# More EF 100-400 f/4.5-5.6L IS II Talk [CR2]



## Canon Rumors Guy (Oct 28, 2014)

```
<p>A few more people have confirmed that select Canon pros around the globe are testing the new EF 100-400 f/4.5-5.6L IS II. Also being confirmed is that the lens resembles the EF 70-300 f/4-5.6L IS in its design; with the zoom ring being at the front element side of the lens, and the focus ring near the camera mount. We were also told that the new lens is “quite a bit smaller than the current iteration”, although this could be subjective depending on the photographer. If it is actually smaller, then I expect the front of the lens will be telescopic like the EF 70-300 f/4-5.6L IS.</p>
<p>Availability will be at the end of the November according to one source. There has been no mention of pricing or filter size for the new lens.</p>
<p>More to come…</p>
<p><strong><span style="color: #ff0000;">c</span>r</strong></p>
```


----------



## Harv (Oct 28, 2014)

If it produces images as good as the 70-300 L it will be a winner.


----------



## unfocused (Oct 28, 2014)

As many others have said, pricing will be the key to me. Especially, now that other options are available from Sigma and Tamron. 

I expect it to be better than the current 100-400, which I own. But will it be triple-the-price better? I'm doubting it. At any rate, I'm in no hurry as I'm not getting much chance these days to use the current 100-400, so I'll wait and see how all the options compare and what the prices settle down to.


----------



## keithfullermusic (Oct 28, 2014)

i'm not sure how "quite a bit smaller" is dependent on the photographer? either way, i bet a lot of people are waiting for this lens. i have the old one, and while it's not perfect, it's still sweet.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Oct 28, 2014)

Late fall is not the best time to start selling the lens, fair weather photographers like me won't use one until late next spring. On the other hand, if camera and lens sales continue to be poor, we might see better prices by Spring.


----------



## Helios68 (Oct 28, 2014)

Really excited about this lens. Hoping IQ and price match ! Could be a good alternative to the old 400 f5.6L


----------



## candyman (Oct 28, 2014)

I am trying to understand what the impact of this design will be for the sales of the 70-300L. 
Because if it is light and the IQ plus AF same (or better) as the 70-300L, I will sell my 70-300L and purchase the 100-400MKII


----------



## mrsfotografie (Oct 28, 2014)

candyman said:


> I am trying to understand what the impact of this design will be for the sales of the 70-300L.
> Because if it is light and the IQ plus AF same (or better) as the 70-300L, I will sell my 70-300L and purchase the 100-400MKII



If the 100-400L II manages to be the same length and diameter as the 70-300L (which I doubt is even physically possible without resorting to DO, and then there's the required diameter of the front element) then I would consider the same, however as it stands the 70-300L will remain my travel tele (I don't use it for anything else, really)...


----------



## slclick (Oct 28, 2014)

As long as it's better than my 70-200 2.8 IS2 + 1.4 TC........ (That's my longest combo for the 5D3) 

So I have my eye on this plus also secretly hoping for a 400 5.6 IS


----------



## Maximilian (Oct 28, 2014)

unicorns... unicorns... unicorns... 
i can see unicorns...


----------



## Lee Jay (Oct 28, 2014)

This actually makes a whole lot of sense. A 100-400 is really just a scaled up 70-300 - about the same zoom range, just a third bigger. Why not scale up the design of the existing lens?

I'm not saying I like it, but I'll have to see in person if I could get used to having the zoom ring on the "wrong" side, compared to my other three zooms - the 17-40L, 24-105L, and 70-200/2.8L.

And, yes, of course it'll extend, same as the current one does. It makes little sense to contain such a long lens in a non-extending frame the way the 70-200s are.


----------



## Steve Balcombe (Oct 28, 2014)

Lee Jay said:


> I'm not saying I like it, but I'll have to see in person if I could get used to having the zoom ring on the "wrong" side, compared to my other three zooms - the 17-40L, 24-105L, and 70-200/2.8L.



It will also probably have the same extreme focus breathing.

As a trade-off I'm happy to accept those things in exchange for a very sharp, reasonably compact 100-400L. The only real problem is what it will do to the value of my 70-300L on the used market...


