New 100-400 in a few months?

Started Mar 29, 2013 | Discussions thread
(unknown member) Veteran Member • Posts: 3,849
Re: "nothing wrong"

joger wrote:

I am not so sure if the situation is really different?

Let's do one step back and look at the broader picture (which is causing severe troubles here sometimes)

In the advent of higher resolving sensors (I am certain we will see them from Canon too) the "quality" of the lens gets even more important that it is today. Lenses are keeprs and my assumption is that the number of sold lenses slows down as well as the number of DSLRs goes down over time with the really more then acceptable quality of many P&S cameras. Canon is even marketing the smallest current DSLR.

The trend goes to smaller and lighter cameras which are not necessarily DSLRS. Thus all DSLR manufacturers will be tempted to up the price to compensate for this envelopment.

I would't be surprised with a new lens automatically means the stop of production for the old version.

Canon has several 70-200rds parallel in production for different aspects.

Don't get me wrong - there is nothing wrong with the current good 70-300L or the good 100-400L - yet there is a market for high res corner to corner sharp images wide open with the need to travel lean.

Will all those guys buy a type II tele? Surely not. There are many aspects in a (travel-)zoom that are very attractive.

the 70-200 f/4.0 L IS USM is an outstanding piece of engineering - unparalleled in weight and optical performance at 135 till 200 mm - I'd surely want this performance at 300-400 mm at f/5.6 for a lightweight travel-zoom with great IS and mode 3 please

Please also very compact and please below 1.5 kg - push pull or rotating mechanism - well - I think whatever delivers the lightest package maintaining the highest precision is welcome.

Is there a future market for that - of course - my assumption is that Canon has a very different marketing strategy compare to Nikon. While Nikon introduced first a high res body Canon seems to upgrade their lenses first before upgrading their sensors. Nothing wrong with both strategies and nothing wrong with people willing to pay less.

I'd surely buy a stellar 100-400 L sooner or later - especially getting older could be a driving force to reduce weight

Why do thoe lenses have to be excellent wide open in the corners?

Well for me it's all about composition and the important aspect is not necessarily in the center of the frame (rule of thirds) and I want the freedom to choose the aperture suitable to the effect I want and not being forced to use the aperture that works best.

Then I want to print s big as I think the image looks right (for an exhibition or my own walls) - if you ever printed big you will see the flaws of a 7D at ISO 800 (which is a very common ISO value for wildlife and action) - that's also the reason why I want to shoot wide open.

If you do a compromise on size and weight f/5.6 seems to be a very good compromise for 400 mm.

Why is it important to have the utmost optical quality?

Well - here I see the shier enjoyment of seeing all details and deciding later how much to crop and alter the image. A good deal of my occupation is working in LightRoom  or PhotoShop to get to the point.

Why I am so keen on the utmost imge quality - well 1st and foremost it is fun to work with excellent tools. 2ndly is the option of having choices in post production and the 3rd important fact is simply the after market - it could likely be that I'd like to sell some parts of my gear - excellent epic lenses get a very good 2nd hand price tag and their brought lot's of fun until they are sold.

Please don't get me wrong - I am just searching for the best money can buy - and most of the time I succeed sooner or later - it's a passion and that's what IMHO photography should be all about - passion for the right moment and situation.

Opposite to some other guys I own only very few lenses - for each purpose one - in total only some 5 lenses but none of them is behind my expectations and all of them need good craftsmanship to get the utmost out of them. A 100-400L II on a high optical and mechanical level (with better centering then the current longer tele-zooms) would be my 6th lens for replacing two lenses for lean traveling.

Let's cross fingers that Canon is thinking the same way - but I would also be happy for others if Canon thinks going cheap is the right way.

just my 2CT - hope this clarifies some points.

I understand what you mean. The way I see it is that the Nikkor 80-400 is essentially a longer version of the Canon 70-300L and that is what I expect any updated version of the 100-400L will be. Any better and the price will have to go up. Considering Canon has the 200-400L in the works and that, that lens (as disastrous as it has been to get it to the market) is their professional quality zoom, I see no reason for Canon to push the 100-400L up a segment.

I still understand what you would like to have, but it would push it passed $3k. They consider the 70-300L their high end compact travel zoom, the 100-400L their wildlife zoom and they have a professional one with the 200-400L. Perfect line-up.

Post (hide subjects) Posted by
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
MOD schmegg
MOD schmegg
MOD schmegg
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow