# Review: Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS II



## Canon Rumors Guy (Feb 27, 2015)

```
Professional nature photography Kevin Ebi took some time to write an interesting review of the brand new EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS II.</p>
<p><strong>Here is a summary of some of Kevin’s thoughts.</strong></p>
<ul>
<li class="p1"><span class="s1">The Mark II doesn’t zoom quite as far. The extreme telephoto end of the new 100-400 is a little more than 2% shorter than the Mark I.</span></li>
<li class="p1"><span class="s1">There is not a huge difference in image quality at the center of the two generation of lenses, but at the corners, there is less distortion in the Mark II. Sharpness is improved, but it’s not a mind-blowing improvement. (A lot of people on your forums ask how it compares to a 70-200 Mark II with a doubler; it provides a readily visible improvement over that setup.)</span></li>
<li class="p1"><span class="s1">The 100-400 II does suffer a bit from the “onion rings” phenomenon, but I don’t think it ruins any images. In fact, it’s no worse than the 600mm f/4 IS. The weather conditions that allowed me to photograph the phenomenon evaporated fast, so I couldn’t compare it to the Mark I.</span></li>
<li class="p1"><span class="s1">A minimum focusing distance of 3 feet/1 meter may seem overkill for a lens primarily used for wildlife, but it has opened new creative possibilities for me. For birds that you are able to get close to — either through opportunity or through remote rigs — it lets you capture sharp subjects with stunningly beautifully backgrounds.</span></li>
</ul>
<p><strong><a href="http://livingwilderness.blogspot.co.uk/2015/02/hands-on-with-canon-100-400-is-mark-ii.html" target="_blank">Read the full review</a> | <strong><strong><strong>Canon EF 100-400 f/4.5-5.6L IS II $2199: <a href="http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1092632-REG/canon_9524b002_ef_100_400mm_f_4_5_5_6l_is.html/bi/2466/kbid/3296" target="_blank">B&H Photo</a> | <a href="http://www.adorama.com/CA1004002U.html?KBID=64393" target="_blank">Adorama</a> | <a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00PF39PEY/ref=as_li_tl?ie=UTF8&camp=1789&creative=390957&creativeASIN=B00PF39PEY&linkCode=as2&tag=canorumo-20&linkId=DR7JYMNZQZ4LVBHE" target="_blank">Amazon</a></strong></strong></strong></strong></p>
<p><strong><span style="color: #ff0000;">c</span>r</strong></p>
<p> </p>
```


----------



## Maximilian (Feb 27, 2015)

Interesting review! 



> There is not a huge difference in image quality at the center of the two generation of lenses, but at the corners


Compared to TDP 
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=972&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=4&API=1&LensComp=113&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=7&APIComp=0
this might be true at 400 mm but not at shorter fl. And I'd buy a zoom for its versatility to have all: long end, short end and everything inbetween.

And the V1 was already good so "_mind-blowing improvements_" would have been quite abstruse.


----------



## Lee Jay (Feb 27, 2015)

I don't have one of the new ones yet, but I do have one of the old ones.

I think some people have missed the point of the new lens.

The old one has quite excellent basic optical performance - good resolution, low CA, etc. However...it has three fundamental problems.

[list type=decimal]
[*]The output is inconsistent wide open with the IS engaged. You could get sharp shots or soft shots depending on where the IS elements were at the time the shot was taken. This issue largely goes away at f/8 instead of f/5.6.
[*]The IS performance absolutely stinks. One stop. Combine that with the above need to stop down a stop and the IS is often (but not always) useless.
[*]The lens has lousy handling. I don't mean the push-pull, I mean the fact that the lock ring can twist the AF ring, and the lock ring is the natural place to put your hand, at least for me. This means you're always screwing with the manual focus ring, usually unintentionally.
[/list]

The new one appears to have solved all three of these problems, and slightly improved the already-great basic optical performance all at the same time. That's an enormous step forward.


----------



## erjlphoto (Feb 27, 2015)

Canon Rumors said:


> Professional nature photography Kevin Ebi took some time to write an interesting review of the brand new EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS II.</p>
> <p><strong>Here is a summary of some of Kevin’s thoughts.</strong></p>
> <ul>



Price is always a consideration, but I would definitely get the MKii over the original. I owned the original and was a great lens. My sister does bif and have used her MKii and like it considerably more.
It is easier to use with the new ring type zoom and I saw a noticeable difference in edge sharpness. Focus on both was great however the image stabilization is better on the new model. Personally, I went with a 70-200 as it meets my needs better. However, if you want 400mm the MKii would be my first choice in a zoom.


