# New 100-400 to Launch with EOS 7D Mark II [CR2]



## Canon Rumors Guy (Mar 27, 2013)

```
<div name="googleone_share_1" style="position:relative;z-index:5;float: right; /*margin: 70px 0 0 0;*/ top:70px; right:120px; width:0;"><g:plusone size="tall" count="1" href="http://www.canonrumors.com/?p=13204"></g:plusone></div><div style="float: right; margin:0 0 70px 70px;"><a href="https://twitter.com/share" class="twitter-share-button" data-count="vertical" data-url="http://www.canonrumors.com/?p=13204">Tweet</a></div>
<p><strong>Finally?</strong>
An update to the 100-400 has been rumored for years. It sort of reminds of the 24-70 replacement rumors. Apparently <a href="http://www.canonrumors.com/2011/11/another-ef-100-400-patent/" target="_blank">patent applications for optical formulas</a> don’t guarantee a speedy release. You can see another patent <a href="http://www.canonrumors.com/2011/09/canon-ef-100-400-f4-5-6l-is-patent-pending/" target="_blank">here</a>.</p>
<p>A very solid source says as it stands, a new 100-400 will be announced alongside the EOS 7D Mark II in the late summer/early fall. Even if the availability of the 100-400 is not immediate, Canon feels the two products will fit extremely well together from a marketing standpoint.</p>
<p>Just a hunch about pricing, it won’t be cheap. <a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00BOZ1Y46/ref=as_li_ss_tl?ie=UTF8&camp=1789&creative=390957&creativeASIN=B00BOZ1Y46&linkCode=as2&tag=canorumo-20" target="_blank">See Nikon’s new 80-400</a>…… :)</p>
<p><strong><span style="color: #ff0000;">c</span>r</strong></p>
```


----------



## lol (Mar 27, 2013)

I'm really interested to see what improvements they bring. Probably 90%+ of my all time Canon shots have been with the 100-400, and a lot of those were with a 7D.

Is this where we start the twist vs. push pull zoom arguments on the lens? Again.


----------



## Daniel Flather (Mar 27, 2013)

Will the rumored 7D come with a new kit lens?


----------



## Thyg0d (Mar 27, 2013)

Would appreciate if they could get it to stay @ f/4 all the way but from the looks of the patents
it looks like it's going to be another f/4-5.6.. 
From what I've heard the current 100-400 is kinda prone to suck up dust and moisture..
Gotta friend who has one though and he's very satisfied with it.. 



Daniel Flather said:


> Will the rumored 7D come with a new kit lens?



Highly doubt it, it's way to expensive and heavy to become a kit lens


----------



## kennephoto (Mar 27, 2013)

Daniel Flather said:


> Will the rumored 7D come with a new kit lens?



Highly doubt it, it's way to expensive and heavy to become a kit lens
[/quote]

Ha that was my thought, 100-400 kit lens. I want this to happen!!


----------



## Apop (Mar 27, 2013)

@f4 all the way? no way !, it would make it big and expensive

it would make it a 200-400 f4 ?

Either way i hope to adapt this camera for wildlife pictures, the lens will depend on the price
If it's close to a used 300 f2.8....., i rather go for that one along with a 500 & 70-200



Thyg0d said:


> Would appreciate if they could get it to stay @ f/4 all the way but from the looks of the patents
> it looks like it's going to be another f/4-5.6..
> From what I've heard the current 100-400 is kinda prone to suck up dust and moisture..
> Gotta friend who has one though and he's very satisfied with it..
> ...


----------



## lol (Mar 27, 2013)

The dust myth has been around forever, mostly by people who don't have one. It is no worse than any other extending zoom. I rarely need to clean the sensor and I'm rather messy at changing lenses in the field.

Water resistance isn't great, but I've used the 100-400 in rain for hours, unprotected, before enough water gets inside to prevent its use.

As for those wanting f/4, that's what the 200-400 is. Totally different lens category.


----------



## Thyg0d (Mar 27, 2013)

would be nice with f/4 all the way though.. a 2x Extender III and this one would make one hell of a zoom.. 

But yeah, of course you're right.. It would be one heavy and probably expensive lens,
Probably in the same price range as the 200-400 which is ridiculously expensive.. :-(



Apop said:


> @f4 all the way? no way !, it would make it big and expensive
> 
> it would make it a 200-400 f4 ?
> 
> ...


----------



## kennephoto (Mar 27, 2013)

100-400 F4 without 1.4 extender, Would be a good alternative to the 200-400 maybe half the cost? Either way I'm sure the 100-400 and 7d currently put are great and can make great photos, I just want something new for once since I've usually only bought used. Go savings account!!


----------



## lol (Mar 27, 2013)

The expensive part of the 200-400 isn't the extender, it is 400mm f/4. You need a lot of glass to make that happen. And if you really do want a 100-400 f/4 of similar quality, that could possibly cost even more to get the longer zoom range corrected. If you genuinely need 400mm f/4, you have to pay for it. This is NOT what the 100-400 zoom is about, which is a greater range alternative to the 70-300 class lenses.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Mar 27, 2013)

Love my 100-400, would appreciate better IS, full sealing, and optical improvements. If it's as sharp as the 70-300L, awesome. Hope they keep push-pull, but could learn to live with rotating extension. 

Expensive, yes it will be. But probably worth it. 



kennephoto said:


> 100-400 F4 without 1.4 extender, Would be a good alternative to the 200-400 maybe half the cost?



Ha ha ha. 100-400mm f/4 means the same front element size as the 200/2, 400/4, 200-400/4, etc. Would be a $7K lens easy. Get off this, folks, it'll be f/5.6 at the long end, and likely close to $3K at that.


----------



## Thyg0d (Mar 27, 2013)

kennephoto said:


> 100-400 F4 without 1.4 extender, Would be a good alternative to the 200-400 maybe half the cost? Either way I'm sure the 100-400 and 7d currently put are great and can make great photos, I just want something new for once since I've usually only bought used. Go savings account!!



Or with the extender and good sealing ? That would actually probably make me buy it.. 

I usually say "Money in the bank is fun you haven't had" but it's the same thing here.. 
I tend to buy used stuff.. There's such a significant price drop on lenses after just 1 year
I just can't justify the cost..


----------



## kennephoto (Mar 27, 2013)

neuroanatomist said:


> Love my 100-400, would appreciate better IS, full sealing, and optical improvements. If it's as sharp as the 70-300L, awesome. Hope they keep push-pull, but could learn to live with rotating extension.
> 
> Expensive, yes it will be. But probably worth it.
> 
> ...



That's fine with me if its 5.6, I highly doubt it would any faster at the long end isn't that why canon makes those primes? Just figured if it had less options like the rumored 200-400 it would be cheaper.


----------



## emag (Mar 27, 2013)

"Just a hunch about pricing, it won’t be cheap."

;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

Hard to know what will be more interesting/entertaining - the equipment or the forum screaming over the price. The lens will of course be priced in the stratosphere, the 7DII will be shockingly high also. To make up for the crop factor, it will be priced at 1.6x what many would consider reasonable or expected. And likely worth every penny.


----------



## Daniel Flather (Mar 27, 2013)

kennephoto said:


> Daniel Flather said:
> 
> 
> > Will the rumored 7D come with a new kit lens?
> ...




No, not the 100-400 as a kit, but a new lens otherwise.


----------



## traveller (Mar 27, 2013)

If true, then it's time to buy the current 100-400mm, if you value your wallet! 

Judging by the price of the new Nikon, the replacement will be cost twice as much for a modest boost in wide open performance, an extra stop or two of IS and probably a conventional zoom ring design. 

Some will value these enough to part with an extra grand...


----------



## kennephoto (Mar 27, 2013)

Daniel Flather said:


> kennephoto said:
> 
> 
> > Daniel Flather said:
> ...



Lol oops misread that, well I will take a 7d2 with a 100-400 II then! There's my kit.


----------



## docsmith (Mar 27, 2013)

A new 100-400 L is probably the single lens release I covet the most. I use the current version extensively but would love to see 2 more stops of IS, faster AF, and slightly better optics.

What I am concerned about is the front thread size. I am hoping they stay at 77 mm, but I have a feeling they will go to 82 mm. Of course, if you are spending $2,500-$3,000 on a lens, what's a couple more hundred in filters.


----------



## rs (Mar 27, 2013)

kennephoto said:


> 100-400 F4 without 1.4 extender, Would be a good alternative to the 200-400 maybe half the cost?


Same constant aperture, and a 4x zoom range instead of 2x for half the cost? A built in TC doesn't account for that much of the cost!

A replacement 100-400 will not be f4 at the long end, unless its bigger and more expensive than the still missing 200-400. There's a need for a lens the size/weight/price/focal length range of the existing 100-400. That means any replacement will be f5.6 at the long end. 

(The price will be about double the existing model :-\)


----------



## wsmith96 (Mar 27, 2013)

I'll get excited about this lens when it is available for purchase - until then I'm burnt out on annoucements, pre-annoucements, etc with no definitive delivery dates. It reminds me of google and their perpetual beta software. I'm sure this lens will amaze when available.


----------



## Bob Howland (Mar 27, 2013)

docsmith said:


> A new 100-400 L is probably the single lens I am most excited about. I use the current version extensively but would love to see 2 more stops of IS, faster AF, and slightly better optics.



Agree completely but want it to NOT be push-pull. Push-pull zoom lenses were a great idea in the days of manual focus, when push-pull was to zoom and rotate was to focus.


----------



## kennephoto (Mar 27, 2013)

rs said:


> kennephoto said:
> 
> 
> > 100-400 F4 without 1.4 extender, Would be a good alternative to the 200-400 maybe half the cost?
> ...



Lol you're right half the price of a lens that's not available for sale for another that's just rumored is just silly thinking. Of course a built in teleconverter doesn't make much of a difference in price of a lens and there's probably not much extra engineering involved!  maybe they will release a 100-400 NON L lens like when they had the 100-300s


----------



## kennephoto (Mar 27, 2013)

Bob Howland said:


> docsmith said:
> 
> 
> > A new 100-400 L is probably the single lens I am most excited about. I use the current version extensively but would love to see 2 more stops of IS, faster AF, and slightly better optics.
> ...



How about a 100-400 with internal zoom like a 70-200. That would be sweet!


----------



## Dylan777 (Mar 27, 2013)

I might go with Sigma 120-300 f2.8 this time. I''m willing to loose 100mm in reach, but gain more x2plus amount of light for indoor shots. I can always crop in PP since I'm only shoot raw.


----------



## kennephoto (Mar 27, 2013)

Dylan777 said:


> I might go with Sigma 120-300 f2.8 this time. I''m willing to loose the 100mm in reach, but gain more in light for indoor shots. I can always crop in PP since I'm only shoot raw.



Is that lens supposed to be pretty good? I really haven't used sigma lenses. I wonder how well it would take a tele converter?


----------



## pj1974 (Mar 27, 2013)

neuroanatomist said:


> Love my 100-400, would appreciate better IS, full sealing, and optical improvements. If it's as sharp as the 70-300L, awesome. Hope they keep push-pull, but could learn to live with rotating extension.
> 
> Expensive, yes it will be. But probably worth it.
> 
> ...



Yes, I'm with neuro on this..... 

I have used Canon's existing 100-400mm L, and it can be a great lens. The newer 70-300mm L is definitely a design & size I prefer (and it's IQ is consistently better). Personally I prefer rotating ring zoom rather than push-pull, but I could get used to push-pull too.

I really love my Canon 70-300mm L on my 7D. And I'm sure that a new (improved) 100-400mm L with a 7DmkII would be a welcome 'tele kit' for many. However the new / rumoured 100-400mm couldn't be a constant f/4 without being huge, expensive, etc... and I expect - Canon have the 200-400mm f/4 1.4x as a separate target lens.

Looking forward to this CR2 becoming a CR3... especially to see what the 7DmkII will bring! (Improved IS and if possible better AF, within still 'non-pro budget' for the 100-400mm will see some good sales, I expect).

Paul


----------



## Rat (Mar 27, 2013)

kennephoto said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > Ha ha ha. 100-400mm f/4 means the same front element size as the 200/2, 400/4, 200-400/4, etc. Would be a $7K lens easy. Get off this, folks, it'll be f/5.6 at the long end, and likely close to $3K at that.
> ...



No, it is actually by definition: max. focal length divided by min. aperture is min. lens diameter. 400mm/4.0=100mm. An anything-400/f4.0 will most always have a 100mm (or thereabouts) front element. No ifs and buts and marketing about it.


----------



## distant.star (Mar 27, 2013)

.
Sounds like the right time to sell my 100-400!


----------



## hoodlum (Mar 27, 2013)

traveller said:


> If true, then it's time to buy the current 100-400mm, if you value your wallet!
> 
> Judging by the price of the new Nikon, the replacement will be cost twice as much for a modest boost in wide open performance, an extra stop or two of IS and probably a conventional zoom ring design.
> 
> Some will value these enough to part with an extra grand...



Much faster AF would allow shooting BIFs which currently requires the 400mm f5.6 prime. A zoom that can have the benefits of the old prime, better IQ, 4 stop OIS and the flexibility of a zoom would make it worthwhile for many. 

Nikon now has a lower cost body (D7100) that can also act as a reasonably good birding body. I just hope Canon improves the AF on the 70D as the 7DII will be much higher priced.


----------



## RGF (Mar 27, 2013)

About time. And I am looking forward to a new 100-400. Seriously hope it is not push pull to focus. If the can make it small like the 70-300L that would great. Definitely would not be a constant F4. Front element would need to be close to 100 mm (100mm filters). But will they switch the zoom and focusing knobs like the 70-300 L?


----------



## Eimajm (Mar 27, 2013)

I'm sure an upgrade on this lens will be a big seller, but for someone who has a 400 5.6 prime, I'm not excited. 
Canon are missing a proper upgrade path from the already existing 400 f5.6s. A £4500 400mm F4 prime with 4 stop IS, lighter than 300 2.8 as a replacement for the DO would fill that gap nicely, and be a excellent match to the new 7D if it turns out to be a mini IDX. I could get excited about that.


----------



## Rat (Mar 27, 2013)

distant.star said:


> .
> Sounds like the right time to sell my 100-400!



Maybe a little offtopic, but I saw your signature ("leave the fish alone!") and had to think of the one time a played with a 100-400, last fall. Great lens, if a little heavy. I'd like the next one to not be push-pull too, by the way.


----------



## rumorzmonger (Mar 27, 2013)

neuroanatomist said:


> If it's as sharp as the 70-300L, awesome.



I hope they don't downgrade the performance that much - it would be a deal-breaker for me.


----------



## preppyak (Mar 27, 2013)

Daniel Flather said:


> No, not the 100-400 as a kit, but a new lens otherwise.


Well, they just updated the 18-55 and 18-135 lenses within the last year; maybe they'll do the 18-200 too, who knows. And they already have a good 17-55 and 15-85, not to mention a 24-105 that works well on crop. Not sure what kit lens they could put out that they don't already offer.



distant.star said:


> .
> Sounds like the right time to sell my 100-400!


Well, if it's at all like the release of the 24-70, then prices will actually go up for a few months. Heck, used prices on the mk.1 version went up $3-400 for a while, and they are still higher than they were before the mk.2 release


----------



## kennephoto (Mar 27, 2013)

Eimajm said:


> I'm sure an upgrade on this lens will be a big seller, but for someone who has a 400 5.6 prime, I'm not excited.
> Canon are missing a proper upgrade path from the already existing 400 f5.6s. A £4500 400mm F4 prime with 4 stop IS, lighter than 300 2.8 as a replacement for the DO would fill that gap nicely, and be a excellent match to the new 7D if it turns out to be a mini IDX. I could get excited about that.



So agree! Wish the 400f4 DO wasn't so pricy.


----------



## TWI by Dustin Abbott (Mar 27, 2013)

rumorzmonger said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > If it's as sharp as the 70-300L, awesome.
> ...



I hope that comment was facetious. The 70-300L is optically superior to the current 100-400L in every way


----------



## neuroanatomist (Mar 27, 2013)

preppyak said:


> distant.star said:
> 
> 
> > Sounds like the right time to sell my 100-400!
> ...



Agreed. They're going for $1000 or so locally for me, and a $2.5-3K MkII will very likely drive that price up a bit. Certainly happened with the 24-70 and 70-200/2.8 IS when the MkII versions came out.


----------



## dadgummit (Mar 27, 2013)

TWI by Dustin Abbott said:


> rumorzmonger said:
> 
> 
> > neuroanatomist said:
> ...



Agreed, I sold my 100-400 for the 70-300L and have no regrets at all. Much better lens.


----------



## Plainsman (Mar 27, 2013)

With no date when the much delayed 200-400/4 will reach the shops I just don't believe this latest 100-400L rumour.

It would be bad marketing tactics if both zooms were launched in the same year!

On the other hand it could mean 100-400L/7D2 might not be out there till late 2014 or even 2015 to let sales of the 200-400 get some traction assuming its coming out soon.

I am saying this is because the current 100-400L is a fine zoom optic and a new version - presumably even better - would seriously cut into the sales of the 200-400 - yep one stop faster but twice the weight and three/four times the price!

But then maybe Canon expect some customers with deep pockets to buy both zooms!


----------



## noncho (Mar 27, 2013)

preppyak said:


> Daniel Flather said:
> 
> 
> > No, not the 100-400 as a kit, but a new lens otherwise.
> ...



15-60 F4


----------



## kennephoto (Mar 27, 2013)

noncho said:


> preppyak said:
> 
> 
> > Daniel Flather said:
> ...



Nice!!


----------



## GMCPhotographics (Mar 27, 2013)

Plainsman said:


> I am saying this is because the current 100-400L is a fine zoom optic and a new version - presumably even better - would seriously cut into the sales of the 200-400 - yep one stop faster but twice the weight and three/four times the price!



I can't see how a £2.5K lens and a £10.5K are in the same market. I have a 400mm f2.8 LIS....and I would love a 100-400 mkII lens. It fulfills a completely different role to my other 400mm lens. It's be smaller, lighter, handholdable, occasional...in fact it might even replace my 70-200 f2.8 LIS II. 

The big 400 is for images were I have the time to set it up and I need to melt backgrounds. The 100-400 would be where I need a really versatile and neat long zoom. 

The current 75-300 LIS is a fine lens, great optics and build like a tank. I hope this new 100-400 is designed to the same if not better standards. It's a pity that this new lens isn't a 70-400, it would work well as a 2 lens combo with the new 24-70 f4 LIS. The 24-105 LIS is a little old and needs an update.


----------



## AlanF (Mar 27, 2013)

neuroanatomist said:


> Love my 100-400, would appreciate better IS, full sealing, and optical improvements. If it's as sharp as the 70-300L, awesome. Hope they keep push-pull, but could learn to live with rotating extension.
> 
> Expensive, yes it will be. But probably worth it.
> 
> ...



+1
It's my travel/safari lens. I hope it folds up small with push-pull. Took it with me on Sunday and captured this pheasant - the white spots are snow (no snow or dust in my lens). I'll buy an upgrade.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Mar 27, 2013)

dadgummit said:


> TWI by Dustin Abbott said:
> 
> 
> > rumorzmonger said:
> ...



In every way? Is the 70-300L optically superior at 400mm? : Personally, I need 400mm (often more, which is why I bought the 600L II). The 70-300L would be a poor replacement for my 100-400L.


----------



## bvukich (Mar 27, 2013)

*Am I the only one that loves the push/pull zoom?*

I find it great for football (american, but both would probably apply; as well as any other large field games, rugby, polo, baseball, etc.), you can see nearly the whole field at 100mm to scan for interesting action, and almost instantly be at 400mm to get in to the action. If you're constantly going from one end of the range to the other, it's much faster with the push/pull.

The push/pull was much less useful, but in no way a hindrance, for things where I was staying at the same focal length for long periods of time; like when I shot a "Dirty Girl" mud run.

Would I want all zooms to be like that? Absolutely not! But I do think the 100-400 and it's common uses lend themselves to the more expedient, brute force method, that the push/pull provides.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Mar 27, 2013)

bvukich said:


> *Am I the only one that loves the push/pull zoom?*



No. 



neuroanatomist said:


> *Hope they keep push-pull*, but could learn to live with rotating extension.


----------



## Etienne (Mar 27, 2013)

How about a new 400 5.6L IS ?

smaller, lighter, sharper !


----------



## preppyak (Mar 27, 2013)

noncho said:


> 15-60 F4


ha. I'm not sure I'd rather have a constant f/4 zoom over what the 15-85 already provides. If anything, there is room for Canon to match what Sigma puts out, with something like a 17-70 f/2.8-f/4 zoom that does 1:2 or 1:3 macro. That'd fall in line with their new 24-70 f/4 that does macro on full-frame. 



Etienne said:


> How about a new 400 5.6L IS ?
> 
> smaller, lighter, sharper !


And yours for only $2499!

Especially with IS, hell, it might be more than that.


----------



## Plainsman (Mar 27, 2013)

neuroanatomist said:


> bvukich said:
> 
> 
> > *Am I the only one that loves the push/pull zoom?*
> ...



When the push/pull is fully extended the length approximates the 400mm focal length which means the lens elements are not "over-worked" as they are in compact designs.

It's one of the reasons why the 100-400 is so good at the top end where many zooms fail miserably.

A new push/pull 100-400 with a super ED element thrown in to improve contrast would be fine by me!


----------



## neuroanatomist (Mar 27, 2013)

Etienne said:


> How about a new 400 5.6L IS ?
> smaller, lighter, sharper !



That would be very welcome, but a hard decision. One of the great things about the 100-400L is that you get a 400mm lens that collapses down to the size of a 70-200/2.8. The 400/5.6 is more of a challenge to pack/transport.


----------



## unfocused (Mar 27, 2013)

If it comes in at about the same price as the Nikon, I won't be disappointed. That's much less than earlier predictions.

I'll hang on to my current 100-400 until the price settles in, compare the quality of the two and then decide if it's worthwhile or not. If the quality is similar to the 70-300 L it will be worth trading up. I actually feel like, for once, I'm in a good position. Glad I picked up the 100-400 when Canon had it in their refurbished store.


----------



## TheBadger (Mar 27, 2013)

So they've decided to skip the 70D altogether... Seems legit, if they were thinking of releasing another camera with the same old sensor.


----------



## distant.star (Mar 27, 2013)

bvukich said:


> *Am I the only one that loves the push/pull zoom?*



I can't get all the way to "love," but I have come to like it -- and it's clearly faster, especially as you suggest going from one end to the other.


----------



## bseitz234 (Mar 27, 2013)

noncho said:


> preppyak said:
> 
> 
> > Daniel Flather said:
> ...



get 2mm on the wide end, and 5 on the long end, and lose a stop of light, plus IS? I'll keep my 17-55, thanks...


----------



## Don Haines (Mar 27, 2013)

Etienne said:


> How about a new 400 5.6L IS ?



That's the one lens I would jump on if released.

