|
| Accept Cookies | Customize | Refuse Cookies |
The following opinions have been automatically translated with Google Translate.  | sent on December 02, 2022 Pros: versatility, sharpness, colors, robustness Cons: a bit short for naturalistic, often used with the extender Opinion: For 4 years I had this lens that gave me a lot of satisfaction. I recently replaced it with the RF 100-500 saving weight, removing and also reselling the 1.4x III multiplier and the adapter ring that I used with an R6. The lens is of excellent construction and has quality materials and returns a sense of overall robustness. Excellent speed of MAF. It showed the limits with my new mirrorless in terms of overall sharpness, especially when coupled with the aforementioned multiplier. It remains an excellent lens coupled with the "old" SLR, now on the second-hand market is at really affordable prices. The difference in terms of weight, af and sharpness is all in favor of the older brother. Thank you for the good times lived together dear 100-400, it was a pleasure to have you. |
 | sent on November 15, 2022 Pros: sharpness, weight, stabilizer, brightness, autofocus Cons: I can't find a fault Opinion: It is the lens that I use the most, and it is also the lens that the R series loves the most, I would say that it is the winning combination. I often use it freehand, because with the stabilizer it has and the weight is not excessive, I can maintain excellent stability. I saw the price of the new one, when I bought it it was cheaper, it had just come out. Removing the previous model, which was really at least 50% lower by comparison. I would buy it two more times. I recommend it to those who want quality. |
  | sent on October 21, 2022 Pros: ALL Cons: PRICE Opinion: I would simply say Canon's best human-digit telephoto zoom. It's actually increasing the price of that too. Starting from the AF it is exceptionally fast and precise, allowing you to shoot dynamic subjects with great ease. The focus reaches just under 1m (I think 98cm) at 400mm giving it almost macro capabilities. It will not be purely macro from the 1: 1 ratio but if you have bees, dragonflies or particular subjects near you will be able to take them back safely. Sharpness in abundance: where the 400mm do not arrive, the crop arrives. He won my battle with the 150-600, in fact I kept the 100-400 and the 150-600 I sold (sharper, brighter, lighter and more practical). I think it's the sharpest of all telephoto lenses I've ever had, including the 70-200 2.8 II. I can mount 77mm filters for landscape photos. It can be multiplied and duplicated if necessary but I have never been able to try it. He never showed chromatic aberrations. Compared to the 400L it loses little in the blurred but gains in all other aspects. Despite the weight it is well balanced. On aps-c it becomes a 160-640mm while maintaining its qualities. I use it on 5D but even those who use it on R6 speak very well of it, indeed they say that on ML it is even better. It's probably the most versatile telephoto lens for Canon. It costs but it is worth. It is highly recommended! |
 | sent on June 20, 2022 Pros: All without exception! Cons: Nothing! Opinion: Great lens, great tele all do. If you work in situations of adequate brightness, it is his death. I use it mainly for sports, it is not excessively heavy and bulky, we are about equal to a 70-200 2.8, even when the barrel is completely out, it does not unbalance too much. Quite another thing than its predecessor (pompone) that with the barrel out became an unbalanced brick out of measure. The step forward in terms of yield is enormous, even the stabilizer works really well finally, vignette a bit 'at full aperture and / or on longer focal lengths but the result is not bad to tell the truth ... and cmq correctable in two clicks to the pc ... or directly in the camera if you shoot in jpeg. Definitely recommended!! |
 | sent on April 18, 2022 Pros: All Cons: Maybe a little heavy Opinion: Spectacular optics for sharpness and quality. He loses very little even with the teleconverter 1.4. The hood is also very practical. If I were to find a defect (if you can call it that) it is the weight that in wandering photographic hunting is felt, but it is endured for the final yield. Used on a tripod it gives the best, even if on bright days you can easily shoot freehand |
 | sent on October 09, 2021 Pros: All! Cons: Nothing! Opinion: I bought this lens 2 and a half years ago for 1600 euros, an exceptional price for such a lens. Today it also costs more than it cost at the exit. Used at first with a 6D and later with the R5. In both cases it proved to be a fantastic lens, with the mirrorless in question it does its best, taking advantage of a camera with AF clearly superior to 6D. I carried it with me in my backpack in all the picnics I did, even in the mountains. Spectacular rendering and sharpness at full aperture, both for fauna, birdlife and landscapes, the quality of this lens is at the top among the zoom superteles of this category, and I say this without the slightest doubt to be denied. The construction is impeccable, robust and very reliable. In naturalistic I have, every now and then, combined the TC 1.4 and, multiplied, does not lose much yield, although, as for all zooms, it is preferable to use it without TC to have the highest quality. The zoom adjustment ring works very well. The hood supplied is also excellent. After taking the R5 and with the release of the 100-500, which has 100 mm more, I started to think about whether it was really worth selling it or not. Eventually, after I was offered 200 euros more than I had paid for it in 2019, I decided to part with it to have a native RF lens like the 100-500. I hope I never regret it! Objects are only material means, but I really reluctantly separated myself from this lens. |
 | sent on June 15, 2021 Pros: Crisp, stabilized, tropicalized, compact Cons: nobody Opinion: This is a zoom mr, I usually prefer fixed optics, but honestly in front of the 100-400 I have nothing to say, it has a great af, a great stabilizer and excellent sharpness at all focal points! Being quite compact and light it is easily transportable, even multiplied it loses little. Another strength is definitely the minimum focus distance at 400mm which is less than 1m, which ensures excellent Close-ups. Maybe the bokeh is not the best wanting to find a hair in the egg |
 | sent on April 30, 2021 Pros: Sharpness, tropicalization, lightning autofocus. Cons: For now nothing a little bit the weight, but there is Opinion: I've got it recently and I'm happy. Although I don't use 1.4x at the moment I'm happy on my 90D which already gives me 1.6. Nice nice blur. Robust construction, good rings. very fast focus. With the zoom adjustment ring you can adjust the "hardness" of the zumata, support for the stand and excellent light rails. |
  | sent on April 28, 2021 Pros: Construction, sharpness, stabilization. Lightning autofocus. Cons: Nothing, in my opinion Opinion: I used the previous great model for a long time and with satisfaction, but this is another planet. The yield is excellent even at full opening and does not decrease significantly even by mounting the 1.4X dupli. Very solid construction, really professional; ring for the tripod put in the right place, smooth and precise controls. On APS-C such as the 7D II it becomes a powerful but manageable 160-640 with which you can really do everything in the naturalistic field. |
 | sent on April 28, 2021 Pros: Excellent sharpness from edge to edge and evenly distributed throughout the focal excursion; excellent construction, extremely robust, relatively light, fast and precise AF, excellent tropicalization, circular diaphragm, the blurry is very pleasant beyond the focus plane... much less however in the previous area, really excellent the backlight seal, very well correct distortion, MMaF very contained. Cons: In fact none or at least: in four years of use I have not yet found one. Opinion: This is a very successful objective. I've had his forefather for a dozen years, a good target, but that's way superior to him in everything. I delayed buying it because I was a little skeptical about the construction and what to say... the very moment I held it in my hand the first time, and tried to vary the focal point, I immediately had to believe it again. Optically speaking he is only a very distant relative compared to his predecessor, to the point that this is not only superior to him in a more than manifest way but I would say that, also thanks to the many small constructive precautions that the first model did not have, between the two objectives the only things in common are only the focal excursion and brightness. The sharpness is really very high to the point that at the 300mm focal point, for example, it manages to exceed the performance of the 300/4 L IS. It is much heavier than its predecessor, about 300 grams, but the five-stop stabilizer ensures significantly higher performance, higher than the point that at 400 mm it is quietly photographed at 1/8 of a second freehand and with a minimum of attention you can go down even up to 1/4. Finally, the minimum focus distance, limited to only 0.98 meters, is very interesting, which allows you to get good close-ups up to an RR of about 1:3. |
 | sent on March 05, 2021 Pros: Sharpening at all construction focals Af very fast focus distance Cons: A little bit of weight, but it's !!!!! Opinion: After having 70 200 L smooth 70 300 L is usm I took the 100 400 L 2 fantastic !!!!!!! L I have taken for a year for MotoGP Superbike motorsport races etc... but because of covid I couldn't test it with races. In 2020 I tried it with birds fauna etc and I find it exceptional very fast with my 90d and I am very happy about it. Built very !!! the weight is felt almost 1.6 kg compared to the 1kg of the 70 300 L but the performance both optical stabilizer and speed of the Af pay off abundantly. Great telephoto lens in all senses satisfied !!!!!! |
 | sent on November 12, 2020 Pros: Excellent performance at all focal points Cons: Absurd locking system Opinion: Tested on 1dx mkII and R6, even with ext 1.4 shines for autofocus speed and optical performance, in my opinion much better than its predecessor. One aspect that I find really embarrassing is the ring locking, with the long and much less practical stroke than the cursor one installed, for example, on the 24-105 series 2. I would also have liked an internal zoom system, such as the Sony 200-600, but you can't have it all at first glance. |
 | sent on May 16, 2020 Pros: Optical quality Cons: Weight, footprint and price Opinion: There's not much to say about one of the best canvases on the market... Quality at all focal points, in all respects. Only "against" that I find are the considerable weight, the clutter (it's not exactly compact...) and the high price... but on the other hand quality is paid for and also deserves some sacrifice of practicality, especially to these focal points that can be left at home if not strictly necessary. |
 | sent on January 25, 2020 Pros: I'd say everything 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. |
user123428  | sent on September 25, 2019 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. |
 | sent on April 02, 2019 Pros: All Cons: Nothing Opinion: Maybe I've been a little drastic in Pros and Cons but things are pretty much the same. Of course it starts at 4.5, of course it's heavy but it's a 100-400 of great quality and it's worth it. For many years I preferred the 70-200/2.8 but if I really have to carry a cannon then that's at least a 400. I compare it to 70-200 because I will make a similar use of it and, from the first bars, I already see that it is not inferior as quality, indeed. It produces even the best blurring at focal points above 200, not probeable with the 70-200 of course. The difference in brightness can be a problem up to about 200 but during the day it does not prevent anything, in the evening or indoors in theaters or the like the light is always on the framed part that, necessarily, is less than that framed with 70-200. It also lends itself in all other application areas where you use these focals in their own way (and not as improper as I do). As a definition and sharpness I didn't really think it could be even superior to the classic white. I have taken it very recently but, at the moment, I am fully satisfied. Update: I confirm everything I said as first impressions except the fact that indoor f/2.8 is always f/2.8 so these whites serve both and for different purposes. |