----------



## BL (Oct 28, 2014)

zoom ring in the front, focus ring behind like the 70-300L?

No thanks. That's the one thing that kept me from getting the 70-300. My wrist kept resting on the focus ring, shifting it ever so slightly as I racked the zoom in and out.


----------



## JPAZ (Oct 28, 2014)

Hmmmmm. Sell the 100-400 now or wait until the new one comes out? That is the question. Because if this does get released and if the price is reasonable and the IQ better than the present iteration, the value of the old lens will drop.


----------



## Dylan777 (Oct 28, 2014)

JPAZ said:


> Hmmmmm. Sell the 100-400 now or wait until the new one comes out? That is the question. Because if this does get released and if the price is reasonable and the IQ better than the present iteration, the value of the old lens will drop.



What is the "GOLDEN" rule again?


----------



## Lawliet (Oct 28, 2014)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> Late fall is not the best time to start selling the lens, fair weather photographers like me won't use one until late next spring.



In winter we have a nice temperate climate, 50-60°F in the lower regions is quite good for longer hiking tours. Also - esp. important with tele lenses - you get less heat shimmer. Saves you from reviews that blame the lens for the lack of understanding behind the camera. Perhaps less a problem for something in the 300-400 weight class, but for a standard amateur lens it would make sense.


----------



## lescrane (Oct 28, 2014)

would I consider it, being a content owner of Tamron 150-600 ??

1. If it's sig.lighter than Tammy....(should be)
2. Sig. sharper than Tammy wide opened(probably)
3. Well under $2000.00.....(doubtful)

Basically, if I know I'm going to be doing either big, close birds, eg herons, ducks, etc and/or telephoto landscapes, boating shots, etc, having the new 100-400 to "carry around" would be worth an investment. I have considered the 70-300L, but I'd rather sacrifice 30mm on the short end to gain 100mm on the long end

My prediction would be about 2,000 price, which is double Tammy and the new Sigma C line, and about 500.00 more than the 70-300L. If the lens really is lighter weight than the original, it's another positive sign for me that Canon and others are seeing the market for lighter weight equipment, esp. w/millions of aging prosumer photographers out there. 
Yes, I would love to get the 400 DO Mk II, but if I bought it, I couldnt afford to go anywhere with it for a few years. LOL


----------



## Marsu42 (Oct 28, 2014)

Canon Rumors said:


> Availability will be at the end of the November according to one source.



Yeah, right, a few people are beta-testing some lens design now, and in one month it'll be available to the general consumer. This is flimsy, even for CR  ... on the other hand, no mention of *which* November :->


----------



## Random Orbits (Oct 28, 2014)

Steve Balcombe said:


> Lee Jay said:
> 
> 
> > I'm not saying I like it, but I'll have to see in person if I could get used to having the zoom ring on the "wrong" side, compared to my other three zooms - the 17-40L, 24-105L, and 70-200/2.8L.
> ...



Not much. The 70-300L will still be smaller and lighter. The question I have is how well it will perform at 400mm. If its sharpness improvement can compete with the Tarmron near 600, then Canon's smaller and lighter lens with native AF algorithms will do well. And if the IQ is improved that much, how much better can a prime 400 f/5.6 do, even if it is a 400 f/5.6 IS?


----------



## Canon1 (Oct 28, 2014)

$3,000 min. That's my prediction.


----------



## Lee Jay (Oct 28, 2014)

Canon1 said:


> $3,000 min. That's my prediction.



I'll make a different one. If it's real, I'll predict it will be available somewhere legitimate for right around the $2,000 mark at some point within the first year. MSRP might be $2,499, or $2,899 or whatever, but I still think street price will ultimately be at or lower than the 70-200/2.8L IS II.


----------



## Jane (Oct 28, 2014)

Focus breathing or not, I have been extremely happy with my 70-300L. It's light and goes with me on most trips. Only stays home when I go on certain wildlife trips. The IQ is very good and the size/weight makes it easy to take along. If the 100-400II is designed the same way with the same IQ I'll be thrilled. I plan to buy it anyway - I've had my money saved for a while...a long while.