For me, 400 F5.6 is the upper limit to size and weight of a lens to take with me on trips to the backcountry.... and for that length of lens I would be happier with a sharper fixed focal length than a softer lens with zoom. A fixed lens should be lighter, cheaper, and sharper than a zoom.

And by the way, just because a lens and camera are anounced at the same time does not mean that they are a kit.


----------



## polarhannes (Mar 27, 2013)

neuroanatomist said:


> Etienne said:
> 
> 
> > How about a new 400 5.6L IS ?
> ...



True in every regard! But only if they keep the push&pull. If they don't, it will not pack that small.
I'd also love to see a new 400mm 5.6.


----------



## AlanF (Mar 27, 2013)

bvukich said:


> *Am I the only one that loves the push/pull zoom?*
> 
> I find it great for football (american, but both would probably apply; as well as any other large field games, rugby, polo, baseball, etc.), you can see nearly the whole field at 100mm to scan for interesting action, and almost instantly be at 400mm to get in to the action. If you're constantly going from one end of the range to the other, it's much faster with the push/pull.
> 
> ...



Neuro and I also love the push-pull. Also, regarding the 70-300L, it's a great lens but too short for me too. An f/5.6 400mm is about the best compromise for a super telephoto that you can throw into your cabin luggage.


----------



## RGF (Mar 27, 2013)

Eimajm said:


> I'm sure an upgrade on this lens will be a big seller, but for someone who has a 400 5.6 prime, I'm not excited.
> Canon are missing a proper upgrade path from the already existing 400 f5.6s. A £4500 400mm F4 prime with 4 stop IS, lighter than 300 2.8 as a replacement for the DO would fill that gap nicely, and be a excellent match to the new 7D if it turns out to be a mini IDX. I could get excited about that.



+1000


----------



## RGF (Mar 27, 2013)

kennephoto said:


> 100-400 F4 without 1.4 extender, Would be a good alternative to the 200-400 maybe half the cost? Either way I'm sure the 100-400 and 7d currently put are great and can make great photos, I just want something new for once since I've usually only bought used. Go savings account!!



at half the cost, that would be close to or topping (US)$5000. That would be very expensive for this lens. I would expect (hope) that the lens comes in below $2500.


----------



## RGF (Mar 27, 2013)

wsmith96 said:


> I'll get excited about this lens when it is available for purchase - until then I'm burnt out on annoucements, pre-annoucements, etc with no definitive delivery dates. It reminds me of google and their perpetual beta software. I'm sure this lens will amaze when available.



Yea I agree. Canon has either introduced beta products (eye control, DO, ...) which never took hold or been pre-announcing to get buzz and the delaying delivery.

It would nice if they laid out a road map of future products (not necessarily in detail but provide direction of their thinking). THen again, priority and competitive pressures could cause them to change course and then they would need to revised the road with all the negative fall out from that.


----------



## Dylan777 (Mar 27, 2013)

kennephoto said:


> Dylan777 said:
> 
> 
> > I might go with Sigma 120-300 f2.8 this time. I''m willing to loose the 100mm in reach, but gain more in light for indoor shots. I can always crop in PP since I'm only shoot raw.
> ...



Their latest 35mm and 70-200 f2.8 look REAL good. I hope their new 120-300 in the same level.


----------



## bwfishing (Mar 27, 2013)

I'm no huge fan of the 100-400, but this sounds like Canon is getting back in the game and will be playing to win! This sounds like a great combo! If they put "real improvements" in these two they could have a serious problem keeping them in stock! This is very exciting news!


----------



## mrsfotografie (Mar 27, 2013)

AlanF said:


> bvukich said:
> 
> 
> > *Am I the only one that loves the push/pull zoom?*
> ...



Count me in, it's great for motorsports! And the lens can double as a prime at any focal length when you tighten it down


----------



## viggen61 (Mar 27, 2013)

Plainsman said:


> It would be bad marketing tactics if both zooms were launched in the same year!
> 
> On the other hand it could mean 100-400L/7D2 might not be out there till late 2014 or even 2015 to let sales of the 200-400 get some traction assuming its coming out soon.
> 
> ...


The 200-400 f/4L 1.4x is going to be in a totally different price and performance class to a refreshed 100-400 ?.?-5.6. If the rumors are true, the 200-400 will be at least 4x the price of the 100-400. I really don't see a whole lot of cannibalization there.

The 200-400 is the pro sports/wildlife photographer's almost ideal lens. 400mm @ f/4 and 560mm @ f/5.6. The 100-400 is still the "budget" or "entry level" lens for wildlife and sports photography.

The only way I could see the cheaper lens cannibalizing any significant sales from the big lens would be if the 7DII had some spectacular performance in high ISO and AFs at f/8 so you could slap a 1.4xIII on it and be happy.


----------



## viggen61 (Mar 27, 2013)

Daniel Flather said:


> kennephoto said:
> 
> 
> > Daniel Flather said:
> ...



Would be nice, but which one? Maybe the EF-S 17-55 f/2.8 IS USM?


----------



## ewg963 (Mar 27, 2013)

I love my push pull 100-400! It has been working well so far (finger crossed) but is interested at looking at the new 100-400.


----------



## Lee Jay (Mar 27, 2013)

Hopefully, 100-400L II + 1.4x TC III + 7D II and its f/8 AF sensors are all designed to work together perfectly from the start. I've only been asking for this since about 2006 or so. Now they'll finally make it, and it'll be unaffordable!


----------



## ddashti (Mar 27, 2013)

So will the 200-400 and 100-400 be released/announced around the same time, then?
Seems like Canon is holding back many products, yet the public knows about very few of them.
The price on the Nikon will definitely trigger Canon to give it an even higher price...


----------



## dolina (Mar 27, 2013)

What I wanna see is a 400/5.6 with 4 or more stops of IS. 100-400 zoom is nice and all but it's a zoom. I want a prime.


----------



## kirispupis (Mar 27, 2013)

This post came about five days too early. 

I waited almost a year at one point for a new 100-400 to release, but ended up buying the existing 100-400. I used it for a few years and then sold it about two years ago and now use the 400/5.6 - which I like much better.

I might buy a new 100-400, but only if reviews prove that it has amazing IQ (better than 400/5.6) and extremely fast AF. Personally though I would prefer a new 400/5.6 that has IS and a closer focusing distance.


----------



## AprilForever (Mar 27, 2013)

The 7D MK II I want. The 100-400sounds interesting, but not too interesting to me... However, I am sure than many will pick it up... The two lenses I see the most in the everglades are the 100-400 and some sigma X-500 zoom. 

I'm saving my money for bigger glass... at some point... 600 f4 is more up my aisle. At any rate though, the 100-400 would make a good B-camera lens, for close overhead flights...


----------



## Jan Jasinski (Mar 27, 2013)

I'm excited for these 2 releases! 
Updating my body would be useful and having the same IQ and AF on a new 100-400 with 4 stop IS would allow me to sell my 400L which lacks IS for low light shooting..


----------



## skinkfoot (Mar 27, 2013)

Okay, I am interested in this lens but... I use and love the 400 5.6 L, and what I would really like is a 500 5.6, with or without "IS" say $2500 without and $3200 with "IS"


----------



## ahab1372 (Mar 27, 2013)

neuroanatomist said:


> Etienne said:
> 
> 
> > How about a new 400 5.6L IS ?
> ...


Are there any foldable/collapsible primes out there? They could have the benefits of both worlds: IQ of a prime, easier to transport like a zoom.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Mar 27, 2013)

skinkfoot said:


> Okay, I am interested in this lens but... I use and love the 400 5.6 L, and what I would really like is a 500 5.6, with or without "IS" say $2500 without and $3200 with "IS"



Just guessing, but I think 500/5.6 puts it into the ~$4K range based on element size. I doubt we'll see one - over 400mm, Canon wants more of your money than that...


----------



## skinkfoot (Mar 27, 2013)

neuroanatomist said:


> skinkfoot said:
> 
> 
> > Okay, I am interested in this lens but... I use and love the 400 5.6 L, and what I would really like is a 500 5.6, with or without "IS" say $2500 without and $3200 with "IS"
> ...



Don't tell Canon, but, I would probably buy it at $3500-$4000. I really think there is a missing $3-$5000 hole in their lineup.


----------



## FunPhotons (Mar 27, 2013)

I'm glad I didn't buy a used 600mm. I'd like a longer reach, but a brand new 100-400 with the latest IS would fit the ticket, for much less money.


----------



## ronderick (Mar 28, 2013)

Wow.... finally something solid this time (or so I hope).

I still remember the speculation going around this forum about which was to be renewed first - the 100-400mm or the 70-200 f/2.8L IS. That was before the announcement of the 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II.

Thank god I waited - that took a lot of will power. ;D

(But then again, I won't be holding my breath until I actually see some announcements).


----------



## neuroanatomist (Mar 28, 2013)

ronderick said:


> (But then again, I won't be holding my breath until I actually see some announcements).



Lol. I'd recommend waiting until the lens hits the shelves. If you'd started holding your breath when the 200-400mm f/4L IS 1.4x was announced, you'd be a mouldering corpse by now.


----------



## 9VIII (Mar 28, 2013)

I have a hard time thinking if I'm going to put $5K+ toward anything that it wouldn't either be a 300f2.8 or 500f4. If you're just trying to shave money off the 500mm it seems kind of futile given that everything cost within a few grand of each other, if you can't afford the longer one you probably can't afford any of them.

What I would really like is a 100-300f4. If I'm going with long glass the 400f5.6 prime is hard to beat (especially for the price), if I'm going to use anything shorter than that, it needs to be faster too.
I have to wonder why they can't make medium/long zoom lenses go from f2-2.8 or f2.8-4. Something like that would be the epitome of multi-role lenses.


----------



## Etienne (Mar 28, 2013)

neuroanatomist said:


> Etienne said:
> 
> 
> > How about a new 400 5.6L IS ?
> ...



The devil's in the details. I'd have to see both, but I would likely favor saving weight and money over size and flexibility. If they both weighed the same and cost the same, I'd choose the 100-400


----------



## birtembuk (Mar 28, 2013)

Well, maybe a little too high expectations but a combo 7D2 / 100-400II is likely to rock big time. This means putting aside some 5k to be ready in time ... 

I for one would also prefer a push-pull. Don't have the 100-400 but tried it. IMO, with a 4xzoom, a push-pull gets you faster where you wanna be. Sometimes, a split second can make a difference.


----------



## RS2021 (Mar 28, 2013)

So, lets see.... 7D2 is a rumor.... A concurrent release of 100-400 II is a rumor upon a rumor... :

Canon ain't replacing this zoom in a hurry...talk about it may be...but we aren't gonna see it anytime soon. But the "CR2" rating should keep the site buzzing for a while and keep the gullible fanboys typing pages upon pages on this rumored zoom...yet again.


----------



## brad-man (Mar 28, 2013)

"A very solid source says as it stands, a new 100-400 will be announced alongside the EOS 7D Mark II in the late summer/early fall. Even if the availability of the 100-400 is not immediate, Canon feels the two products will fit extremely well together from a marketing standpoint. Just a hunch about pricing, it won’t be cheap."

;D ;D ;D

So 7Dll released around the same time as the 200-400, and the 100-400 sometime after that...


----------



## BrandonKing96 (Mar 28, 2013)

lol said:


> The expensive part of the 200-400 isn't the extender, it is 400mm f/4. You need a lot of glass to make that happen. And if you really do want a 100-400 f/4 of similar quality, that could possibly cost even more to get the longer zoom range corrected. If you genuinely need 400mm f/4, you have to pay for it. This is NOT what the 100-400 zoom is about, which is a greater range alternative to the 70-300 class lenses.