 | sent on March 15, 2019 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! |
 | sent on January 21, 2019 Pros: Sharpness on all focal zooms not overly heavy excellent resolution even with low lights great with Canon MT 1/4 III loses very little AF excellent and good stabilizzattore that has 3 settings like the last generation of the brothers Cons: Nothing Opinion: For me it is one of the best zoom 100-400 in circulation seems to have been created together with the 7dii is an exceptional pairing and since I replaced it with the 400f. 5.6 I no longer removed from my 7dii use it even with the Canon MT1/4 III without any problem I use it even with the 5DIII for stolen portraits because it has an excellent blurred up to F. 8 I use it more for birdlife and up to 30mt. It is great if you use it in full light is amazing and with little light is spectacular is enough to hit AF immediately at the first shot and with times and ISO guessed that no Will disappoint you for me deserves a 10 + |
 | sent on July 17, 2018 Pros: Sharpness at all focal lengths, general robustness, much smoother focal block on zoom, stabilization, color, minimum MAF distance improved. Cons: Perhaps, but only perhaps, the uncomfortable disconnect of the bracket and only partially. But just to write something also in this section... Opinion: Still improved compared to my much-loved 100-400 I; I think it's pointless to write torrents of words but only because using it you realize you have a top optics to use for years without sagging. For yield, elasticity of use, general quality, balancing. Having also the excellent 150-600 Sigma S I do not consider however this optics at all in overlap, given the comfort and ductility in the use. Rating: 10, and praise. |
 | sent on May 01, 2018 Pros: Sharpness, construction, fuzzy, beautiful took up thanks to minimum focus, image stabilization, balance weight when closed with camera body mounted and excellent value for money. Cons: Weighs a bit but it's still well balanced, cost, clutch ring that during use of the lens changes accidentally and unwittingly, not wholly detachable tripod attachment and small to use as a carrying handle. Opinion: Great lens, truly exceptional sharpness, lots and lots of stuff for a super zoom lens on €2,000. I had so many other alternatives thinking it could be some solutions but so were not; tried various 70/300 until 70/300 L and 400 f 5.6 L fixed. What can I say, the good qualities of all 100/400 encloses the uncompromising quality, no small feat, holds up very well the 1.4 x III teleconverter. |
 | sent on February 11, 2018 Pros: Minimum distance of reduced focus, balance, autofocus and stabilization at the top, rotationally operated zoom and not plunger like in the old series, spectacular definition. Cons: You notice it immediately also for the white color, a bit heavy but well balanced if used in combination with machine bodies equipped with battery grip, the cost is not really cheap, but the quality has a cost. Opinion: It 's my favorite lens in combination with the 5DS R, equipped with a battery grip, for freehand use. It does not fear any kind of photography, but offers the best in the long focal length and in the close-up thanks to a reduced minimum focusing distance that allows shots at the level of the best macro. I never liked the plunger zoom, as was the "pompon" of the first series, so I greatly appreciated the change of zoom drive present in this second series.rnA less brightness, this lens is a more than a substitute for the little brother 70-200, which doubles the maximum focal length with a minimal loss on the focal length (100 mm instead of 70), but adding flexibility in the naturalistic shots and, as mentioned, in the fantastic close-up.rnI have taken hundreds of photographs with this lens, which I leave mounted by default on the body of the 5DS R: in my opinion is a definitive lens in this range of focal.rnrnHere some shots made with this goal: rnrnrnhttps: //www.flickr.com/photos/henry62/albums / 72157690670300332 |
 | sent on November 05, 2017 Pros: Great compromise for optical quality, weight and size Cons: Heavier than the previous model, fixed tripod collar Opinion: It's the lens I missed. Thanks to its lighterness and smaller dimensions, I can leave the 400DOIS II home without too much regrets in the most demanding hikes. The new 100-400 IS II is silent, crisp, has a fast AF and an effective stabilizer. I was pleasantly surprised to be multiplied by the Canon EF 1.4-III extender as the AF speed remains good, the image quality is very small and my 5DIV keeps all active AF points. In my case, they are small: 1) The weight has increased compared to the previous model and, in certain situations, 150 / 200gr. in less they would do it. rn2) The tripod collar is fixed and adopts once again a small bracket that is uncomfortable to handle for a long time. I immediately replaced it with a slightly longer after-market leg and already equipped with RRS / Arca Swiss Attachment, so I do not have to use additional plates. |
 | sent on August 03, 2017 Pros: Sufficiently "handy" even with free hand, great resolution at all focal points, the fluorite lenses are seen. Given the zoom, certainly not "cheap" but not expensive either. Cons: I do not remember anything Opinion: I just did a couple of tests right after the purchase, I'm looking forward to hearing the talk as soon as I have tried the theater optics that will not happen shortly. I also made comparisons with the 70-200 2.8 mark II. Except for the obvious loss of brightness, there is no qualitative difference between the two. Of course, the autofocus and the stabilizer have greatly improved. The lens is extremely manoeuvrable and lightweight despite the "field" focal points. I personally DO NOT like the lens that stretches outward but builds it like the 70's. -200 would have made it absolutely unmanageable and very heavy. Even the diaphragm a little too closed for my tastes, made it more compact and handy, without altering to this first test, the quality: complice a 1dx mII which has no limits in iso and noise control. Fluoride treatment in terms of resolutionGrace and plasticity make it absolutely top of the range! |
| sent on August 01, 2017 Pros: Excellent sharpness even at 400mm, made even at full aperture, silent engine, fast speed, stellar IS, construction and top glass, protected from dust and moisture, what else will? Cons: I only think of the cost, certainly not cheap Opinion: Recent purchase but I've been weighted for a long time, replaces the 700-200 f4 is (still excellent) as it is more versatile and also suitable for roaming photographic hunting. With my 80d occasionally exploit the ability to use the 1.4x series III with 27 focus points and a more than good yield. Photographing less than a meter with a 400 mm, even with an extension ring, allows unusual macro shots with an excellent blur. The weight is well manageable by using it with a free hand. Always with free hands with IS and static subjects I got (from now on) sharp shots at 1/6 second to 100mm and 1/15 second to 400mm! Unconditioned for many genres, including the landscape! |
 | sent on May 08, 2017 Pros: Focal excursion, handling, construction. Cons: nothing at the moment. Opinion: I can only approach everything dario Rattieri wrote. adding personal opinions. above the dial of the focus c is a rotary selector that makes the zoom ring softer or harder. The optics is excellent in every way, from construction to photos that kidney, weight is contained. I thought it was a little dark with an f4.5 and f5.6 as an opening, but it's bright. The colors are realistic and bright, Is is fast and responsive. From 100 to 300mm the opening remains constant at f4.5 then from 300 to 400 switches to f5.6. The attack of the trepod seems a little small, and not being completely removable cluttered during the rotation of the focus ring but if placed above it turns out to be a valid foothold for transport. I did tests on 80d with two multipliers : - Canon 2x iii at 100m the center point passes to f9.5 , the af does not work, you have to use the mf. - Kenko1.4 300 pro 80d does not recognize optical or multiplier. ... Too bad. At the weight level we are like a have a 70-200 is f2.8. I strongly support this optics, both for focal and bright excursion, perhaps it can scare you for its cost... but it's worth a lot more than you pay. Bought back in 2020 |
 | sent on April 01, 2017 Pros: Interesting price Cons: Opinion: |
 | sent on March 06, 2017 Pros: Crisp, stabilizer and af top, beautiful solid, well with 1.4x III, a perfect all-rounder in the range covering, minimum focusing distance awesome fire. Cons: Nothing to report. Opinion: I got to try repeatedly the lens is smooth * * which combined with the 1.4x III (sort, I'm waiting) and its yield has convinced me to buy. In my case it does not replace the 70-200 F4L that for reasons of size / weight prefer for outputs / jobs where lighter perspective and less invasive * * is indicated. E 'instead of the maximum when you need a single optical covering the focal instead of two fixed heavy. |
 | sent on February 25, 2017 Pros: Sharpness and quality 'image, tropicalization Cons: Price, zooming and not piu'a classic "pump" Opinion: A large optical, not comparable in quality 'image to the previous version, which I never liked, but from which I would have preferred to inherit the pump system that allowed you to zoom and focus using all facilita.Nonostante the price slightly elevated well worth the money! Very practical and versatile allowing you to leave home more heavy and bulky lenses. |
 | sent on January 03, 2017 Pros: Quality / price excellent, very efficient stabilizer, a TA excellent optical quality at all focal lengths, fast and precise AF, MAF minimum distance at all focal almost macro, ability to adjust the zoom strength, with three options for stabilizing function for panning, construction of tank, weather sealed, no chromatic aberration, good focus, aesthetically beautiful, the possibility of using it for many kinds. Cons: nobody Opinion: Canon has produced recently this view is really incredible for build quality, performance and versatility. A character that makes it unique is the minimum distance of MAF: virtually any focal I can put myself in focus even feet. This feature makes it very well suited to portraits and together with the increased focus, in my opinion, make it even better to the various 70-200 for any use. The lower brightness determined by a smaller aperture than zoom 2.8, is recovered with a stabilizer that is extraordinary and allows you to take quietly to 1/60 to 300 / 400mm. Blurred to 300mm and TA is much more enjoyable than the 70,200 2.8L II to 200mm and TA. In my opinion, do not be afraid to prefer it to 70,200 for any photographic genre. The price is very low compared to what offers this masterpiece of optics and technology. |
 | sent on December 31, 2016 Pros: Versatility, speed Af Cons: Brightness and support for gantry partially fissorn Opinion: I recently purchased this point, but I've used it in several situazioni.rnPremetto I own both the 70/200 2.8 (ii) and 300 2.8 (ii). rnrnLa made, in all lighting conditions is really high and versatility has not paragoni.rnrnIl 70/200, I consider it a lens can not be substituted for "landscapes with special" and for portraits. Its definition is awkward and well above 100 / 400.rnrnColoro them be photographed animals not shed, this is the best you can find. Fast autofocus, precision and detail, are its best features. rnrnL'unico drawback I found is obviously the brightness, if you were to take pictures in low light conditions. The diaphragm usage imposes iso too high for fast-moving subjects. rnrnHo tried to down the previous version and have had for a long time the new 400 5.6.rnIl 100/400 100/400 is superior to the very poor and old to the magical 400 5.6.rnrnRitengo very importantand emphasize that the fine tuning autofocus (homemade or Room Service) is considered essential to this level objectives. RNLA precision in detail is found only when there is full compatibility between the machine and the obiettivo.rnrn |
 | sent on December 31, 2016 Pros: image quality, construction, stabilizer, focusing distance, the focusing speed and precision Cons: price Opinion: The new Canon 100-400 Isii is ideal for those who want a zoom lens from the high quality of image. Canon has packed into a single objective qualities of fixed f4is 300 and 400 5.6L, with the advantage of having an excursion that goes from 100 to 400, a latest generation stabilizer, all for a sum of approximately two thousand euro. A figure definitely not low especially for amateur photographers, but the focus speed and accuracy of AF, the construction and the materials used in it, the image quality they soon pleased the most demanding photographer. Hard to find flaws, especially considering that the goal that Canon produces the same end is the expensive 200-400.rnColoro which are in doubt whether to take the 100-400 70/200 or 2.8 Isii with TC, I would recommend the 100-400, because despite having the 70-200 tc with a good quality, there are differences. Of course, the 100-400 is a relatively dark objective, therefore difficult to use in lighting conditions basYou know, in concert or in the halls. In this case, the iso will rise rapidly and a 2.8 will have his rematch. In addition, 70/200 in portraits has two speeds more. In summary who can take them entrambi.rnPer As regards the comparison with Sigma or Tamron zoom that trip more boost, as they arrive to 600 mm, in my experience discourage their purchase for Variability precision of af. Spending 1000/1500 euro to focus a picture out of ten, it is not recommended, although there are many who live so happy ... |
 | sent on December 14, 2016 Pros: Flare resistance, sharpness, color beauty,is and af noteworthy, minimum distance focus,yield to TA,yield with multiplier 1.4xlll. Cons: It might sound like the price but once tried it is no longer. Opinion: Hi... It is obvious that when you buy an optics you do it based on what kind of photography we love to do, I for 95% do naturalistic. I had both the old 100-400 (pompone) and the 400 f5.6...good optics that also gave me a lot of satisfaction,this 100-400is2 however it's quite another thing, a span above the old "pompone". Of the 400 5.6 as image quality is slightly higher (but it is), the booken is far more beautiful and pasty, plus it has full flare resistance... sharpness, beauty of color,large af, minimum distance focus (less than one meter), rendered to TA, and a large, large double function stabilizer. I have always used the old and the 400 5.6 as complementary lenses to the super fixed canvas (first 500mm and after 600mm),a year ago the and 400 5.6 I sold them and took the 100-400 is2, this has become the lens I use most frequently , and I would say with great satisfaction of the results obtained, making the super canvas work in certain contexts, in practice only in comfortable places. In fact, this jewel with 1.4x (560mm f8) has the same yield as smooth... With series 1 (e.g.:1dmk4 - kenko 2.0x) you have an 800mm f11 with appreciable quality,obviously in certain cases and with very favorable light. For rambling photography I think has no rivals, lightness, practicality, image quality, robustness and tropicalization. The price,certainly important, may seem excessive but the money it costs (for me) is worth them all... recommended, in its category (zoom) has no rivals... vote10. |
 | sent on December 12, 2016 Pros: Versatility, clarity, speed, accuracy Af, stabilizer, AF minimum distance, construction, weight and great with the Canon 1.4x III Cons: I thought it was worth the price but then .... it all. Opinion: I use it for Birdlife matched with Canon 1.4x III is on 5D mk III of 80D, with the 5D III works only the central point, everything works perfectly and keeps excellent speed I encountered slight hesitation if behind the subject as a background there are the branches, with 80D behaves with no problem and I can use 21-point AF but to have the sharpest I have to close from f9 to f10 when used without multipliers is really fantastic. the indoor use, for football games, with canon 5D mkIII for the chance to raise the ISO from 6400 to 12,800 and is truly spectacular always ready and responsive. For outdoor sports use for me it is ideal given its focal excursion versatility! RNLA minimum distance of 98cm of APSC with a multiplier of 1.4x 25mm extension tube allows you to do macro 1: 1 with excellent results. RNLA its compactness allows me to do the holidays with Canon 5d mkIII or 80D, Canon 16-35 f4, canon 24-105, 100-400 canon II + 1.4x Canon 85 f / 1.8 usm in my bag messanger Crumpler Light Delight 6000 ifnce need backpack! |