----------



## Canon1 (Oct 28, 2014)

Lee Jay said:


> Canon1 said:
> 
> 
> > $3,000 min. That's my prediction.
> ...



You may be right, but I highly doubt it will be priced lower than the Nikon 80-400. If anything we generally see canon L glass fetching a premium.


----------



## mycanonphotos (Oct 28, 2014)

I love my 100-400 and the way it functions. This new design dosent sound all that great to me ???. I'll stick with what I have...Wonder if it will totally stop being produced?...
Thinking....Rather than purchase a 1.4 TC I'll buy a 1.6 TC in the 7D II...give me 160-640...being that I have 2 5D'3 and want a longer reach and faster shutter...bonus is having the improved AF/improved IQ...


----------



## Lee Jay (Oct 28, 2014)

Canon1 said:


> Lee Jay said:
> 
> 
> > Canon1 said:
> ...



Not always. The Canon 800/5.6 is $13,500, the Nikon is $17,900.

I think Nikon is asking a bit much for the new 80-400, especially since it doesn't seem to even be as good as the current 100-400L. If Canon follows, then they'll sell fewer of them.


----------



## antonioleandro (Oct 28, 2014)

As the lens extends during the zooming process, could it pump dust into the camera and on the sensor? Altough it is not a trombone design, as the 28-300 or 100-400, the volume of the lens expands as we zoom in and contracts as we zoom out and I think it could allow air from the outside into the lens and from the lens into the sensor. Am I wrong?


----------



## Lee Jay (Oct 28, 2014)

antonioleandro said:


> As the lens extends during the zooming process, could it pump dust into the camera and on the sensor? Altough it is not a trombone design, as the 28-300 or 100-400, the volume of the lens expands as we zoom in and contracts as we zoom out and I think it could allow air from the outside into the lens and from the lens into the sensor. Am I wrong?



It's hard to say where the air comes from and to during extension and retraction. Could be from the body or from the outside through the lens and not from the body.

My 24-105L extends and retracts, and I've never found it to be a dust problem.


----------



## Canon1 (Oct 28, 2014)

Lee Jay said:


> Canon1 said:
> 
> 
> > Lee Jay said:
> ...



What do you think the price of canons 800mm will be when it's the mark 2? You can't compare the current Nikon 800 to the aging canon.


----------



## DWM (Oct 28, 2014)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> Late fall is not the best time to start selling the lens, fair weather photographers like me won't use one until late next spring. On the other hand, if camera and lens sales continue to be poor, we might see better prices by Spring.


It's only late fall on half the world. Late spring in the other half. Keep in mind it is before Christmas in all the world and many will make this purchase for a present or use Christmas money they recieve to buy it if avaliable.


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Oct 28, 2014)

candyman said:


> I am trying to understand what the impact of this design will be for the sales of the 70-300L.
> Because if it is light and the IQ plus AF same (or better) as the 70-300L, I will sell my 70-300L and purchase the 100-400MKII



for those leaning heavily towards wildlife it might

otherwise, I'm not so sure, it will obviously be heavier than the 70-300L which is already getting a touch heavy for a run around all day travel lens and not going wider than 100mm might be a pain for some since it would mean more lens swapping for some FF users, and will it really manage quite the same IQ at 70mm and 200mm?

still, it should be good


----------



## candc (Oct 28, 2014)

this is the kind of talk i like to hear, smaller than the present one, excellent. this is sounding to be a good lens for in a beltpack or bag with a few others on a hike or bike ride. something besides wildlife shooting outings where you are carrying a big lens and nothing else. 

take a 16-35 and this one and your all set for the road. maybe a 50mm too. that sounds like a nice travel kit.


----------



## Jane (Oct 28, 2014)

[/quote]
... the 70-300L which is already getting a touch heavy for a run around all day travel lens...

[/quote]

Really, for the quality it's light. I can carry it all day along with other gear! I plan to walk all day with the 100-400II also, but that will be my only lens!