The IS, the constant f/4 in it's range. It's actually stupid to see people want a 100-400 f/4 because they're going to end up losing a lot of quality if they want it for a cheaper price.


----------



## wickidwombat (Mar 28, 2013)

skinkfoot said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > skinkfoot said:
> ...



I'd be pretty interested in a 500 f5.6 IS at that price expecially if its not too bulky and has an integrated lens hood like the 300f4L and 400 f5.6 do


----------



## noncho (Mar 28, 2013)

bseitz234 said:


> noncho said:
> 
> 
> > preppyak said:
> ...



If you are looking only the mm here or there go for 18-200
But this would be lighter and cheaper zoom with good range, add great image quality and could be great. 
Of course with IS, I thought I don't need to mention it


----------



## Marsu42 (Mar 28, 2013)

Canon Rumors said:


> Even if the availability of the 100-400 is not immediate, Canon feels the two products will fit extremely well together from a marketing standpoint.



Haha, so after the last (probably unintended) product delays Canon feels like announcing vaporware products is the way to go if it helps marketing? Firmware updates that take half a year to release, big mp camera sometime later, new 100-400 sometime later, mirrorless with faster af sometime later - "We'll announce anything as long as you stay with Canon!".

Canon: Please also announce a 35L2, a 50L2, a small rt flash (430ex2-successor) and rt tiggers for sometime later, will you?


----------



## GMCPhotographics (Mar 28, 2013)

wickidwombat said:


> skinkfoot said:
> 
> 
> > neuroanatomist said:
> ...



Bare in mind that the current 300mm f2.8 LIS II with a 2x TC yeilds a 600mm f5.6...so a 500mm f5.6 LIS isn't going to be much cheaper, lighter or smaller than that combo.


----------



## greger (Mar 28, 2013)

I want the new 100-400 with twist zoom. I don't want a dust attracter I have one in my 17-85. I am careful to wipe dust off the barrel when it's extended. If it's priced to high, I'll stick with my 70-200 and 2X extender. 
140-400 F8 isn't bad for just under 2 grand. Will have to learn how to pan with my tripod for BIF pics. LOL


----------



## AJ (Mar 28, 2013)

wickidwombat said:


> skinkfoot said:
> 
> 
> > neuroanatomist said:
> ...



Yeah me too, I'd be interested. 

Front element size should be around 10 cm (IS lenses are always a little bigger than fl/aperture). That's still very portable.

However at that price I'm looking towards Sigma, not Canon. As for 100-400, I think a Canon 100-400/4-5.6 L mk2 will come in around $3.5 to $3.6 k.


----------



## tron (Mar 29, 2013)

Canon Rumors said:


> A very solid source says as it stands, a new 100-400 will be announced alongside the EOS 7D Mark II in the late summer/early fall.


Hmmm how a CR2 rumor (for the lens) can include a CR1 rumor (the camera)?

Either should be both CR2 or... CR1.


----------



## tron (Mar 29, 2013)

tron said:


> Canon Rumors said:
> 
> 
> > A very solid source says as it stands, a new 100-400 will be announced alongside the EOS 7D Mark II in the late summer/early fall.
> ...


Seriously now, the 100-400 II is becoming an ... urban myth.... ;D ;D ;D


----------



## xps (Mar 30, 2013)

Sometimes I feel, that Canon and Nikon talk to each other, where the cutoff of the maximum price most buyers will pay for an product is.

I listened to an Nikon-seller information meeting. There will be an 800mm lens with an enormous price of more then 17.000€!! 
You can be sure that, if Canon produces something equal to that, the pricelevel will be equal to Nikons price.

In my opinion, the 100-400 II will be priced above the Nikon 80-400. Canon will find an reason to do that. 


I love my 100-400, but will think of buying the II version (if not pulling zoom). But only, if the lens will be under 2500.


----------



## M.ST (Mar 30, 2013)

After a lot of mails to Canon I am now sure that Canon hear at the customers and realease a ...-400 lens this year.


----------



## tron (Apr 1, 2013)

M.ST said:


> After a lot of mails to Canon I am now sure that Canon hear at the customers and realease a ...-400 lens this year.


Hmmm it's April 1st today :


----------



## GMCPhotographics (Apr 4, 2013)

AJ said:


> wickidwombat said:
> 
> 
> > skinkfoot said:
> ...



Which Sigma? I don't think they have anything comparible in their catalogue to the Canon 200-400. I've used a 120-300 and it was a nice lens but there is so much focus breathing, at min focus distance there's not much benefit over a 70-200/2.8. It might state 120-300 on the lens casing but it rarely is. By my estimates it drops down to a very poor 240mm at MFD. Pop a 1.4x TC on it and it barely scrapes 335mm f4....which isn't much better than a 300mm f4. It's not worth the cost, size or weight in my opinion. Far better off saving for a proper mk I white lens (300/400/500/600).


----------



## dallasdave (Apr 4, 2013)

I bought a used 100-400 and have had nothing but issues with it (I've sent it to Canon multiple times to get recalibrated), so I would love to see a mark 2 with better IS and image quality at 400mm.


----------



## wookiee2cu (Apr 8, 2013)

Looking at their recent pricing strategy with the updated 70-200 2.8 and 24-70 2.8 I wouldn't be surprised to see the new 100-400 come in at $2,600-$3,100. I bought the 70-200 2.8 MII (I did not have the MI version), when the 24-70 MII came out I didn't have funds available at the time to get the MI version and by the time I did they were gone so I waited till I had the funds and got the MII. I currently have a 100-400 and use it once in a while and won't bother upgrading as mine works just fine and it is rarely used. Had I already owned the MI versions of the other lenses I more than likely wouldn not have upgraded.


----------



## archiea (Apr 21, 2013)

New 100-400mm and 7D seems to be quite the couple these days. For sports and wildlife peeps, its piece of standard kit. Here's my predictions:

100-400mm:
1) internal design like the 70-300
2) same f4.5-5.6 aperture
3) weathersealed like the modern L lenses
4) modernized IS
5) price bump but not as much as we think...
6) updated focus
7) Bokeh-licious nine bladed aperture (parity with other L lenses)

Thing is, canon can dip into their cooperate parts bin for bits (weather sealing, IS update) to modernize the lens to keep parity with the L line without radically changing the price point or market for this lens. I think thats critical for them. For wild life and sports, weathersealing is paramount, modernizing the IS and focus, some modern glass to boost contrast, its in line with the updates to the markii's we've seen in the 24-70, 70-200, etc. 
An F4 version would be so heavy and pricey, and with the 200-400mm on the horizon, it could potentially cannibalize that market. With the new ISO performance of the newer bodies, and in camera lens corrections, the Achilles heal of CA & vignetting can be minimized. So that last 10% of perfection for many lenses can be corrected in software, keeping the price down. 

for the 7D, I'd say a 2 stop high iso performance boost so that 6400 becomes the new 1600, courtesy of canon's brainy Digic chips, hopefully retain the legacy of AF speed & flexibility along with 10fps, in keeping with the 1D-lite legacy.


----------



## mrsfotografie (Apr 21, 2013)

archiea said:


> 100-400mm:
> 1) internal design like the 70-300



How do you define 'internal design'? The 100-400 has rear 'internal focusing'. If you're referring to the way the lens barrels overlap, I prefer the way the 100-400 is designed, with the outer tube carrying the big front element, and the rear tube carrying the small elements. That is one of the reasons this is such a (relatively) compact design!


----------



## neuroanatomist (Apr 21, 2013)

mrsfotografie said:


> archiea said:
> 
> 
> > 100-400mm:
> ...



I suspect he means a rotating zoom like the 70-300L, vs. the current push-pull design. Personally, I like the push pull, I could learn to live with the rotation but I hope if them implement that design, they don't switch the relative position of the zoom vs. focus rings as they did with the 70-300L (which matches the EF-S 17-55mm, for example, but is the opposite of the L-series standard zoom lenses). I highly doubt they'd make it internally zooming like the 70-200 series, it'd be too long.


----------



## jrista (Apr 25, 2013)

LOL! I just love how you can save a WHOPPING WHOLE THREE DOLLARS on the Nikon 80-400 VR at Amazon!  I mean, *WOW, AMAZING SAVINGS!!*


----------



## Edwin Herdman (Apr 25, 2013)

I'll be interested to see how this works out, but it doesn't strike me as much of a savings when I've had, for roughly the same price, the ol' 120-300mm + 2X TC combo for a long time. Fills the niche better for my purposes, although of course that won't be true for everyone.


----------



## xps (May 1, 2013)

Got some infos from an friend, using the old and the new AF-S VR 80-400mm 4.5-5.6G ED lens:
He got it some days ago and was on a trip in the south of Italy.
He told me that the new lens has an much faster AF than the predecessor model. But the AF was even not accurate every time. In his opinion Nikon pushed the AF-S VR 80-400mm 4.5-5.6G ED up in image quality and made it faster. But he doubts that he did right by buing this lens, spending 2,5 times more than his old lens costs today. Excellent rumors and advertisements are sometimes not true, as we all know.

Maybe Canon improves the lens too, but will it be 2500-3000€ worth - in comparison to the old 100-400? Let us see.


----------



## RGF (May 1, 2013)

xps said:


> Sometimes I feel, that Canon and Nikon talk to each other, where the cutoff of the maximum price most buyers will pay for an product is.
> 
> I listened to an Nikon-seller information meeting. There will be an 800mm lens with an enormous price of more then 17.000€!!
> You can be sure that, if Canon produces something equal to that, the pricelevel will be equal to Nikons price.
> ...



Competitive pricing - match the competition.

Market analysis showing price sensitivity. Often major companies work off the same or very similar data. Pricing models tend to be similar, they could employ the same consulting companies (or buy white papers) showing price thresholds and diminishing returns as prices increase. Or even gone to a conference where one spoke of the the new normal in consumer acceptance of higher prices. None of this is illegal (though I am not a lawyer, just a lay opinion).


----------



## RGF (May 1, 2013)

neuroanatomist said:


> I suspect he means a rotating zoom like the 70-300L, vs. the current push-pull design. Personally, I like the push pull, I could learn to live with the rotation but I hope if them implement that design, they don't switch the relative position of the zoom vs. focus rings as they did with the 70-300L (which matches the EF-S 17-55mm, for example, but is the opposite of the L-series standard zoom lenses). I highly doubt they'd make it internally zooming like the 70-200 series, it'd be too long.



I wonder if there is a design benefit for longer lenses to switching the position of the zoom and focus rings. The position of the rings on the 70-300L could become the new normal. I just hope that Canon sticks to one layout. Annoying to fiddle rings to figure out which does which


----------



## neuroanatomist (May 1, 2013)

RGF said:


> I wonder if there is a design benefit for longer lenses to switching the position of the zoom and focus rings. The position of the rings on the 70-300L could become the new normal.



I'm not sure. The zoom ring is also further out on the 200-400, but that might be so the hand on the lens is close to the zoom ring (that hand will be further out on such a heavy lens).

I had assumed it was the target market - Canon's 'lens positioning article' suggested the lens was aimed at APS-C shooters (and 'of course, it also works on FF cameras), and the 70-300L is similar to the high-end EF-S standard zooms. FWIW, the zoom ring is in back (opposite of the 70-300L) on the other 70-300 lenses (non-L and DO).


----------



## greger (May 6, 2013)

This and other posts helped me to decide on buying the 100-400 now instead of waiting to see what the vs ll will be like.
I saved Money with the instant rebate. I haven't had it long enough to find anything wrong. The pics are good and I think I got a good copy of this lens. I just need to practice with BIF pics. I'm sure when vs 2 comes out my wallet will be happy I bought when I did.


----------

