# How long and how much: new 100-400L



## jonathan7007 (Nov 17, 2012)

I may have missed recent mentions of a new 100-400L but am thinking ahead about:
1. how much to save/allocate from limited funds for future purchases, and 
2. How long before we see this lens.

I want something longer than what I have now: 70-200 series II. I do have a Canon 2x extender II. I'd probably sometimes use the Extender on the 100-400 if I bought that, as I won't be buying, say, a 400 f2.8. I don't photograph birds. This is for landscapes, sports, commercial (stills) editorial work.

I wonder what the likely cost of a new 100-400 will be? $2500? What does everyone think?

jonathan7007


----------



## K-amps (Nov 17, 2012)

jonathan7007 said:


> I may have missed recent mentions of a new 100-400L but am thinking ahead about:
> 1. how much to save/allocate from limited funds for future purchases, and
> 2. How long before we see this lens.
> 
> ...



Yes thats about the range I expect Canon to sell it at.... so much so that the current model might go up to 1500 used.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Nov 17, 2012)

People keep predicting a replacement, and have been for the last 7 or more years. 
IMHO, its wishful thinking. There is really no competition for the existing lens, Nikon has been rumored to have a improved 80-400mm coming, but their existing one is more expensive and inferior.
Why make a slightly better one for 2-3 times the price?
For the quality and price, the 100-400mmL is a bargain.


----------



## Marsu42 (Nov 17, 2012)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> Why make a slightly better one for 2-3 times the price?



Canon accounting could give you the answer as to why this is an excellent idea :-> ...

But to the op: Except for their IS primes Canon seems to be very conservative and they release new products only when pressed by the competition - like the new 24-70 mk2 since the Nikon that is better than the mk1. So we might really expect a new 14-24 uwa lens, but there is little pressure to produce a new 100-400L since people who want better iq currently have to go for the much more expensive tele primes.


----------



## tome223 (Nov 19, 2012)

Love my Canon 100-400mmL. I'd expect the new one to be $2400-$2600 but don't think there is a rush on the 100-400Lii because the 70-300L is presumably doing well and the APS-C equivalent to 112mm-480mm. When I was on safari in Kenya last year lots of people had the 70-300L. 

On a side note, saw the 100-400mm in use as the handheld surveillance camera on Cinemax's _Strikeback_ a few episodes ago. I for one like the push/pull, wonder if Canon will keep that one the ii version.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Nov 19, 2012)

Marsu42 said:


> Mt Spokane Photography said:
> 
> 
> > Why make a slightly better one for 2-3 times the price?
> ...


Actually, Canon likes to sell lenses, not have them priced so high that they do not sell. Thats why they continue to make the non IS version of the 70-200mm L lenses, something for everyone that Nikon cannot match.
For the super telephotos, its a different story. At that level, price is not as big of a issue as it is for the high volume lenses. The Development cost, tooling, etc are long paid for on the 100-400mmL, so its all gravy. thats what the money people like, profit and no risk.


----------



## Marsu42 (Nov 19, 2012)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> Actually, Canon likes to sell lenses, not have them priced so high that they do not sell.



If you ever meet some Canon exec, please be sure to tell them that - I wonder if they aren't being a bit too excessive even with the newest "standard" lens prices for their own good.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Nov 19, 2012)

Marsu42 said:


> Mt Spokane Photography said:
> 
> 
> > Actually, Canon likes to sell lenses, not have them priced so high that they do not sell.
> ...


Thats why we do not see a whole flurry of upgraded high end lenses. The cost to develop and tool a new one is high -really high! The 24-70mmL and the 70-200mmL had to be done, and they sell in large quantities such that as soon as tooling and development is paid off, prices will drop.
Many wish for a new ultra wide zoom, it will cost a lot more due to fewer sales, but it needs to be done as well. There is really no reason to put out another high priced lens, sales are in a tailspin as it is, the 24-70mm L MK II will be dropping in price soon.


----------



## RLPhoto (Nov 19, 2012)

When the 100-400L IS II is released eventually... It will be very expensive.


----------



## well_dunno (Nov 19, 2012)

I am going to get the 100-400 shortly as I will need the reach in an upcoming trip, however I have seen sample variation for this lens mentioned in many places. Any experiences? Anything specific I should check?

Cheers!


----------



## Marsu42 (Nov 19, 2012)

well_dunno said:


> Any experiences? Anything specific I should check?


Without expensive equipment it is very difficult to tell how good your specific sample is (I had this problem when I bought my 70-300L). The one method I could imagine and tired is compare the new lens to an older one that you know is a good copy and sharp (in my case the 100L). Then match this difference to the expected difference from the iso crops of http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx ... and if you are not satisfied try afma or replace the new lens.


----------



## well_dunno (Nov 19, 2012)

Marsu42 said:


> well_dunno said:
> 
> 
> > Any experiences? Anything specific I should check?
> ...



Thanks!!


----------



## brad-man (Nov 19, 2012)

I'm satisfied with the sharpness of my 100-400, I just wish I could send it in to Canon to swap the old IS system for the new one...


----------