----------



## WillT (Oct 28, 2014)

Why even bother with the Tamron 150-600 and the Sigma on the way. I think they would be better off making something longer than 400mm.


----------



## Lee Jay (Oct 28, 2014)

WillT said:


> Why even bother with the Tamron 150-600 and the Sigma on the way. I think they would be better off making something longer than 400mm.



Because a lot of people, myself included, would value something shorter in length and smaller in diameter than either the Tamron or the Sigma. The bag I would use for this lens won't take anything bigger than a 70-200/2.8 or the existing 100-400L in the retracted position. Further, the Tamron is a little heavy (not too bad) and the Sigma C is unknown. The Sigma S is way too heavy for me to handhold all day long. Finally, it's likely that this lens will out-focus the Tamron and SigmaC for moving subjects.

That's why.


----------



## lol (Oct 28, 2014)

I do fear my 100-400L might be worn out from the use I've given it over the years. The push-pull mechanism isn't as smooth as it used to be, so a long(er) replacement isn't out of the question. No push-pull remains a disappointment to me but not unexpected.

Since the 600mm class lenses have also been bought up, to me the Tamron is not an option with its backward zoom ring. That leaves the two new Sigma lenses. I already have the 120-300 f/2.8 (to get 600 with a x2) and the '600 S will be similar in weight. A bit too much for regular use on the move. On the other hand, I'm not sure how good the C will be.

Or maybe I should just get another 100-400L before they stop making them  Even bring back the 35-350!


----------



## WillT (Oct 28, 2014)

Lee Jay said:


> WillT said:
> 
> 
> > Why even bother with the Tamron 150-600 and the Sigma on the way. I think they would be better off making something longer than 400mm.
> ...



If its about bag space and weight just get a teleconverter for the 70-200. Honestly for wildlife I would rather just use the 70-200 and crop than use the 100-400. The Tammy does well focusing in my experience.


----------



## Lee Jay (Oct 29, 2014)

WillT said:


> Lee Jay said:
> 
> 
> > WillT said:
> ...



I already have that combo.


----------



## 9VIII (Oct 29, 2014)

mycanonphotos said:


> I love my 100-400 and the way it functions. This new design dosent sound all that great to me ???. I'll stick with what I have...Wonder if it will totally stop being produced?...
> Thinking....Rather than purchase a 1.4 TC I'll buy a 1.6 TC in the 7D II...give me 160-640...being that I have 2 5D'3 and want a longer reach and faster shutter...bonus is having the improved AF/improved IQ...



I know it may seem like I push the 400f5.6 prime lens a lot, but...

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=278&Camera=736&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=0&LensComp=113&CameraComp=736&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=7&APIComp=1

You can stop down to f11 and get decent IQ with the current 100-400, but at that point the Tamron on the 5D3 is going to look a lot better (and with a one stop advantage in light gathering due to full frame).
Specifically for BIF shooting on a budget, the 400f5.6 is still the best option, but the new Tamron and Sigma options are certainly a tempting offer for all around telephoto use.


----------



## Rockets95 (Oct 29, 2014)

WillT said:


> If its about bag space and weight just get a teleconverter for the 70-200. Honestly for wildlife I would rather just use the 70-200 and crop than use the 100-400. The Tammy does well focusing in my experience.



I tried the 7D / 70-200 f2.8 IS II / 2X III combination. Intitial shots showed severe Front Focus Issues, so I exchanged that extender for another. I really wanted this combination to work for me, so I tackled lens Microadjustment. What I discovered was that at 400mm, the setup was fairly accurate, (although also somewhat inconsistant) with little or no adjustment needed, but at 200mm I needed to adjust focusing to +12 on the -20 to +20 scale. I decided this was not going to work for me, so I returned the second extender.

The reason I purchased the 70-200 in the first place over the 100-400, was I felt I could use the 2X extender to get to 400mm. Eventually I will probably end up getting a 100-400.


----------



## slclick (Oct 29, 2014)

WillT said:


> Lee Jay said:
> 
> 
> > WillT said:
> ...



Ugh I took out my 70-200 2.8 Mk2 with the 1.4 today and mid shoot took it off and was much more pleased with the results, cropped or not. It's such a great lens, why degrade it? I know others would say it's such a great lens it can TAKE the hit but I just can't any longer. Thus the 100-400 Mk2 is up my alley. I tried my hand at birding and it's just not my thing. So I shelved my thoughts of getting a 400 5.6 and am rethinking the 100-400. Plus, it fits my bags, lol.


p.s. I call $1999-2299 (based on the Mk1 at $1699)


----------



## Lee Jay (Oct 29, 2014)

slclick said:


> Ugh I took out my 70-200 2.8 Mk2 with the 1.4 today and mid shoot took it off and was much more pleased with the results, cropped or not. It's such a great lens, why degrade it? I know others would say it's such a great lens it can TAKE the hit but I just can't any longer. Thus the 100-400 Mk2 is up my alley.



One of these is from the 70-200II + 2x + 1.4x, the other from the 100-400L + 1.4x, both on the Canon 18MP 1.6-crop sensor. Honestly, I don't know which is which.


----------



## docsmith (Oct 29, 2014)

Hope it is true. A smaller, lighter 100-400 II would be great. I'd prefer push pull, but the twist zoom won't make much of a difference to me. The key will be the IQ, especially with a 1.4TC. Whatever gives me the best IQ 400 mm and greater (that I can afford) is what I will end up with.

The lenstip review is in on the 150-600S. Better IQ (but not by much) at center and mid-frame than the Tamron 150-600, and Canon 70-300 and 100-400L. Some issues at FF edge with IQ, especially at 150 and 300 mm.

So, for me, Canon needs to beat that.


----------



## Etienne (Oct 29, 2014)

I have the 70-200 2.8 IS II and 2x extender. While I like it's versatility, it is slow to focus and soft wide open. I am interested in this 100-400 mkII if it delivers fast performance, reasonable price, not too heavy and sharp wide open.
Otherwise I'll stick with the combo I have.

To be honest, I am hoping for a super sharp contrasty lightweight new 400 f/5.6 IS


----------



## tron (Oct 29, 2014)

I believe we will see a 5DMkIV, a 6DMkII, a 1DxMkII before we see 100-400 II. Not to mention a 7DMkIII ;D ;D ;D ;D

I would like to ask CR if this proves yet another BS to refrain from mentioning it again and to stick to more plausible rumors please.

100-400 II rumors are good only for laughing!


----------



## mrsfotografie (Oct 29, 2014)

WillT said:


> Lee Jay said:
> 
> 
> > WillT said:
> ...



Actually the 100-400 by itself is already lighter and smaller than the 70-200. If you're carrying both a 70-200 and a 100-400 in your bag, that's not a smart thing to do. Consider what you need and leave the rest at home is my motto (everything has to fit in my Lowepro Mini Trekker AW or it stays).


----------



## Lee Jay (Oct 29, 2014)

mrsfotografie said:


> Actually the 100-400 by itself is already lighter and smaller than the 70-200. If you're carrying both a 70-200 and a 100-400 in your bag, that's not a smart thing to do.



I don't. I carry one or the other (I use the same bag at home and at work, and I use the 70-200+2x at home and the 100-400 at work).


----------



## Plainsman (Oct 29, 2014)

tron said:


> I believe we will see a 5DMkIV, a 6DMkII, a 1DxMkII before we see 100-400 II. Not to mention a 7DMkIII ;D ;D ;D ;D
> 
> I would like to ask CR if this proves yet another BS to refrain from mentioning it again and to stick to more plausible rumors please.
> 
> 100-400 II rumors are good only for laughing!




...I think this is the real thing, both Sony and Nikon have had new ones and with a total of three low priced 150-600 zooms available in the next month or so it's now or never for Canon


----------



## Nethawk (Oct 29, 2014)

^^ My thoughts as well. Canon must release this soon, the number of potential purchasers is dropping daily since Tamron & Sigma's releases.


----------



## Plainsman (Oct 29, 2014)

As it is supposed to be very similar to the 70-300 I wouldn't be the least surprised that it was also designed at the same time by the same team!! 
So if they've missed the boat on this one tough titty but humble pie if it turns out as sharp as the Sony @400.


----------



## mrsfotografie (Oct 29, 2014)

Plainsman said:


> As it is supposed to be very similar to the 70-300 I wouldn't be the least surprised that it was also designed at the same time by the same team!!
> So if they've missed the boat on this one tough titty but humble pie if it turns out as sharp as the Sony @400.



Yes, even the conservative Canon will have to step in soon.


----------



## JonAustin (Oct 29, 2014)

tron said:


> I believe we will see a 5DMkIV, a 6DMkII, a 1DxMkII before we see 100-400 II. Not to mention a 7DMkIII ;D ;D ;D ;D
> 
> I would like to ask CR if this proves yet another BS to refrain from mentioning it again and to stick to more plausible rumors please.
> 
> 100-400 II rumors are good only for laughing!



No question there've been a lot of false rumors about this fabled update in recent years, but it seems inevitable for Canon to release it _some_day. And I don't believe that a late start relative to the Tamron and Sigma releases will matter all that much; if it tests out to be a superior optic, plenty of Tammy & Siggy owners will elect to sell their current telezooms and upgrade to the Canon 100-400 II. (And for most of those who don't, it'll probably be because the new 100-400 is beyond their price range.)

Personally, I'm keeping my cash in my wallet in the belief that the 100-400 II will materialize, and that it will be worth the wait. I can do that because I don't need to shoot beyond 200mm very often, and when I do (for the time being), I ratchet my 5DIII up from its usual mRAW setting to full RAW, and then crop in post.

Of all the rumors about the 100-400 II, the only thing that puts me off a bit is the "wrong" placement of the zoom ring. But I console myself in the fact that -- had Canon opted to repeat the push/pull design -- my fingers would have to be placed that far out on the lens barrel to zoom, anyway.


----------



## slclick (Oct 29, 2014)

The way I figure it, all my 3rd party lenses have been training for a wrong way zoom ring Canon


----------



## neuroanatomist (Oct 29, 2014)

slclick said:


> The way I figure it, all my 3rd party lenses have been training for a wrong way zoom ring Canon



Reversed position with the focus ring, the zoom ring will still turn the 'right' way.


----------



## slclick (Oct 29, 2014)

neuroanatomist said:


> slclick said:
> 
> 
> > The way I figure it, all my 3rd party lenses have been training for a wrong way zoom ring Canon
> ...


Oh you know what I meant, just had to chime in with persnickety correctness! lol...oh and here's your emoticon...


----------



## MrFotoFool (Oct 30, 2014)

If it is based on the 70-300L design, let us not forget that lens does NOT take 1.4x or 2x extenders. Any chance this new 100-400 would not take extenders?


----------



## mrsfotografie (Oct 30, 2014)

MrFotoFool said:


> If it is based on the 70-300L design, let us not forget that lens does NOT take 1.4x or 2x extenders. Any chance this new 100-400 would not take extenders?


Because it starts at 100 there's a good chance there will be enough room for a Canon extender


----------



## Steve Balcombe (Oct 30, 2014)

mrsfotografie said:


> MrFotoFool said:
> 
> 
> > If it is based on the 70-300L design, let us not forget that lens does NOT take 1.4x or 2x extenders. Any chance this new 100-400 would not take extenders?
> ...


That's right, and surely Canon won't launch a MkII which is 'worse' than the old lens in such a significant way? A few weeks after launching the 7D with AF at f/8?


----------



## birdingbilly (Oct 30, 2014)

As I posted on an earlier thread I saw this new lens being used last week, it was not a pre-production model. It does take extenders and will af at f/8.0 at least on the 1DX so I assume will also do so on the 7D II and 5D III. The canon rumours description of the lens are accurate (it looks very much like the 70-300) and I was told that it would be launched in November. I wouldn't be surprised if Canon don't do a deal to package it with the 7D II - makes obvious sense as potentially its a great combo.


----------



## Maximilian (Oct 30, 2014)

Steve Balcombe said:


> mrsfotografie said:
> 
> 
> > MrFotoFool said:
> ...