 | sent on October 01, 2016 Pros: Sharpness, minimum distance maf, stabilizer, lightweight Cons: Price Opinion: It's a few days which is in my kit but I must say right away I felt a few top step of the previous model, in hand immediately notice the compactness and robustness and optics already you know that there will only give you satisfaction, not for nothing is series L.rnPrime photos taken with medium low times certainly not the classic "" security and yet the detail is enormous thanks to the excellent stabilizer that ensures shake-free pictures up to 4 stops, but the best of the work carries the new optical scheme issuing us an excellent sharpness even at full aperture throughout the zoom range, clearly by closing just one stop sharpness increases even reaching the maximum in my opinion at f5 / 6, vignetting for the few photos taken does not seem very marked definitely does not create fastidio.rnIl weight mè is light very suitable for walking so photographic stalking because not very tired, the ultrasonic motor as for others to mè already; possess not disappoint fast, quiet but the thing that made me lean towards the purchase is the minimum distance to maf fundamental mè, is the only aim of its kind with a reproduction ratio so elevato.Nota a little 'sore the price but then you can understand the motivation, although looking good you can negotiate a reasonable price, in my humble judgment is a point of view that for a nature photographer and sports can not miss in the kit seen your excursion a great handyman highly today recommended to the best of its kind on the market rn |
 | sent on September 25, 2016 Pros: Sharpness even at TA, stabilizer, AF speed, made with Canon 1.4x, minimum focusing distance Cons: Nobody Opinion: I went from 100-400 first set this goal, there is a difference and you feel: this gives you clarity even at room temperature, whereas with the old Pompone I had to close the aperture enough to get a very sharp image, the stabilizer is much improved and allows slightly slower times than the first set, the AF is even faster, almost instantaneous, the focus distance is really little and especially has a good yield with the multiplier Canon 1.4x III, I have often used this pair in the recent trip to the Pantanal and I was not disappointed (see photo gallery), in fact they do not notice any appreciable slowdown in FA and the loss of photo quality is pretty minimal. Personally I preferred the longer pump zoom system, I found it more practical, but it will have far fewer problems of '' vacuum '' dust. I believe that the price offered is the best choice for those with Canon, especially insome situations where it is essential to have the versatility of a zoom. |
 | sent on August 21, 2016 Pros: Great sharpness, minimum distance focus, made with Canon multiplier 1,4xIII Cons: for non-removable tripod ring (you can remove the foot only) Opinion: I state that I have had both the old 100-400 that the legendary 400 5.6, passing from Tamron 150-600 and Canon 70-200 f4 IS and Canon 70-300 L.rnL'ho series tested with Canon 1DX and 7DII: optical excellent, very clear and very versatile. AF very fast, very good stabilizzatore.rnHa very great qualities as the minimum focus distance and the ability to work well with the multiplier Canon 1.4xIII (with cameras that support the AF f8 aperture). Excellent companion for 500 and 600mm super telephoto type, is a lens of great value to those who will use it for hiking or otherwise in situations where too many pounds are not gestibili.rnIn coupled with Canon 1.4xIII multiplier you eat at breakfast (in terms of sharpness and AF) the Tamron 150-600. Costs double that, but they could afford is in my opinion a much more far-sighted choice. You pay more, it is true, but the image quality and construction, and the price resistance over time, is definitely in favor of Canon.rn |
 | sent on August 11, 2016 Pros: Sharpness, AF and minimum focusing distance. Cons: Nobody Opinion: I 'a really crazy lens, I recommend it to all those who use this range of focali.Ho had several zoom including Pompone, but to date this does not beat anyone (of my possessed)! Af lightning really and finally the minimum focusing distance ... So for those who had doubts do not hesitate to buy it will not disappoint! |
 | sent on April 24, 2016 Pros: rnNitidezza super even at f / 5.6, rugged, compact, stabilized Cons: Cost, small tripod mount bracket for use as a carrying handle Opinion: I also had the first set, but I must say that the comparison is clearly in favor for the series 2. For the rest it has already said everything I think, I find it really good for me also matched with tc 1.4xII with which loses little sharpness and af quickly, combined with 7dII. The limiter and stabilizer work fine, but I have not done extensive testing to 400mm can be had still shots with a 1/100 "or so compact li.rnMolto, is in a small rucksack or bag, I can say that as quickly zoom was a little 'me better from motion pump. |
 | sent on April 20, 2016 Pros: Sharpness wide open, weather sealing, minimum distance maf, hood, very very good sharpness with 1.4x mk3 and especially great stabilizer Cons: I would say the price but you have to try it to judge Opinion: I use it for about a year and it is a satisfaction after the other, crystal clear already at f5.6, and f8 with 1.4x MKIII becomes even there is already clear without having to close, which also means fantastico.Perfetto other genres other than wildlife and bird life, I do not think has defects, the comparison with the old 100 400 is to be avoided, are two totally different things, the only thing that unites them and the minimum aperture and the canon brand, without detracting from the old 100 400 that if calibrated to perfection was and is still a slow ottimissima |
 | sent on April 17, 2016 Pros: Sharpness, Af, stabilizer Cons: weight and maybe the price Opinion: I finally found peace, after 6 months of use I can claim to have found a fantastico.rnvengo paintings from Sigma 150-500 and 400 noble canon hard but I make 90% stalking and have never managed to be happy with the pienamente.rnPer sigma, as noted, it was necessary to close at least in f9 to have good sharpness but in the forest with little light came out casini.rnil 400 fixed to a tripod or rest on some stable support was great but "wandering" no, no stabilizer camera shake has always been presente.rncon the 100-400 I managed to find the square, I find only the weight too little (after hours of walking is felt) and maybe the price a little high but then I would say that quality pays off a lot. rnRiesco also to use it with the Kenko 1.4x pro 300 DGX without losing any automation with good soddifazione obviously he lost a sharpness hair and the AF slows a bit in low light but nothing fantastic esagerato.rnObiettivo and highly recommended for those who want have a quality canvas |
 | sent on December 28, 2015 Pros: Sharpness, alertness AF, handling, weight Cons: They do not exist Opinion: For me is perfection. I deleted 300 f4 and the 70-200 f4 to keep only this lens (together with the 24-105) coupled to the first 7d old and now in 5dmkiii 1dmkiii.rnLa and sharpness is at the top and the AF lightning. The versatility and easy handling complete the work making it a lens nearly handyman. The story that the drive is better than a zoom believe that the document finally disproved. The quality there tutta.rnAccoppiato the canon 1.4xiii and kenko 1.4x and 2x lost well poco.rnOvviamente not cheap but worth the money you spend, there's nothing to do. Pace of various competitors 150-600. |
 | sent on December 05, 2015 Pros: Sharpness, Speed ??Autofocus, image stabilization, size and weight Cons: No one, perhaps the price? But the lenses good cost there is little to do .............. Opinion: Someone will find questionable that I have counted among the advantages the weight, but if we examine the alternatives around 600 mm. the 100-400 + 1.4X is a great 560 and is significantly, very significantly lighter of the coupling 300 f 2.8L IS + 2X I've used so far. You agree we speak of a 568 f8 against a 600 f 5.6, but if the light is decent, for outputs of a certain duration, the weight difference is very appreciable, inter alia, I find that it is a weight that ensures excellent maneuverability combined with a good stabilità.rnSostanzialmente are very satisfied with this lens that for the kind of "Nature" is almost a "total goal" that allows you to do macro, or to shoot birds are not expected volo.rnSe taking in subjects with hypothermia R 1/1, with the multiplier 1.4X the field of view of 90 cm. is 5 cm (about 7D2) that for a lover of butterflies, dragonflies and other flying insects unsociable & egrAve; a real boon. A fine lens, highly recommended! |
 | sent on December 02, 2015 Pros: Sharpness in TA - holds very well the many 1.4x III - AF impressive for a zoom - controls and dials placed in the right place - excellent hardness zoom ring - Lock button hood - excellent Stabilization Cons: after 2 months of use I noticed dust inside the barrel - bracket tripod Opinion: What more 'to a professional zoom questo.L'ho as compared with my old fixed 400 f5.6 and came out to grande.A equal' focal length and aperture are equivalent on the field but the zoom wins tearing the fixed in engaging the subject with both 7DII both 5DIII.rnSono delighted with what I was able to get with this zoom even if the focal stops 400mm.Non sorry it blurred in line with the fixed 400 F5.6.Le notes negative I see in the tripod bracket that can not 'be removed completely as it was in 400 fixed and a very negative note is that after two months of heavy usage I noticed that entered the dust inside the lens (although I always take care to change optical - I did safari) .rnIn conclusion a super optical baked by Canon and worth all that costa.Un Af impressive zoom and when I multiply with 1.4x is as if there fosse.rnHo sold 400 f5 .6 and 70-200 f4 is why zoom.Super satisfied! |
 | sent on September 09, 2015 Pros: "Easy" to use, clear, fast in focus Cons: Heavy and expensive (at least for me) Opinion: I decided to make the leap to this canvas after several steps .... Sigma 150-500, 400 fixed canon, 100-400 series IrnMi scared to spend 2000 euro (at RCE) for a goal but in the end they are felicissimornIl baptism Fire was in Looking. Mounted on canon 7d The series, he has absolutely disappointed. (See gallery) .rnPenso that sell even the 70-200 F4 L series because I am afraid that I will use it no more after trying this lens retaining only the 24-105 and 50 fixed 1.4rnConsiglio spending to those who are undecided |
 | sent on July 31, 2015 Pros: Stabilizer good, sharpness to TA, strength, construction and ergonomics, even sharpness, close focus with excellent macro capabilities. Cons: I found none, for some maybe the price. Opinion: After having saved several months I decided to make this purchase. For me it is the first lens L and above is the first investment so onerous in this passion that I carry around. After some 'shaking initial purchase I went on the field and I finally tried the lens. rnOgni doubt dissolved. Focus excellent, incredible sharpness and especially to F 5.6! rnUsando the lens on a 60D machine me baked files incredibly rich and detailed stuff to say Croppo to 7080% and still keep a great file.rnLa close focus then is the final jewel of a lens fabulous. rnNon I can only recommend it, a quality to which then we hardly unaccustomed. |
 | sent on May 04, 2015 Pros: Stabilizer exceptionally bright, detail rendering, ability to use it as close up, robustness Cons: Weight, buttons a bit 'hard, incompatible with some teleconverters Opinion: Just tried with birdlife, with Canon 70D body and sigma multiplier 1,4X.rnDecisamente a superb lens, with an excellent definition of detail to the center and also to appreciable bordi.rnLo stabilizer works in a superb and a pleasure to view the image initially strongly quivering, that becomes a static moments after half-pressed the button scatto.rnSe the scene is not particularly dark, it is absolutely possible to use it with one hand libera.rnUsandolo APS-C and a 1.4 multiplier becomes virtually a 900mm at a fraction of the price (though not cheap) and peso.rnLa construction is solid and ergonomica.rnLa minimum focusing distance (less than one meter from the sensor) and the massive enlargement possible, thanks to the multiplier, allowing use as a macro-close up, allowing, if