----------



## AlanF (Feb 27, 2015)

There are now many reviews repeating each other, and omitting crucial details. The tests here were done on a 1DsIII only, not a crop. This reviewer, without even testing it on a crop, states that improvement in the corners of the new lens won't be so noticeable on the smaller format. My old 100-400mm was OK on a 5DIII but was soft on a 7D or 70D because a crop sensor with smaller pixels is much more sensitive to the quality of a lens.

You can see from the TDP site that the new and old lens are similar in the centre of a 1DsIII

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=972&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=4&API=1&LensComp=113&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=7&APIComp=0

But, on a 60D, the new 100-400 II is much better than the Mk 1.

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=972&Camera=736&Sample=0&FLI=4&API=0&LensComp=113&CameraComp=736&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=7&APIComp=1

THe new lens is much better at shorter focal lengths.


----------



## TommyLee (Feb 27, 2015)

nice review....
very nice lens.....

I rented the old version a few times... but not sold on it
especially as it didnt do that good with my tamron sp pro 1.4x TC.

this new lens ...besides a number of improvements...
seems to like my TC.... I believe the canon mk III version would be a little better...
focus speed slows a bit...on my tamron...

my devoted crow from a few days ago 5DmkIII, 560mm f8
and cropped to the size I wanted...

seems a little soft...maybe off a tad...the 1.4TC isn't perfect...the $220 tamron versus the $100 one.
I HAVE NOT micro adjusted yet..but looks close.....
{ note: I notice the resized/compressed version for the posting by this site seems to soften it ..versus my own screen ...which is understandable}
this is from RAW...and I am not very aggressive with sharpening in Lightroom
////////

canon has some nice(er) lenses lately...
this one gives me a lot of reach and yet lets me do some flowers and close portraits....
handy

Tom


----------



## anolis23 (Feb 27, 2015)

I recently started a youtube channel about wildlife photography with some friends, and in our first video I gave some first impressions about the 100-400 ii, you can check it out here: http://youtu.be/uAMoWZYTico

I compared it to the 400 5.6 which was the lens I had before. Any comments are appreciated since this was our first episode and hopefully not our last!


----------



## mycanonphotos (Feb 27, 2015)

Having been shooting around with the new 100-400..what this lens can do up close is stunning from the original..it’s such a big plus+... having that capability in that range, being able to get down eye level with wildlife, flowers and other subject matter. Additionaly its IS... I'll be using it at the Yuma airshow on Saturday with my 5D3..no TC...we shall see how it works out..


----------



## 20Dave (Feb 27, 2015)

TommyLee said:


> ...
> I rented the old version a few times... but not sold on it
> especially as it didnt do that good with my tamron sp pro 1.4x TC.
> ...
> ...



Question - does AFMA work with the Tamron TC on the 5DIII? It would crash my camera firmware when I tried it on mine, but it's been a year or so since I've tried it and I haven't updated the firmware. I know that there is a newer version than what is on my camera which allows AFMA using the Canon TC, but I didn't want to upgrade for fear that it would turn my Tamron TC into a doorstop. I have the Pro-300 1.4x model.

Thanks,
Dave


----------



## RGF (Feb 27, 2015)

I guess that the 2% loss on the long end makes this lens fatally flawed. Time to return them to Canon and ask for a true 100-400, not a 100-396mm lens ;D


----------



## TommyLee (Feb 28, 2015)

20Dave said:


> TommyLee said:
> 
> 
> > ...
> ...



ok....trying to make sense here
1. my tamron sp pro was great on the 100mm macro (non L)
and on the 135 f2 and 70-200 II..... I mean peeping at with/without...
at close inspection...like micro eye feathers on a hummer or Jay....they are nearly my pets so they are close..
..
also I had the 2x TC III....which I sold with 70-200 II
all three 1.4 tam, canon 2x III and without... setups seemed perfect after the raw lens calibrated....
and I am only talking a few clicks..on that 70-200 II
my camera seems to be dead-on (135 had no clicks, 85L II had 3, 100L macro had none)

2. I have not done micro in a while ...so I just now put on the 100 -400 II... and the 5D3 does not recognize/report the 1.4 TC....I guess that was always the case for the 1.4x tamron...I believe the 2x III did report...and was separately adjusted...I think...all was so good.... I forgot

3. with a accurate body AND Canon sending out proper lenses....I hardly pay attention once I shoot a few...
and it looks good...

4. nothing crashed.....I tried moving some settings...off zero..T/W.. but they were worse +/- ...

so I guess my answer is no crash...but no adjustment allowed...other than the raw lens...I suppose...
even though the lower light throughput..gave a different f stop at ...all wide open..

my bottom line is 
the gear works so well including the tamron...that I haven't thought about it for quite a while

maybe there is some blood to be squeezed.. but I have not done ...any fine tuning.. 
and it looks...... mah...velous.... to me...

and I see a slight softness with a 1.4x TC.... I think...
I need more outings and work here...

.....

hope this helps a little....I am less techie than I used to be...because things work better..
I haven't swabbed a sensor in a few yrs....because I dont see specks...that old problem ...solved...

if I had a12,000 dollar LONG tele and a 2X TC III I would look pretty close...but I bet not see much diff...

...

I THOUGHT when I first got my tamron ($200) it was EXACTLY like kenko... I believe...early on..
then over the yrs...various 'versions' were solving various issues ..like on the 70-300 L... etc...
I lost track about then..

maybe you could borrow/rent to try your version..

TOM


----------



## Mr1Dx (Feb 28, 2015)

Mrk II is not quite there yet...returned mine. Much prefer my primes, 200, 300, 400 and 600mm.


----------



## Bernd FMC (Apr 12, 2015)

´I try to "hang" me on this Topic 8)

- Some Pictures i saw from the new 100-400 look like an "nervous" Bokeh - compared to other (Zoom)Lenses .

How does the Bokeh looks like compared to the 70-200 f2.8 L IS II for Example ?

Greetings 

Bernd


----------



## candyman (Apr 12, 2015)

Bernd FMC said:


> ´I try to "hang" me on this Topic 8)
> 
> - Some Pictures i saw from the new 100-400 look like an "nervous" Bokeh - compared to other (Zoom)Lenses .
> 
> ...


I have nothing to complain about it. See the birdgallery at www.thornmillimages.com


----------



## Bernd FMC (Apr 12, 2015)

candyman said:


> I have nothing to complain about it. See the birdgallery at www.thornmillimages.com



Took a Look on it, and it is ok - some Guys have sharpended some Pictures too much i assume.

A Friend of mine searches for a Telezoom in that Range, and the new 100-400 looks pretty good.
Me myself also could get a bit more Reach sometimes.

Thank´s for the Link !

Bernd


----------



## Hjalmarg1 (Apr 12, 2015)

Canon Rumors said:


> Professional nature photography Kevin Ebi took some time to write an interesting review of the brand new EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS II.</p>
> <p><strong>Here is a summary of some of Kevin’s thoughts.</strong></p>
> <ul>
> <li class="p1"><span class="s1">The Mark II doesn’t zoom quite as far. The extreme telephoto end of the new 100-400 is a little more than 2% shorter than the Mark I.</span></li>
> ...


This review makes me think if I should still save for the Mark II


----------



## Omni Images (Apr 12, 2015)

Why is everyone still talking about it ? just get it. !!!
I got my version a few days before Christmas ... I couldn't be happier with it.
Unless I had all the big white primes like Mr1DX .... I wouldn't bother getting it either if I had those.
BUT ... and a big but I think ... it kicks those guys arses with min focus distance .... 0.98m take that big white primes.
For those of us with modest bank accounts it's a KILLER lens, and yes, for some, me included, it was expensive ... BUT stop talking about it and get it.
IQ is great, I am very happy with it and the 1.4III converter.
Min focus to 0.98m that's just unreal ... can get real up close for almost macro shots of little animals, flowers and even small birds ... those big white primes are useless under 3m.
The IS is excellent ... I don't have a bad word for this lens ..
I birder friend of mine came down the coast one day, he had just bought the 7DII and I gave him the lens for the days shooting and used his 400F5.6 prime ... it was a cloudy day, and I gotta say I don't think I got a keeper that day, where as he was blown away by it and bought it within the week ... and this is a guy using Nikon D4 and 500 prime .. he found it great as a more walk around kit body and lens .... he has a short reveiw of his gear on his front page ... http://www.matthewjonesphotography.com/

So in summing up stop thinking about it, cause if think it might be what you are looking for and in your price range, then it'll exceed your expectations and some. So just get it now, you won't regret it.


