# 100-400mm and more DO lenses confirmed



## dolina (Sep 16, 2014)

No other than Chuck Westfall confirmed it. As to when we can expect a 100-400mm and more DO lenses were not answered.

http://www.cnet.com/news/canon-reveals-details-for-future-telephoto-lens-line/

Hello Osbourne Effect.


----------



## sagittariansrock (Sep 16, 2014)

*Re: 100-400mm DO confirmed*



dolina said:


> No other than Chuck Westfall confirmed it. As to when we can expect a 100-400mm DO was not answered.
> 
> http://www.cnet.com/news/canon-reveals-details-for-future-telephoto-lens-line/
> 
> Hello Osbourne Effect.



Nowhere does Mr Westfall or the article state the 100-400 will use DO.
If I understand the article correctly, there are two issues- replacement of the aging tele zoom, and developing DO and bringing the tech into cheaper lenses.


----------



## dolina (Sep 16, 2014)

*Re: 100-400mm DO confirmed*



sagittariansrock said:


> dolina said:
> 
> 
> > No other than Chuck Westfall confirmed it. As to when we can expect a 100-400mm DO was not answered.
> ...


Thanks for the correction!


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 16, 2014)

Replacement 100-400. More DO lenses. Independent statements. Your conclusion is a conflation.


----------



## slclick (Sep 16, 2014)

learn a thing a day!


----------



## dolina (Sep 16, 2014)

OT: It could be interpreted as conflation but my conclusion isn't so.

There is already a DO lenses that could also face replacement. Saying more DO lenses are to follow could hurt sales of that lens.


----------



## applecider (Sep 16, 2014)

Dolina I think the conflation was directed to s rock's comment as you separated the propositions with a conjunction.


----------



## dolina (Sep 16, 2014)

apple,

either way... let us keep it friendly and stick to the subject of lenses! ;D


----------



## JonAustin (Sep 16, 2014)

In addition to confirmation that Canon's actually working on a 100-400 II, I like the tease that built-in extenders may find their way into more lenses. I think a 300/f4L IS Extender 1.4x would be awesome!


----------



## dolina (Sep 16, 2014)

My sole beef with built-in extenders is that they add length to gear. Sometimes space isnt an option especially on handcarry.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 16, 2014)

applecider said:


> Dolina I think the conflation was directed to s rock's comment as you separated the propositions with a conjunction.



The conjunction was a correction of the corrigendum, as the conflation was contained in the communique at its creation. 

;D


----------



## AquaGeneral (Sep 17, 2014)

Also worth noting is that there is mention of more EF-M lenses on the way:


> Canon only has a handful of EF-M lenses, but during a press conference here, the company committed to adding more.



I like to hear they are still supporting the EOS M system. Even though I don't think I will be buying any more lenses or a new EOS M, I still love the way the cameras and lenses look. It'll be nice to see a powerful new Canon mirrorless camera coming out in the next year or so.


----------



## Lee Jay (Sep 17, 2014)

Re: 100-400L

"It's definitely on the boards for replacement."

Geee...ya think? The replacement was late 8 years ago!


----------



## sagittariansrock (Sep 17, 2014)

Unfortunately, Chuck Westfall also stated on camera that Canon is concerned about illumination (or lack thereof) of AF points in AI Servo mode in the 5DIII and will definitely do something about it, except Canon didn't. Canon USA is a subsidiary of Canon Inc. and it seems big daddy doesn't always keep li'l champ in the loop...


----------



## dgatwood (Sep 17, 2014)

dolina said:


> My sole beef with built-in extenders is that they add length to gear. Sometimes space isnt an option especially on handcarry.



I would say it's the other way around. There's always room for a couple of extenders in the same lens compartment as your shortest prime (with a spacer in between), but there's not room for a lens that's two inches taller without making the camera bag itself too tall for the overhead bin.


----------



## serendipidy (Sep 17, 2014)

neuroanatomist said:


> applecider said:
> 
> 
> > Dolina I think the conflation was directed to s rock's comment as you separated the propositions with a conjunction.
> ...




Ahhh...a consonant alliteration ;D


----------

