broken 100-400 what to do, fix or new lens?

bout a year ago i dove in and bought my first "L" lens. the canon 100-400.

it seemed well built had pretty good quality and was the pride of my lineup and completed my basic set (canon 10-22, canon 17-55 2.8, canon 100 macro, canon 100-400)

unfortunately it appears to not be built all that well and no longer focuses. when i turn the focus ring the focus distance indicator doesn't move, or moves only a little requiring many full rotations to go from close to infinity.

so now i'm wondering what to do. should i sell my 100-400 and get a cheaper lens? a friend of mine bought the 70-300 IS USM and it's almost as sharp as my L lens 300 tons lighter better IS and half the price. but it feels cheap and the front element rotates with focusing so filters are a pain to use

then there's the part of me that thinks that i should sell it and get putt he money towards the 70-200 MK II. i have heard that with a 2x converter that it is about as fast and about the same quality as the 100-400 making it a 140-400 with better IS. though i am unsure if i can still autofocus with the 2x and my XSi (or the 60d which i am hoping to upgrade to) not to mention the additional cost for such a lens


or i can fix my current one, i think the quality is good, and it was cool that all my main lenses ere 77mm filters so i could easily trade caps and filters. the only thing i hate is that it's so heavy and the IS is weak. however I don't know how much it will cost, i don't want to put $500 into it (or spend $60 shipping it back and forth for an estimate). i think i'd rater putt hat towards the 70-200

i need a telephoto to fill out my mm range but am unsure what would be the best option at this point.

any suggestions?

Should send it to canon service center and let them check the lens first! No one is going to buy a broken lens anyways, unless it is dirt cheap!

I like my 100-400 a lot, and if I were in your position, I would send it in for a cost estimate. But only you can decide what you want to do after that. I don't think I would be happy with the 70-200 instead, but that is only my own bias. I had the 70-300 (old version) and found it was never long enough for my work. What do you mostly shoot? Will the 70-200 with a teleconverter be flexible enough?

Good luck, whichever way you proceed!

Julius

Either send it in for repair or sell it to me cheap

Get it fixed if only because you will have to to sell it. I have had no repair over $125 total, including a dropped lens and a 100-400 which needed a new part.

As for the 70-300, I owned that. It is not on the level of the 100-400 and lacks the reach. That said, it was a fine lens for the money, no doubt.

I shoot LAX with a lady who went with the 2X TC and the 70-200 II so I get to see what she produces all the time. It is ok, but just ok. A 2X will surely cost you IQ. 1.4x, not so much.

thestone11 wrote in post #12694740
Should send it to canon service center and let them check the lens first! No one is going to buy a broken lens anyways, unless it is dirt cheap!

I agree 100%. Send it in. If you are looking for a 70-300 at a lower cost than the Canon 70-300 is and one that has better IQ, ftm, non rotating front element check out the Tamron 70-300mm VC USD. Fix your 100-400 and sell it, then buy yourself your 60d!

Did you drop it ?

S.Horton wrote in post #12694766
Get it fixed if only because you will have to to sell it. I have had no repair over $125 total, including a dropped lens and a 100-400 which needed a new part.

As for the 70-300, I owned that. It is not on the level of the 100-400 and lacks the reach. That said, it was a fine lens for the money, no doubt.

I shoot LAX with a lady who went with the 2X TC and the 70-200 II so I get to see what she produces all the time. It is ok, but just ok. A 2X will surely cost you IQ. 1.4x, not so much.

I owned the 70300 is usm and 100400 at the same time... and there's no way the 70300 is anywhere near as sharp unless he got a really, really soft copy of the 100400. The 100-400 really is one of the ultimate travel birding lenses. The 70300, I'm really sorry to say, is not very good, even relative to its $700 price.

Sometimes USM lenses do that (insufficient friction in the USM unit or something apparently). I've had a lens do that and have seen others. Luckily mine was under warranty so am not sure what the normal cost is, but they "replaced USM unit".

I would get it fixed. When you get it back then decide whether to sell it or keep it. If you like a smaller/lighter lens then you could downgrade to a Tamron 70-300 VC, for example, and the left over $$ will probably get you a nice small light prime or something else (or just bank the difference).

Note to self -- do not buy a 100-400 from SpinningCone...

The 100-400 came out in 1998 before this press release in 2001:
http://photo.net …topic_id=23&msg​_id=001N3n

Probably it has a "less than 20 hour" lifespan motor. Buying SpinningCone's use lens after he has it repaired might be a very good deal as it would have a fresh motor rather than an unknown one.

send it in...even if you were going to try and sell it, it'll help to know how much it's going to cost to repair...you'll get hardly anything for selling a broken lens without knowing what's wrong with it...i bet it's not too expensive of a fix...certainly cheaper than getting a lens of equal length/quality...

my friend might just have a good 70-300 or maybe my 100-400 isnt that great. the ID is better but not $700 better, oh and to answer i didnt drop it, took good care of it just stopped working.

i shoot everything and anything. i do people, birds (when i can) landscapes macro buildings etc. i pretty much never go out without all 4 lenses which give me 10-400mm range + 1:1 macro


i like having up to 400mm but i think i could probably get by with 200 for most things. and reviews like this one http://www.ophrysphoto​graphy.co.uk/pages/tut​orial_lenstests1.htm lead me to believe that i would be gaining IQ at the short end and loosing nothing at the long end.

i wasn't unhappy with the 100-400 but it is a beast to use. the IS is noticeably worse than even my kit lens. i got some decent ones with the 70-300 at 1/25 and 1/50 something i could never get with my 100-400.

i might look into the tamron. i used to have the 18-270 which was pretty good but the build quality wasn't the same as canon, i've considered the newer sigma 50-500 as well.


part of the issue isnt jsut cost but time. with the Tsunami i heard repairs were delayed. i dont want to be without a longer lens for a huge amount of time.

SpinningCone wrote in post #12694717
bout a year ago ....

Is it less than a year so that it's still under warranty?