Depends on where the air is coming in. Like I said I can feel it on my chin which may mean a seal is compromised.I hear you.. I use the 100-400 mk2 plus 1.4 III on my t7i permanently. Here's a couple of snaps with that combo !!Well in my opinion just as good. Canon slows down AF speeds electronically because of light loss for all bodies expect the 1DX and 1DXII. 50% with a 1.4 and 75% with a 2X. However since we are talking about milliseconds the difference is negligible. It snaps in. I used my 5D4, 1.4 and 100-400 II exclusively all of last year. I pulled out the 7D2 this year because I missed using it.
These are about 50% crops with 5D4, 1.4 and 100-400 II. The only thing I missed in the dive sequence (I'm not going to show them all) was extra FPS. Anything off is not the system, I'm shaky.
I never take my lens off!!! I assume that the dust if any will stay in the lens and not make it to the sensor because of the 1.4 txd
-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
Canon 100-400 IS II sucks dust?
- Thread starter SWtraveler
- Start date
gavin
Veteran Member
No not really. Great lens. I have both vervsion.
After years of debates I took my B+W filters off. After all of the years I agree there may be a slight loss in contrast but no IQ hit the human eye can see. My 400 DO II has a permanent gelatin filter.
irm
Senior Member
After a very wet and windy trip to Norway earlier this year I put, the 100-400, 24-70 and 5Div in for a clean. I think the report on all 3 was duplicated because they all reported large dust spots amongst other issues. The 5Div and the 24-70 went in because they got very wet in a heavy rain storm, no protection for me or my equipment everything was wet through camera bag included.
I haven't had the opportunity to try them out yet, maybe today if the weather holds, just cold not wet to windy.
--
my 2 exposed flashcubes worth.
Ian the pbase supporter.
http://pbase.com/ianm_au
Please check my profile for equipment list.
An amateur with dreams of being a good to excellent photographer.
I haven't had the opportunity to try them out yet, maybe today if the weather holds, just cold not wet to windy.
--
my 2 exposed flashcubes worth.
Ian the pbase supporter.
http://pbase.com/ianm_au
Please check my profile for equipment list.
An amateur with dreams of being a good to excellent photographer.
Last edited:
an_also
Leading Member
Thanks man. Glad to hear it. I had a used one i had my eye on at BHphoto but i think it got bought pretty quickly. I'll keep looking out for deals.
Did you have to do any MFA when the TC was used? or did it work well right out of the box?
Yes quite a bit. For some reason without the TC very little but it needed +13 for 7D2 and and + 9 on the 7D2 at 400. Its not the TC because it needs 0 with both my 1.4 III and 2X III on my 7D2/. -3 with 1.4 and - 6 with the 2X on the 5D4.
I know of another that needed that much on the 100-400 II. Some need none. There as so many elements and moving parts even if at spec it can be to one end or the other.
While the 100-400 II is TC compatible TC's are tuned for long primes.
cdmazoff
Senior Member
Zee... not to be argumentative but!!!! The lensrental article above is from 2009. That's almost 10 years ago. I get 27 cross type AF points (if I want them) on my t71 with the Mk2 and the 1.4 III. I've seen so many people turned away by the old F8 limitation. I try to remind people that the F8 limitation is not what it was a long time ago. The combo also works on the 80D and the 77D.
Also: luckily for me (because my t7i doesn't have AFMA) my lens combo seems to work pretty darned well. (you can check out my flickr page to see how well).
So: I am pickled tink with my lens combo. I am waiting for the 7D Mk III however. I'm a birder and I think I can use the autofocus tracking etc.
All the best
CD
NP. I just remember the part that TC's are tuned for long primes from that article. F8 has changed a lot since it was written.
BirdShooter7
Forum Pro
There have definitely been some complaints and I don't think those people are making it up but for whatever reason the issue doesn't seem to be universal. For example, I just returned from two weeks in the Pantanal of Brazil and it was incredibly dusty. Three members of my group were using the 100-400 mk2 extensively throughout the trip out in the dust and none of those three lenses had any noticeable dust inside and at least one of those lenses is 3 years old and has had a lot of action in very dusty conditions. I wonder if the issue has something to do with how the lens is being used. For example if you zoom in and out very rapidly there is more chance of dust getting in (I am speculating). One of the 100-400's on our trip did have a big crop of fungus growing inside.
I don't know if the new version is better or worse on the dust issue than the original but I do recall the original having a pretty big reputation for being a "dust sucker."
Personally I wouldn't worry about the issue too much, it is a great lens and definitely up to the task of heavy outdoor use.
I don't know if the new version is better or worse on the dust issue than the original but I do recall the original having a pretty big reputation for being a "dust sucker."
Personally I wouldn't worry about the issue too much, it is a great lens and definitely up to the task of heavy outdoor use.
an_also
Leading Member
It wound't be the first time a company (any company) discovered an issue after the first few production runs, made a few changes with the best batch and not tell anyone. Happens every day. I've seen it.
Of course this is all speculation and I can't back it up but there has to be a reason why some do and some don't get some dust inside.
I've been using my 100-400II for about 3 years now, i was protected since day 1 with a quality Hoya clear filter.
I noticed dust behind the front element a few month ago, and I must admit I was annoyed, for a lens at this price I wasn't expecting it.
A friend of mine has the same issue so I think it it something quite common.
But once you see the quality this lens produces you'll quickly forget about a few specs of dust, trust me it's a cracking piece of kit!
The IQ of this lens is outstanding. On another thread where it was being praised I mentioned dust was about the only dislike I had. Some didn't like that
I'd buy it again even if I knew about it although I have said many times - if Canon had of also offered a 400 5.6 IS II as well, I would have gone with it instead.BirdShooter7
Forum Pro
I think you might be putting words into our mouths 
I do think we all agree that it is a very good lens.
I do think we all agree that it is a very good lens.No you were clearly trying to give me a hard time for saying it did.I think you might be putting words into our mouths
BirdShooter7
Forum Pro
You have a nice day
jamie8848
Active member
I use my lenses for long periods in very dusty environments (trekking in Nepal and India) and have the lenses cleaned and maintained every so often. They all need that occasional TLC.
With my 100-400 II the technician removed the front element/group and that cleaned it up nicely. I am not sure if he disassembled the rest of the lens to get this out, but I don't think so.
With my 100-400 II the technician removed the front element/group and that cleaned it up nicely. I am not sure if he disassembled the rest of the lens to get this out, but I don't think so.
Jon555
Veteran Member
A bit of dust in the optical path has a negligible effect and most lenses suck dust to some degree of other. (That said my 100-400 II seems fine so far.)
Similar threads
- Socialmediatrolls
- Sony Mirrorless Lens Talk
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum