# The one waiting the new version of 100-400 IS, investegation



## leecheeyee (Jul 19, 2012)

I want to know how many people like me waiting the new version 100-400mm is. If you be, please reply in an even simple way. Thinks!


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Jul 19, 2012)

No, I bought the existing model. Some have been waiting for 7 years.
When I recently bought a Nikon D800 to try out, I found that Nikon has nothing that can match even this old design, nothing close in the price range. It made me thankful I kept mine.


----------



## Random Orbits (Jul 19, 2012)

I'm waiting for the new version. I use the 70-200 with the 2x for now but the images are soft at 400 and AF is slow, but I'm in no hurry... yet.


----------



## Videoshooter (Jul 20, 2012)

I actually opted for the Sigma 150-500 IS. It's damn sharp (well, my copy is anyway) but I've found the AF to be hit and miss. If Canon did come out with a new 100-400 (or even something slightly longer) I'd definitely consider it. 

I wouldn't put off buying a tele-zoom until an updated version comes out though. It could be years away, and as old as the Canon 100-400 IS is, it still performs extremely well.


----------



## ronderick (Jul 24, 2012)

Yeah, I was holding off on that for quite a while. At one point I was wedging my bet between the 100-400 or 70-200 MK1... I went with the 70-200 and was scorched by the result (the MK2 came out 6 months after I got the MK1). :'(

Since then I have decided to wait it out.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jul 24, 2012)

I have the current version, it's excellent. The new one, assuming it ever comes, will almost certainly be a lot more expensive. If recent history is a guide (70-200 II, 24-70 II), the price of the original version will rise when the new one comes out, and the prices on the used market will follow. That means you can buy the original now, especially during a rebate, and likely sell it when the new one comes out for around the same price you paid for it, or at least only a couple of hundred less.


----------



## ronderick (Jul 25, 2012)

The good thing about the L lenses is that existing models have been around a long time and their quality have been tested (and they're made to last... which is something that seems to be missing from a lot of other consumer products nowadays ;D)

But even if a new one does come out, it's going to be probably a year or two before the prices settle to a more affordable range (look at the 70-300L prices today vs. when it first came out).

So I'd say the wait time for me would likely be release time + a year or two...


----------



## Bennymiata (Jul 25, 2012)

Just buy the current version.
It's a great lens.
I love mine, and I couldn't wait for another few years for a new model to come out, if ever.

Mind you, I've had mine for over a year and used it often for lots of different things from spiders through to landscapes and pictures of the moon.

Personally, I reckon it's cheap for what it offers.


----------



## noncho (Jul 25, 2012)

I would bought old version second hand good condition. Pricing of new canon lenses is awful, I can't spend something like 2500$ for new, especially if I can find good old one for half price. I'm just not sure that I'll got the money before the anouncement.


----------



## 4D (Jul 25, 2012)

I just bought a very good condition used one, 18-months old, for $1300 and it is fantastic, can't imagine how good the new one will have to be to justify a price that would probably be at least double.

I did some comparisons with my very sharp 70-200 f4L and it was hard to tell the difference, actually almost impossible.


----------



## FunPhotons (Jul 25, 2012)

I've been waiting for a few years. No super hurry, though it would be fun for getting some wildlife shots in. I've had a policy of waiting and buying after a new release. Sure prices are higher, but the lenses are better, and I'm not stuck with an older lens and wondering. In the scheme of things the price isn't enough to keep me away. 

Presently have 8-15 fish, 16-35II, 24-105, 70-200/2.8 II and a 50/1.4 from 'the old days'. A new 100-400 will nicely fill out the top end for me. 

EDIT: Oh I also have the shorty forty which I really like. I'm considering the new 24mm if the price ever came down. It's about time Canon updates their non-L primes.


----------



## caruser (Jul 25, 2012)

I'm waiting most eagerly for one, together with a 135L it'll replace my 70-200 f/4 IS.


----------



## awinphoto (Jul 25, 2012)

My friend just bought the current one on craigslist... I keep teasing him that the new one is coming out and his will be obsolete... maybe i can get his even cheaper haha. But, as we know canon lately, dont count on the new one being under 2k.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Jul 25, 2012)

awinphoto said:


> My friend just bought the current one on craigslist... I keep teasing him that the new one is coming out and his will be obsolete... maybe i can get his even cheaper haha. But, as we know canon lately, dont count on the new one being under 2k.


I think it will not be under $3K. I also think that Canon is or will be rethinking new product introductions. If the tooling is complete, they will probably go ahead, but if its just in the final design phase, it will get delayed. The recent drops in prices accross the photography industry are a sign of lagging sales, and the resultant cash flow issues.
Obviously, the 200-400mmL is going to come, and a host of small low cost STM non L lenses as well. Those will sell, even in tough times.


----------



## dhofmann (Jul 31, 2012)

Random Orbits said:


> I use the 70-200 with the 2x for now but the images are soft at 400 and AF is slow, but I'm in no hurry... yet.



Ditto. If only the 400mm f/5.6L lens had image stabilization. Maybe the new 100-400 will be just as sharp at 400mm. If so, a tough decision awaits about whether to keep the 70-200!


----------



## tome223 (Jul 31, 2012)

I have the current version of the 100-400 and love it. Am planning to get a 17-40 L and it's nice that the 17-40L, 100-400, (and 24-105 L for that matter) all take 77mm filters. Something to consider, who knows when the newer version of the 100-400 is coming out - and if it does - what it's filter size will be. I for one like the push / pull of the 100-400. Even if a new version of the 100-400 would come out I think I'd invest my money in glass elsewhere rather than in the most recent model. 

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
60D | 50mm f/1.8 | 18-135mm f/3.5-f5.6 | 70-300 f/4.5-f/5.6 IS | 100-400mm L | 430 EX II |


----------



## Abraxx (Aug 3, 2012)

I am waiting for the new version.


----------



## Omar H (Aug 17, 2012)

I might have the funds from a tax refund around may/june of next year, if by then it's available, then for (almost*) sure I'll get one, if not, I'll have a tougher time deciding between the existing 100-400 which I have actually used and I'm in love with, and the 70-300 L which I have not used but I would believe might be an excellent choice given the advancement in technology when compared to the 100-400, but I certainly don't have any hardcore data to support such statement.

*almost in reference to a potentially obscene increment in price, like going from $1600 US to $3,000 US. In such case I would think, darn you Canon!


----------

