JuzaPhoto uses technical cookies and third-part cookies to provide the service and to make possible login, choice of background color and other settings (click here for more info).
By continuing to browse the site you confirm that you accept the use of cookies and that you have read and accepted the Terms of service and Privacy.
The Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 L IS USM II is a tele lens for FF and APS-C, manufactured from 2014. The focus is done by Ultrasonic AF Motor (Ring-USM), it has image stabilization. The average price, when it has been added to the JuzaPhoto database, is 1967 €;
161 users have given it an average vote of 9.7 out of 10.
MOUNT
This lens is available with the following mounts:
Canon EF: this lens is compatible with reflex fullframe and APS-C Canon EF.
Do you want add your opinion? You do it by joining JuzaPhoto, it is easy and free!
There is more: by registering you can create your personal page, publish photos, receive comments, join discussions and you can use all the features of JuzaPhoto. With more than 187000 members, there is space for everyone, from the beginner to the professional.
Pros: Extremely sharp and contrasty, portable, takes the Canon 1.4x III tele-converter well, fast accurate focusing, excellent IS (image stabilization), and the minimum focus distance is 1 meter.
Cons: Occasional purple fringing on high-contrast subjects. Bokeh isn't as nice as a prime, of course (but it isn't terrible). I wish the tripod collar was removable. Expensive.
Opinion: This is the best tele-zoom I've ever used. It is an improvement in every way over the original 100-400. It is sharper, faster focusing, more accurate, has better stabilization, and handles the 1.4x TC III well. However, the best feature for me is the 1m close focus (1/3 life size at 400mm), which lets me get closer to frogs than before. While the bigger faster super-teles have advantages, this is the best portable tele available for Canon. I've used the original 70-200 f/2.8L IS, 300f/4L, original 100-400L... the 100-400 mark II is better than all of them... except the 300/f4L is smaller/lighter. None of the other lenses I listed are bad (they are all excellent), but the 100-400 mark II is noticeably better.
The following opinions have been automatically translated with Google Translate.
Cons:It doesn't hold up the filters (UV) in my case, otherwise nothing
Opinion:Gorgeous goal, awesome AF speed and with the 7D Mark ii in my opinion the AF is something unique. Only uncomfortable but it is really a crap, the system of release of the trepia bracket is a bit uncomfortable. Unfortunately initially I used it with a protective UV filter as I always did, but I then discovered that the cause of soft photos and micromoves was just him, once removed is I could appreciate its great quality, the low weight makes it really very as versatile as zooming, you won't be disappointed if you buy it. L-series always a guarantee.
Pros:Image quality, sharpness, focus distance, Af speed, stratospheric even with extender 1.4XIII
Cons:Nothing
Opinion:Just taken and immediately tested, great optics in everything I do not find any flaws, if I just have to then I can make a note on the blurred that is not the best, but only because I am used to the 600mm canon f4, I am really satisfied to have it in my kit, I gave back the 400mm f5.6 and I was afraid of being disappointed and instead I was happy with the choice, even at 400mm at full opening is in my opinion superior to the good old 400 5.6, in short I highly recommend it to those who want to take naturalistic or sports photography.
Opinion:Maybe I've been a bit drastic in Pros and Cons but things are pretty much the same. Of Course that starts from 4.5, of course it is heavy but it is a 100-400 of great quality and worth it. For so many years I preferred the 70-200/2.8 But if I have to carry a cannon behind then that is at least a 400. I compare with 70-200 because I will make a similar use and, from the first jokes, I already see that it is not inferior as quality, indeed. It Produces the blur even better at focal lengths than the 200, not fathomable with the 70-200 of course. The difference in brightness can be a problem up to 200 about but in the daytime does not prevent anything, in the evening or indoors in theaters or similar the light is always on the framed part that, by force of things, is less than that framed with 70-200. It Also lends itself to all other fields of application where these focals are used in their own way (and not improper as I do). As definition and sharpness I didn't really think it could even be higher than the classic biancone. I have taken it from very little but, at the moment, I am fully satisfied.
Pros:Extraordinary sharpness and weight. Unattainable by any other objective at the moment on the market of Reflex
Cons:Hard to find
Opinion:Undoubtedly the best tele in Reflex field for several years to this part. Extraordinary sharpness at any aperture, construction and exceptional materials. The weight is very low and allows you to work anywhere. I assure you that I used it even in climbing wall it was a lot of magnesite. The cost must not mislead because in my opinion, in view of the excellent tool that is delivered, is even underestimated. Congratulations Canon!
The sample photos are selected automatically between all photos posted by JuzaPhoto members, using the camera and the lens selected in the techs. If you find evident errors (e.g. photos taken with cameras and lenses that are not available yet), you can contribute to improve the page by sending a private message to the user that has entered incorrect values in the photo caption.
The following opinions have been automatically translated with Google Translate.
![[editors pick]](shared_files/layout/ep_badge.jpg){kind=icon}
JuzaPhoto contains affiliate links from Amazon and Ebay and JuzaPhoto earn a commission in case of purchase through affiliate links.