you have specific needs and very special, to leave home the macro dedicated, even if for some shots indispensabile.rnMolto latter remains good even the hood, with the special window to act on filtri.rnL'anello dZoom also held the position "fully open" offers some resistance, which allows precise control and smooth zooming without unwanted or accidentali.rnVenendo the negative notes, is definitely a lens physically demanding, given the weight of more than three pounds . rnInoltre not digest well teleconverters other brands. I connected to a 1.4 sigma, already tested successfully on other objectives canon, but lost the autofocus at any condition luce.rnI sliders functions, from new, are also a bit 'duri.rnE' true that the cursor of the fire auto-manual and the distance of focus can be peacefully forgotten, but what about the stabilizer is useful to switch from "total" (position 1) to "pan" (position 2) and so it is not comfortable without losing the inquadratura.rn |
 | sent on March 05, 2015 Pros: sharpness, stabilizer, af speed, excellent yield with the 1.4x multiplier, minimum distance maf Cons: maybe for some the price Opinion: After you have had, in the past, 100-400 (The series), 400 5.6, Tamron 150-600, last year I decided to buy a used 500 I series. However I realized almost immediately that I was missing something light for track use (and for hunting touring). So just introduced the new 100-400 I decided to buy it without even waiting for a review (as I did with the 16-35 f4). As I have repeated to exhaustion, Canon has not failed a single lens in the last 4-5 years. He staked everything on optical correction, presenting in series goals pro as well as targets lower-end, which had always an extraordinary optical quality already at RT. This new 100-400 does nothing but confirm the trend, going, perhaps, to touch new heights with regard to uncompromising quality with a sharpness that the same parameters approaches and sometimes exceeds the 70-200 2.8 II, an af incredibly fast and quiet, accompanied by an IS very effective. To hear you talk about Canon's 4-stop, but I could not tell if there & ograve; true. The weight a bit 'higher than its predecessor, but it is still very comfortable solution for hunting and traveling in general for uses requiring outputs read. For comparison seemingly merciless, the new 100-400 has very little to envy to 500 fixed, which clearly remains on another level, not least to stop more light. rnPer regarding the multiplier, use the 1.4x III, which takes very little sharpness and makes the af only slightly slower. There remains however a solluzione emergency. rnNonostante the opening words, I believe that this lens is comparable only with the predecessor and partly with 400 fixed. The 150-600 remains an objective substantially different, primarily for weight and especially because it is in any case of two different bands. the fact of having focal lengths in common, does not mean that two goals are in direct competition. The 150-600 see it as a good way to get the focal sidereal without fainting. The 100-400 II is great as a "complement" and not born necessariamente to use fauna. Personally on track with 150-600 (not using the monopod), I wasted it arms after a few hours. The 100-400 makes it much less daunting task. In addition a 77 mm diameter filters allows me to use the set of filters nd that I, when I want to do panning estremo.rnCapitolo price .. not cheap, but it is pure excellence. I believe that with this lens Canon has outdone herself, creating a perfect object from all points of view. Currently is under 2000 euro without much effort, but it is still an easily salable. |
 | sent on March 05, 2015 Pros: 4-stop IS, fluorite lenses, finally to tropical minimum room MAF, AF lightning, sharper throughout the frame already in TA compared to the previous model, resistance to flare, 77mm filters. Cons: Heavier than its predecessor, the ring tripod adapter can not be removed completely, price, mild CA in extreme conditions but easily eliminated in PP. Opinion: The age difference with the previous model of the design you see and hear tutta.rnNonostante mark I had a well-managed can say that the IQ of the mark II is another cosa.rnL'IS 4-stop is a boon to 400mm, more silent than the 70-200 f4 IS. Allowed me the shots with the times really high in relation to the focal length. The recovery of 4 stop there tutto.rnLa sharpness in the center of the frame is similar to the old, while moving to the edges maintains excellent clarity (not excellent), else than the old modello.rnIl bokeh has improved a lot even though we are far from the one returned from expensive paintings mark II.rnMa one of the things that struck me most is the minimum distance of MAF which is passed to 0,98m.rnDiventa "almost" a lens to close up. Keeps diameter 77mm filters and the new hood with side slit opening allows easy adjustment of GND.rnInteressante being able to remove the hook part of the easel but all the ring can no longer TOGLiere completely, some may be fastidioso.rnLeggermente heavier than its predecessor and more massive. Well built, it returns a nice sturdy feel. I had grown accustomed to the pump system in the mark I, very versatile. Here comes back to the zoom ring. Less fast in step 100 to 400 with respect to the pump but infinitely more precise in intermediate zooming. Remains friction ring Zoom but it seems less modulabile.rnOttima three-dimensionality and Out of the plans, much better than I. mark Excellent with 1.4x teleconverter II, loses much less in sharpness and af remains quite fast. rnIl price is still a little high and perhaps not justified by the difference in performance, there are about 800 € at stake and there are many in my avviso.rnDi contrast, the mark II is superior in every respect to the mark I. |
JuzaPhoto contains affiliate links from Amazon and Ebay and JuzaPhoto earn a commission in case of purchase through affiliate links.May Beauty Be Everywhere Around Me
