EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS II USM Review WOW!

Methodical wrote in post #17769031
Would he be better served with the 1.4III vs the 1.4II?

Well, yeah, the III is an improvement, but I have the II which matches my older 500mm, and it works just fine. Costs a lot less too.

Choderboy wrote in post #17770343
And why make collar non removeable?

Agreed, it was a silly bit of business to add this "feature" to a lens that is meant to be hand held.

Is the RRS replacement foot the way to go?

ShutterPonch wrote in post #17771195
Is the RRS replacement foot the way to go?

I don't know. It appears you still need that plate in place where Dave is have problems with.

http://www.reallyright​stuff.com …Canon-100-400mm-IS-II-USM

I think I'm starting to salivate...

digital paradise wrote in post #17770742
300L and 70-200 2.8 II the whole collar comes off. I had to buy the collar for my 70-200 F4 IS (which I sold). Not sure why they re-desgined this lens. Less storage when you remove just the foot I guess.

Like I said those 4 screws are probably far more than enough when the lens sits on top when on a tripod. Was never meant to be upside down but I do carry it that way sometimes by grabbing the foot. I have not used it on my double BR yet and I doubt I will. Gonna check the manual for any warnings.

It's an obvious way to carry. So obvious that Sigma build finger hold bumps into their lens feet.
Several reviewers have commented on ability to hold by the foot, ie is there enough room between the foot and barrel to be able to carry.

That very well may be.

digital paradise wrote in post #17756244
I'm kind of limited now but whe I get back I'll post an Art Morris video I came across where he explains how he meters for manual bird exposures. He shoots in AV first, makes sure some info (the whites) is in the last bar on the right in the histogram and then puts it in manual and matches the aperture and shutter settings from the AV setting. I have yet to try it but I will when I get the chance.

The 4th video. Getting the right exposure

http://www.learn.usa.c​anon.com …birds_as_art_mo​rris.shtml

Choderboy wrote in post #17771439
It's an obvious way to carry. So obvious that Sigma build finger hold bumps into their lens feet.
Several reviewers have commented on ability to hold by the foot, ie is there enough room between the foot and barrel to be able to carry.

Yes, it is the obvious way to carry a big lens. In fact, there really isn't any other way to carry truly big lenses (unless you add a strap). If this method works so well for my 12 pound "monsters", then why shouldn't it work for the relatively small, light 100-400?

I carry my 100-400 II by a big long v-groove plate (about 8 inches long, mounted to the foot), in upside-down fashion, There is plenty of room for my fingers - even when wearing heavy gloves - to hold the lens in this manner.

Everybody does it and so do I. Used that rig and double BR for two cams and bodies. My 70-200 II was on one combo. I was just referring the design change and Dave pointing out the four small screws defying gravity. If tight it would take a lot of force to rip them out. If loose it appears they won't come all the way out but could suffer wear over time - possibly. I think it would need a lot of wear to let go.

Seems like once lose the don't like to stay tight without thread locker. Why they would only put it in one? Worker got distracted? Hard to get out if all four are sealed and the plate needs to be changed? Red thread locker is pretty much permanent and blue needs a lot of heat. With red you might have to drill them out which is not easy with that size. Easier for Canon to change the collar.

I do remember reading Canon recommends to use the body strap mount but that was a long time.

digital paradise wrote in post #17770742
...Was never meant to be upside down but I do carry it that way sometimes by grabbing the foot...

Curious. What would be the difference if carrying the lens by the foot? Was the lens designed not be carried by the foot? I want to think that Canon thought that people would carry the lens by the foot.

Methodical wrote in post #17772294
Curious. What would be the difference if carrying the lens by the foot? Was the lens designed not be carried by the foot? I want to think that Canon thought that people would carry the lens by the foot.

Actually I was going to respond to Tom about this. What I was trying to say is using something like the BR strap, not with your hand. There is some risk involved and I can't see Canon backing that.

Delivered in perfect condition, of course sunset is 5:25 P.M. Last 5 or 6 UPS deliveries I've gotten all came between 1:00 and 2:00 P.M.
Oh well, at least it's supposed to be all rainy and stormy tomorrow.


I'll post my amateur impression once I've had a chance to take it out and play with.

Ha happy days

Managed a couple of quick snaps just to see what I could do with the new lens
I do not think these are in any way indicative of what this lens can do but it does show what can be done pushing it a little
These were taken about 25 minutes after sunset, hand held, SOOC

Transformer on a power pole about 100' away from the camera

IMAGE LINK: http://s23.photobucket​.com …00_400test2-3627.jpg.html

IMAGE LINK: http://s23.photobucket​.com …00_400test1-3630.jpg.html