# Is the EF 70-200mm f/4L IS II Still Being Announced This Month?



## Canon Rumors Guy (Apr 24, 2018)

```
We <a href="http://www.canonrumors.com/the-canon-ef-70-200mm-f-4l-is-ii-is-coming-in-april-cr3/">reported in March of this year</a> that the upcoming Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L IS II was going to be announced this month.</p>
<p>We’re now nearing the end of April and we haven’t heard anything further about this lens announcement. We have asked around, but for the moment we’re just getting silence on the matter.</p>
<p>It’s not unusual for lens announcements to move, even at the last minute. The last one to suffer this fate was the EF 16-35mm f/2.8L III, which was originally to be announced in June of 2016, but was delayed until August 24, 2018. The other recently delayed product from Canon was the Speedlite 470EX-AI, which was originally going to be announced in the summer of 2017, but was held off until February of this year.</p>
<p>The lens is coming and the month isn’t over yet, but we cannot update you any further on when EF 70-200mm f/4L IS II is going to be officially announced.</p>
<p>I will say that I am pleasantly surprised about how many people seem to be looking forward to this lens.</p>
<span id="pty_trigger"></span>
```


----------



## criscokkat (Apr 24, 2018)

I hope soon, I am planning to buy this lens. I haven't seen any real discount on the current V2 version.


----------



## neonlight (Apr 24, 2018)

Hmm.. the original is an excellent performer. It's hard to see what an update might offer. Perhaps a quieter AF mechanism and closer MFD would be good but that's all I would want in an update.


----------



## tmc784 (Apr 24, 2018)

Don't want a F/4, F/2.8 is versatile.


----------



## tron (Apr 24, 2018)

neonlight said:


> Hmm.. the original is an excellent performer. It's hard to see what an update might offer. Perhaps a quieter AF mechanism and closer MFD would be good but that's all I would want in an update.


Exactly! This wasn't an urgent update.


----------



## Talys (Apr 25, 2018)

tron said:


> neonlight said:
> 
> 
> > Hmm.. the original is an excellent performer. It's hard to see what an update might offer. Perhaps a quieter AF mechanism and closer MFD would be good but that's all I would want in an update.
> ...



Closer MFD for sure.
Better & included tripod ring would be nice.
Whiter paint!


----------



## maxfactor9933 (Apr 25, 2018)

canon keep releasing EF lenses. kinda hints their upcoming ML cameras can handle EF lenses without hassle


----------



## AuroraChaserDoug (Apr 25, 2018)

Every time I think about upgrading my 70-200 f4 for a 70-200 f2.8 to finish my f2.8 zoom collection, my 70-200 f4L IS USM gets the job done. It gets the job done after I remember to ignore the IS motors spinning up and take a few more steps back to acquire minimum focus distance. A replacement would need to have some great specs to replace the original.


----------



## mb66energy (Apr 25, 2018)

neonlight said:


> Hmm.. the original is an excellent performer. It's hard to see what an update might offer. Perhaps a quieter AF mechanism and closer MFD would be good but that's all I would want in an update.



Same here. I upgraded from the non-IS version that is a very good performer and it is substantially better on FF and high MPix APS-C. I payed roughtly 600 EUR 2nd hand for a 8 month old lens which seemed fresh from production.
It's my first IS lens and I am impressed how helpful it is: this and very usable ISO 1600 on current 24MPix sensors opens up a whole new world without tripod.
Maybe some built-in hood? Closer MFD as you said? 1 stop improvement in IS? To best Nikons and Tamrons alternatives (and maybe coming Sigma counterpart)?

At least for me an update for the 1.4 50 is much more important: very good IQ at f/1.4, excellent from f/2.0 + 11 blade diaphragm + IS + reasonable size/weight is the next lens I buy I would buy if available.


----------



## Tyroop (Apr 25, 2018)

> Don't want a F/4, F/2.8 is versatile.



The f/2.8 is also very big and very heavy. No thank you.

The rumors on this site are normally quite accurate, but I was surprised with this particular one because the lens it will replace is already excellent - I've had mine since 2006. The only criticism I hear is noisy IS, but that hardly justifies bringing out a new version.

It also surprises me that Canon would upgrade this superb lens before upgrading the EF 400mm f/5.6L to an IS version, and the EF 300mm f/4L IS is at least a decade overdue for an optics and IS update.


----------



## hendrik-sg (Apr 25, 2018)

The original one, is a very expensively built lens, with magnesium barrel, many lens elements, USM focus etc. It's build to the highest standards (except the superteles maybe). This in mind, the selling price is very reasonable. The same is true for the much cheaper non IS version. Not having the numbers, i would expect the IS version is selling in much higher numbers.

So for me it looks obvious, that they want to optimize production costs and to increase the price by adding some goodies which cost not much, newer coatings for exapmple and less weight (plastic barrel)


----------



## riker (Apr 25, 2018)

That's right, I'm checking the site twice a day to see if it is out yet


----------



## Steve Balcombe (Apr 25, 2018)

Tyroop said:


> The rumors on this site are normally quite accurate, but I was surprised with this particular one because the lens it will replace is already excellent - I've had mine since 2006. The only criticism I hear is noisy IS, but that hardly justifies bringing out a new version.



How do you update a lens which is almost faultless but is perceived as old? Just about the only thing I would change is to make it shorter (physically I mean), but only if that didn't impact on the IQ and only if it was still Extender-compatible. An internally-zooming 70-200 which fits in a standard compartment in my bag might persuade me to upgrade.



Tyroop said:


> It also surprises me that Canon would upgrade this superb lens before upgrading the EF 400mm f/5.6L to an IS version, and the EF 300mm f/4L IS is at least a decade overdue for an optics and IS update.



Agreed. The 300 needs current-generation IS and an optical redesign to get rid of the the LoCA. Important things to keep are the excellent IQ at MFD, and the built-in hood.

If a new 300/4 performed well enough with a 1.4x III, there might be no need for a new 400/5.6. That could also make it easier to fit a 500/5.6L IS into the lineup.


----------



## LesC (Apr 25, 2018)

Better AF mechanism would be good - the existing model is known for focus slipping when held vertically - mines currently with Canon for repair for this exact fault.


----------



## Etienne (Apr 25, 2018)

Every time there's a new L lens, a slew of people say that it isn't needed because the current one is just so damn good. Then the reviews come out showing (usually) that the new one blows the old one away.
Maybe Canon knows a thing or two that the fans don't?


----------



## Etienne (Apr 25, 2018)

BTW ... I have the 70-200 f/2.8L IS II and I would still consider the new f/4 IS II. There are a lot of times that the f/2.8 stays home because it's just too heavy. There's a place for both in my kit: The f/2.8 when it just has to be so, and the f/4 when low weight is a priority.


----------



## stevelee (Apr 25, 2018)

Sort of a remark and sort of a question re:f/4 vs. f/2.8 models:

For my purposes, it seems that the IS and improved high-ISO performance of modern lenses and bodies makes that extra stop in speed much less often needed, so hardly worth the extra cost and lugging around the extra weight of the faster lens.

Is that a reasonable perspective and rational tradeoff?

That's not to say I begrudge anyone's preferring the f/2.8 for their purposes, such as need for the extra stop or blurrier backgrounds. It's just those are less often major considerations for me than apparently they are for others.


----------



## chrysoberyl (Apr 25, 2018)

Tyroop said:


> It also surprises me that Canon would upgrade this superb lens before upgrading the EF 400mm f/5.6L to an IS version, and the EF 300mm f/4L IS is at least a decade overdue for an optics and IS update.



This, exactly! I will not buy this 70-200, but I would buy either or both 300L and 400L.


----------



## slclick (Apr 25, 2018)

chrysoberyl said:


> Tyroop said:
> 
> 
> > It also surprises me that Canon would upgrade this superb lens before upgrading the EF 400mm f/5.6L to an IS version, and the EF 300mm f/4L IS is at least a decade overdue for an optics and IS update.
> ...



I totally get your frustration but we who want those two lenses updated are in the minority and the 70-200 crowd is much more vast.


----------



## chrysoberyl (Apr 25, 2018)

slclick said:


> I totally get your frustration but we who want those two lenses updated are in the minority and the 70-200 crowd is much more vast.



I have doubt that you are correct and it makes good business sense for Canon to proceed accordingly. What I don't get is why no 50mm 1.4 has been offered. That I would consider, too.

Sorry to go off-topic.


----------



## slclick (Apr 25, 2018)

chrysoberyl said:


> slclick said:
> 
> 
> > I totally get your frustration but we who want those two lenses updated are in the minority and the 70-200 crowd is much more vast.
> ...



I'm with you, some of these releases and lack of refreshes certainly are head scratchers.


----------



## Cory (Apr 26, 2018)

Was weighing the 100-400 vs. 400 5.6.
The answer might be this + a 400 5.6. 
:-*


----------



## ddixon (Apr 26, 2018)

My 70-200 f4 (bought fall 2010) is not a great copy. It's merely OK on crop and pretty good on my 6D, but not amazing. So, I'm excited to see this new version - if it has improved sharpness.


----------



## ewg963 (Apr 26, 2018)

maxfactor9933 said:


> canon keep releasing EF lenses. kinda hints their upcoming ML cameras can handle EF lenses without hassle


 I hope so as but as the old saying goes "time will tell".


----------



## amorse (Apr 26, 2018)

chrysoberyl said:


> slclick said:
> 
> 
> > I totally get your frustration but we who want those two lenses updated are in the minority and the 70-200 crowd is much more vast.
> ...



I just wonder if Canon is struggling in determining where to position the 50 1.4 and is humming and hawing over how to approach the problem. There seems to be two schools of thought on that lens - one who wants something faster than the 1.8 but the size and weight of the lens must be retained with decent quality, and the other group which would prefer Canon look to create a 50 1.4 where image quality is a priority and little else. Canon's offering for 85 1.4 indicates that the pickle jar size approach seems to be ideal, but that may not service the current users of the 50 1.4 who have to hand hold the camera for long periods and manage a relatively low profile lens.

Wild speculation continues!


----------



## barton springs (Apr 26, 2018)

Canon Rumors said:


> We <a href="http://www.canonrumors.com/the-canon-ef-70-200mm-f-4l-is-ii-is-coming-in-april-cr3/">reported in March of this year</a> that the upcoming Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L IS II was going to be announced this month.</p>
> <p>I will say that I am pleasantly surprised about how many people seem to be looking forward to this lens.</p>
> <span id="pty_trigger"></span>



I've always thought that the 4.0 versions of the 70/200mm are extremely underrated. I've owned both versions and my advice for the novice sports photographers with limited financial resources is to find a clean used non IS 4.0 on eBay or craigslist or new/used at B&H/Adorama. My assignment logistics always require speed to be never under 750 so no need for IS. The 4.0 IS is my go to long zoom for indoor handheld especially personal photography. I'm looking forward to the v2 but I'm pleased with v1 ...but it'll be even better so I'm in! BTW my company is all action sports assignments such as road races, short triathlons, IRON distance Tri's, ultra distance trial runs, & bike races ...so tri-pods are always being used for any lens longer than medium zooms 24-70 2.8L or the very popular 24/105 4.0L IS.

I personally will always have two of each version and believe me the back-ups come in handy when the shooters have a malfunction or forget to bring the lens which is stupid as hell except I did it once myself(!) as a novice 

CANON rules 

Rick
in Austin


----------



## josephandrews222 (Apr 26, 2018)

...I'm wondering if a reason that a new 70-200 f4 IS is likely is because of the fact that...

*when this lens is attached to my M6, and I turn on IS (on the lens), the IS is 'always on' (unless I turn off IS on the lens itself).

When attached to my 5DMk3, the IS only 'engages' when I press on the shutter-release button.

I had never discovered this 'feature', until earlier today when I aimed to compare 150mm focal length images captured with M6 + 18-150mm EF-M lens vs. M6 + adapter + 70-200 f4 IS lens.

CR readers...what say you?

Can I turn 'off' IS acquisition when using the 70-200 lens + M6 combo any other way than literally turning it off on the lens?

...and if not, is this a reason that a new lens is on the horizon?

I'm about to test my 17-55 f2.8 IS lens (with adaptor) to see if its IS acts the same way...a way that I'm sure kills M6 battery life.