... and competition (Tamron, Sigma) that is offering more reach within the lens and no need of TC.
IMHO A 100-400 L II without TC capability would be a bummer! But Canon strategists sometimes follow different logics than we do.


----------



## gregorywood (Oct 30, 2014)

Lee Jay said:


> This actually makes a whole lot of sense. A 100-400 is really just a scaled up 70-300 - about the same zoom range, just a third bigger. Why not scale up the design of the existing lens?
> 
> I'm not saying I like it, but I'll have to see in person if I could get used to having the zoom ring on the "wrong" side, compared to my other three zooms - the 17-40L, 24-105L, and 70-200/2.8L.
> 
> And, yes, of course it'll extend, same as the current one does. It makes little sense to contain such a long lens in a non-extending frame the way the 70-200s are.



As a relatively new owner of the 70-300L, and having been concerned pre-purchase about the zoom ring arrangement, I can say that it was a bit awkward at first, but I adjusted. There is a larger issue (at least for me) that I've not heard any one else mention. The heel of my hand tends to ride on or at the edge of the focus ring while I'm using the zoom ring. As a result, I'm often manually focusing against the autofocus and have produced more blurred images as a result. I bought the third-party tripod ring by Vello and it helps to leave it on and use it as a platform in my left hand. This allows me to get my hand off the focus ring and also improves my ability to more accurately and quickly use the focus ring. The only thing is that the design of the Vello ring is not optimal. It works, but it moves and I don't like the release mechanism. It is over $100 less expensive than the Canon version. 

At any rate, the reversed focus ring/zoom ring does present some challenges, but they are manageable in light of an outstanding lens. I may have to drop the $160 for the Canon mount. 

Greg


----------



## Nethawk (Oct 30, 2014)

gregorywood said:


> As a relatively new owner of the 70-300L, and having been concerned pre-purchase about the zoom ring arrangement, I can say that it was a bit awkward at first, but I adjusted. There is a larger issue (at least for me) that I've not heard any one else mention. The heel of my hand tends to ride on or at the edge of the focus ring while I'm using the zoom ring. As a result, *I'm often manually focusing against the autofocus and have produced more blurred images as a result*. I bought the third-party tripod ring by Vello and it helps to leave it on and use it as a platform in my left hand. This allows me to get my hand off the focus ring and also improves my ability to more accurately and quickly use the focus ring. The only thing is that the design of the Vello ring is not optimal. It works, but it moves and I don't like the release mechanism. It is over $100 less expensive than the Canon version.
> 
> At any rate, the reversed focus ring/zoom ring does present some challenges, but they are manageable in light of an outstanding lens. I may have to drop the $160 for the Canon mount.
> 
> Greg



Hi Greg,

Yep, this is the worst part about the zoom and focus ring arrangement. It still slips me up on occasion. The tripod ring is an interesting work around. I don't own one as my tripod ballhead supports the weight, but I may consider it now. Edit: I've mostly overcome this now by trying to compose then focus as a final step.

A lot of the time I am overriding AF anyway with tweaks of the manual focus ring, especially on tripod using live view at 100% zoom. In this case I actually prefer the rear focus ring. Having my elbow tucked in rather than reaching for the far end really helps stability while fine tuning focus.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Oct 30, 2014)

Nethawk said:


> I don't own one as my tripod ballhead supports the weight, but I may consider it now.



I bought the Tripod Mount Ring C primarily as a base for handholding that puts my fingers by the zoom ring. Depending on your body, the tripod ring still might not provide proper balance. Still, depending on your setup an unbalanced load can be more prone to vibration than a balanced load (for example, no real difference on my RRS TVC-33 + BH-55 LR, but noticeably different on my RRS TQC-14 + BH-30 LR with the center column raised). More details in this linked post


----------



## Quasimodo (Nov 5, 2014)

*Waiting for Godot... The new 100-400L*

This just in from Cameraegg: http://www.cameraegg.org/ef-100-400mm-f4-5-5-6l-is-ii-usm-lens-to-be-announced-in-several-days/


----------

