Rumor: EF 100-400 f/4-5.6L IS

[Tony Printezis]

Hi all,


I hope you are enjoying your holidays.


Canon Rumors is reporting that someone who was apparently involved in testing the 100-400 mk II e-mailed them about it:


http://www.canonrumors.com/2008/12/ef-100-400-f4-56l-is-cr2/


The summary:

• traditional zoom ring
• latest (4-stop) IS
• f4 instead of f4.5 on the wide end
• weather sealed
• announcement Feb 2009
• sharp

Sounds real sweet.


Tony

[Bryan Carnathan]

That would be very sweet.Rumors are fun, but unfortunately, it seems that most do not come true. Apparently some people get excitement out of gaming the system. I think the people at CanonRumors.comare legit (don't want to discredit them), but as it is a rumors site, theyreport information they receive. And their "CR2" rating is a low confidence level.


I like the current 100-400 L a lot - and a better 100-400 L would be - well - even better!

[Tony Printezis]

Hi Bryan,

Rumors are fun, but unfortunately, it seems that most do not come true.

Of course! But, this one doesn't sound totally unreasonable to me. It's consistent with other rumors I've seen on the net about a potential 100-400 replacement, with the only new info being the Feb 2009 date. Anyway, we'll know in a couple of months. []


Tony

[Bryan Carnathan]

I agree. It is a long-wished-for upgrade. With a (rumored) Feb availability date, the lens would likely be included in the (typically) January announcement.

[Jeff]

It will be fun to see what is announced in early 2009. There are many things a lot of us are waiting to hear and see

[adam]

If that were true, it might convince me to abandon my beloved Sigma 100-300 f/4...


But I won't get my hopes up

[Dan Pinder]

If so, I might buy one. Had a great time with a rented 100-400 for 2 weeks recently. It was very sharp but couldn't initiate focus at 400mm—you had to back it down in the 300s before it would focus. Even better would be a 200-400 f/4!


100-400:

[aphanta]

Great news if the rumor becomes reality. It is too bad that this lens isn't a constant f/4 but then again I wouldn't want(can't afford) to pay > $3000 for it either.

[adam]

Great news if the rumor becomes reality. It is too bad that this lens isn't a constant f/4 but then again I wouldn't want(can't afford) to pay > $3000 for it either.
<div style="clear: both;"]</div>

It wouldn't be hand-holdable either...Nikon's 200-400 f/4 weighs over 7 lbs...one of the best features of the 100-400 is its size.

[Dan Pinder]

A nicer 100-400 would be a must buy.