----------



## slclick (Apr 27, 2018)

josephandrews222 said:


> ...I'm wondering if a reason that a new 70-200 f4 IS is likely is because of the fact that...
> 
> *when this lens is attached to my M6, and I turn on IS (on the lens), the IS is 'always on' (unless I turn off IS on the lens itself).
> 
> ...



fwiw, all my IS lenses work just fine on my M5


----------



## Canondude2018 (Apr 27, 2018)

LOL, I wonder how many suckers out there sold their 70-200mm 4.0 IS in anticipation for this piece of vaporware.

Imaginary lenses and cameras take great pictures and cost nothing.


----------



## slclick (Apr 27, 2018)

Canondude2018 said:


> LOL, I wonder how many suckers out there sold their 70-200mm 4.0 IS in anticipation for this piece of vaporware.
> 
> Imaginary lenses and cameras take great pictures and cost nothing.



I would imagine less than the number of fingers on a sawmill operators left hand.


----------



## Random Orbits (Apr 27, 2018)

Etienne said:


> BTW ... I have the 70-200 f/2.8L IS II and I would still consider the new f/4 IS II. There are a lot of times that the f/2.8 stays home because it's just too heavy. There's a place for both in my kit: The f/2.8 when it just has to be so, and the f/4 when low weight is a priority.



Did you ever look at the 70-300L? It has a larger diameter but shorter packed length than the 70-200s. For bags designed for FF gear, the 70-300L can be packed vertically like a 24-70 rather than lying on its side. IQ is good. You lose a little bit in max aperture in the native 70-200 range but it beats carrying an extender.


----------



## josephandrews222 (Apr 28, 2018)

slclick said:


> josephandrews222 said:
> 
> 
> > ...I'm wondering if a reason that a new 70-200 f4 IS is likely is because of the fact that...
> ...



I found this--late to the party, I guess!

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/4123692

(thread title: Mount Adapter EF-EOS M issue on M5 + IS EF lenses)


----------



## Michael Clark (May 1, 2018)

Obviously not.


----------



## I Simonius (May 6, 2018)

if the mk2 f4L has the IQ of the f2.8Lmk2 (better than the 70-300) I'm buying it pronto.

one can hope

Don't need a fast 70-200 lens but do need a light(er) lens


----------



## hendrik-sg (May 6, 2018)

Is the lens announced this month? Yes, the month it will be announced will be "this month" by then, but who knows which of the coming (infinie amount of) months will be the one. 

But ok, as long as i dont know if my EF mount System is futureproof they can kiss my ass and print their money themselves, they will not get my money anyways. 

lets take pictures instead of throwing money out of the window, we all have enough equipment, and if not it can be had used for a great price. And this lens is a robust one with great optical quality.


----------



## Alexlin (May 8, 2018)

Etienne said:


> Every time there's a new L lens, a slew of people say that it isn't needed because the current one is just so damn good. Then the reviews come out showing (usually) that the new one blows the old one away.
> Maybe Canon knows a thing or two that the fans don't?


Agree and it makes sense.
The must say the old lens perfect cuz they are the existing user. ;D and if the new comes, the old lens likely are not the best anymore.

Obviously, neither the F/2.8 nor F/4 are perfect.


----------



## Don Haines (May 8, 2018)

Alexlin said:


> Etienne said:
> 
> 
> > Every time there's a new L lens, a slew of people say that it isn't needed because the current one is just so damn good. Then the reviews come out showing (usually) that the new one blows the old one away.
> ...



Also, sometimes materials/components are reaching end of life and just will not be available in a year or two,,,,, at which point Canon would have to re-do the design.... and if they do, then they will take advantage of newer materials, design tools, coatings, and higher precision machining to release an updated version, and it will be superior to the old one....

I have the 70-200 F4 IS lens. It is a great lens.... one of the best light telephoto lenses out there..... and I have no doubt that the new one will be significantly better. Will I buy one? Probably not... but then again the market for this lens is not existing owners, it is mostly new purchasers..... the same people who would have bought the old one, and for all those people it is like getting a free upgrade.


Lenses have steadily improved in quality. This is just another bump up the ladder.


----------



## slclick (May 8, 2018)

Meanwhile I'm anxiously awaiting real life Tamron 70-120 f/4 reviews. (From the usual reputable suspects)


----------