----------



## KKCFamilyman (Apr 12, 2015)

I shot with the original and never could be happy with the push-pull zoom. I love this new lens as a former owner of the 70-300l. It is very similar but the extra 100mm of reach is worth the extra size and weight. I recently broke my foot so do not have a lot of wildlife yet. This is a shot pretty far back since I was on crutches shooting with it.


----------



## YuengLinger (Apr 13, 2015)

Which thread is the best for posting our images? I can't find it!


----------



## mehaue (May 5, 2015)

This lens is truly amazing... I came from a 55-250 Version I to this beast. The lens arrived yesterday and I only had time for about 1 hour to play with it. It is a beast and I love the minimal focus distance, it is so close you can easily photograph butterflies and small bugs on a flower. I look forward to less rainy weather and some free time to test it more and get used to it, I think there is a lot to learn for me.


----------



## Random Orbits (May 11, 2015)

Got mine yesterday morning and used it for my daughter's soccer game later the same morning. IQ and AF performance is better than the original, but there were a couple things that I wasn't expecting.

1. It's going to take me a while to get used to the twist zoom. The push-pull of version 1 didn't bother me, but I didn't love it either. It might not have been "cool" but it was fast. Version II's has more rotation than the 70-200 f/2.8 IS II, which makes it harder to go from 100 to 400 or vice versa in one twist with the lens foot in the way.

2. I had always used the 70-200 f/2.8 IS II for soccer but I wanted something with more reach. The new 100-400 works well for this application (servo AF with the 5DIII), but it is not quite as fast/accurate as the 70-200 f/2.8 II. Not overly surprised because the f/2.8 lens can use more accurate AF baselines, but the difference was more noticeable when the background had more contrast than the subject.

Overall, very pleased with the performance of the 100-400L II.


----------



## chasinglight (Aug 5, 2015)

Random Orbits said:


> Got mine yesterday morning and used it for my daughter's soccer game later the same morning. IQ and AF performance is better than the original, but there were a couple things that I wasn't expecting.
> 
> 1. It's going to take me a while to get used to the twist zoom. The push-pull of version 1 didn't bother me, but I didn't love it either. It might not have been "cool" but it was fast. Version II's has more rotation than the 70-200 f/2.8 IS II, which makes it harder to go from 100 to 400 or vice versa in one twist with the lens foot in the way.



I just pulled the trigger on the 100-400II. Upon first receiving it I am VERY impressed with the AF speed on the 5D3. Its the fastest AF I have experienced short of the lightening quick 500L II + 1DX I borrowed from CPS, which if memory serves was very very close.

As you mentioned the one complaint I have is that the zoom ring, even on SMOOTH is very very TIGHT. Maybe I am just used to the smooth zoom ring of the 70-200, but I would say the zoom ring is too tight for me...just something to get used to I guess.


----------



## AlanF (Aug 5, 2015)

It will get looser with use.


----------



## 9VIII (Aug 5, 2015)

RGF said:


> I guess that the 2% loss on the long end makes this lens fatally flawed. Time to return them to Canon and ask for a true 100-400, not a 100-396mm lens ;D



What's worse is that it's actually just focus breathing, which virtually every lens has. This design is a little worse than others but if you focus to infinity (probably 100 meters or so out) you will get a proper 400mm field of view.
I will gladly take the trade of focus breathing for the ability to use this lens for near-macro photography, a 400mm macro lens with the best IS on the market is just about ideal for plants and bugs outdoors.


----------



## Random Orbits (Aug 6, 2015)

chasinglight said:


> Random Orbits said:
> 
> 
> > Got mine yesterday morning and used it for my daughter's soccer game later the same morning. IQ and AF performance is better than the original, but there were a couple things that I wasn't expecting.
> ...



Glad it is meeting and/or surpassing your expectations. Yes, the zoom ring is tight but agree with AlanF, it does loosen a bit with use.


----------



## Hjalmarg1 (Aug 6, 2015)

I thought this topic was for discussing Kevin Ebi's review on the Canon 100-400mm MkII but I found something different :-\


----------



## iaind (Aug 8, 2015)

Just got mine and it handles better than mk1. Never really liked push pull design.
Am probably going to sell my 300 f4L as hardly use it now.


----------

