. I've not had the problem but she does.

I set my tripod foot underneath so it rests on the heel of my hand and that keeps me from tagging the focus ring.