New 100-400 in a few months?

Started Mar 29, 2013 | Discussions thread
Wyville
Senior MemberPosts: 3,111Gear list
Like?
Re: Just curious
In reply to joger, Apr 1, 2013

joger wrote:

what's wrong with optimizing the lenses?

Oh, nothing wrong with that! I simply doubt it would make much business sense to release a new version (at probably twice the price) of a lens that a lot of people are happy with using. It's not like the 400/5.6 where current users would be happy to upgrade to a version with IS

I don't see any conspiracy or hidden agenda from Canon here. The extenders are meant for lenses that still work nicely with them being fast enough and optically good enough to cope with them.

I don't see any need for a slow lens to work properly with a 1.4x or 2x making it 2 stops slower which will turn a 100-400 in a horrible 800 f/11 lens that could be used in bright sunlight from tripod for slow moving objects??

Seriously - I really doubt that this should be the strategy from Canon. Leaving the rear end of the lens open to allow the protruding front element of the new TCs to slide in the right place in the lens design perfectly suits the principle of primes but when you have floating elements within a zoom to allow a nearly constant optical quality along the zoom range might demand more flexibility in design and thus the room might be needed to the las lens group.

I do not think that this is intentionally by Canon but more a kind of necessity of the optical design.

I'd rather want an f/4.x-f5.6 lens that works perfectly then a slow zoom that can take extenders and get's even slower with lots of optical compromises for the design without extenders.

But as some pointed out earlier - the current version is not that bad with the given pricing and it is half the price of the Nikon.

If you consider the pricing of the Nikon as o.k. you could also search for a good condition used 300 f/2.8 (I) and be happy - the Nikon is already 1.6 kg - I guess an optimized Canon 100-400 would be also in that range.

Canon has a very very wide lens portfolio and probably the best lens lineup of all manufactures - if you are after lens quality you can choose from a huge variety of quality glass - of course at a premium price but there is no gap IMHO in the lens line up that another manufacturer does better.

Every focal length can be addressed with Canon glass on a surprisingly good quality level.

What's really missing is a new sensor technology like the research projects from Canon indicate - the new lenses have to cope with high resolution

I fully agree. For me prime lenses are probably the best way to proceed. The 100-400L suits me well as is and the improvements I would like are really found best in prime lenses.

I can still see some people wanting just the one tele zoom that works with a TC, especially considering the cost of lenses. I too am tempted by the Sigma 120-300/2.8 as it could function the same as my 100-400L combined with a 300/2.8, but for less cost. Although I'm really hoping for a Canon 400/5.6L IS and a 7DmkII with AF at f/8. That would be the ideal solution. (Although a Sigma 300/2.8 OS 'Sports' might do even better.)

 Wyville's gear list:Wyville's gear list
Canon PowerShot S95 Canon EOS 7D Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS USM
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow