Canon 100-400 f/4.5-5.6L IS II tested on Lensrentals

[Hans Kruse]

http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2015/08/canon-100-400-is-ii-mtf-and-variation-tests

Notice the new tests of sample variance that Lensrentals now have done for a number of lenses and now also this one. The previous outstanding example was the new Canon 11-24 f/4L lens.

After trying this lens I decided to buy this lens for landscapes. It is a very very good lens with a good reach. I had in the past shot a lot with a 70-200. Zooming with your feet is great, but often the situation is that you have great light where you are and you seen in great scene in the distance which either is impossible to reach or there is not time to reach it. Having a lens with the reach of the 100-400 is great. I also like the shot focus distance of this lens which can be used for flower shots. Even though it is a f/5.6 lens shots fully op at f/5.6 at 400mm shows nice bokeh and OOF blur.

[spidermike]

I am really enjoying this lens as well - although many reviews say optically it is no sharper than the original model, I find there is something about it that gives better (more pleasing?) images. Maybe it is the development of glass materials or lens coating in the last 10 years, I don't know.

[Hans Kruse]

I am really enjoying this lens as well - although many reviews say optically it is no sharper than the original model, I find there is something about it that gives better (more pleasing?) images. Maybe it is the development of glass materials or lens coating in the last 10 years, I don't know.

Here is what Roger Cicala, President of LensRentals.com had to say about the new version:

What to say about the lens that replaces an excellent classic lens? That’s easy, it’s better. Not hugely better, but clearly better in many small, but significant ways. Many people like the fact that it zooms with a ring now, rather than with ‘tromboning’ the barrel. I didn’t mind the other way, but some people did.
The new lens is just a bit sharper in the center than the original 100-400 (the original was excellent) and is clearly sharper in the edges and corners. It also has a far superior Image Stabilization system and with a 400mm lens that is often hand-held, that’s a big advantage. It focuses just a bit quicker and the motor is quieter, although I doubt the difference will be noticeable for most people. Finally, it takes a 2x teleconverter and still autofocuses accurately now, although that’s not my first or second choice on how to shoot at 800mm. But if you want to, you can.

There are some downsides: the new lens is a bit heavier than the old one and is more expensive. But for the vast majority of photographers, the positives of the new lens far outweigh the negatives. It’s worth the money for most of us.
February 2015

[NancyP]

I have the elderly design EF 400mm f/5.6L no-IS (light at 1.1 kg), and it does great bokeh wide open for medium-range flowers. Also bokehlicious in my opinion are the 1:1 macro lenses in the 180-200mm range, in my case the similarly elderly 180mm f/3.5 L no-IS (heavier at 1.2 kg), great for 1:3 to 1:1 close-up flowers. By all accounts, Canon hit it out of the park with the new 100-400.

[Hans Kruse]

I have the elderly design EF 400mm f/5.6L no-IS (light at 1.1 kg), and it does great bokeh wide open for medium-range flowers. Also bokehlicious in my opinion are the 1:1 macro lenses in the 180-200mm range, in my case the similarly elderly 180mm f/3.5 L no-IS (heavier at 1.2 kg), great for 1:3 to 1:1 close-up flowers. By all accounts, Canon hit it out of the park with the new 100-400.

The new 100-400 gives in a single lens better sharpness than the old 400 f/5.6 and with IS and it also give you 1:3 macro at 400mm. It's an amazing lens. It does not replace a macro lens, of course. It is also heavier than any prime lens between 100 and 400, but all in all it is amazingly good. I sold my 70-200 f/2.8L IS II as I would hardly ever bring both lenses. Where they overlap the 100-400 is as sharp as the 70-200, but it does not replace a 70-200 f/2.8 lens, of course.

[NancyP]

Maybe this lens is in my future. Lifting dumbbells needs to be in my future. It helps heavier lenses feel light.

[OneSparrow]

I have shot and tested both the new 100-400 and the 400 5.6 prime.  At 400mm, the 100-400 is still no match for the prime, even in the center, although it is close.  Towards the corners the difference is more obvious.  Have noticed that the 100-400 gets better as you zoom out.  The great IS, though, will enable more keepers in low light situations, something the prime is just not up to.

[jng]

Maybe this lens is in my future. Lifting dumbbells needs to be in my future. It helps heavier lenses feel light.

A little off-topic but this is actually good advice. I prefer to use fast lenses on my D800E (Sigma Art f/1.4 primes and Nikon f/2.8 zooms). I found that even a little weight training (I'm in my mid-50's and not exactly buff) helps me hold the camera steadier and allows me to shoot a little longer before taking a rest.

On-topic: the latest big zooms from Canon and Nikon are looking pretty attractive!

[ErikKaffehr]

Hi Hans,

Thanks for the link. Canon's new lenses are quite impressive.

Best regards
Erik

http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2015/08/canon-100-400-is-ii-mtf-and-variation-tests

Notice the new tests of sample variance that Lensrentals now have done for a number of lenses and now also this one. The previous outstanding example was the new Canon 11-24 f/4L lens.

After trying this lens I decided to buy this lens for landscapes. It is a very very good lens with a good reach. I had in the past shot a lot with a 70-200. Zooming with your feet is great, but often the situation is that you have great light where you are and you seen in great scene in the distance which either is impossible to reach or there is not time to reach it. Having a lens with the reach of the 100-400 is great. I also like the shot focus distance of this lens which can be used for flower shots. Even though it is a f/5.6 lens shots fully op at f/5.6 at 400mm shows nice bokeh and OOF blur.

[Hans Kruse]

I have shot and tested both the new 100-400 and the 400 5.6 prime.  At 400mm, the 100-400 is still no match for the prime, even in the center, although it is close.  Towards the corners the difference is more obvious.  Have noticed that the 100-400 gets better as you zoom out.  The great IS, though, will enable more keepers in low light situations, something the prime is just not up to.

I never had the old 400 f/5.6L lens. When I said that the new 100-400 II was sharper at 400mm I was referring to the MTF charts which shows that. This review http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-100-400mm-f-4.5-5.6-L-IS-II-USM-Lens.aspx says that this lens is very sharp fully open across the frame. I have checked with the 5DsR and can only say this is true. I also sold my 70-200 f/2.8L IS II since the 100-400 II was as sharp where they overlap for focal lengths and fstop. The only thing you give up with this lens is faster fstops than f/4.5-5.6 from what I see on the 5DsR.

[Hans Kruse]

A little off-topic but this is actually good advice. I prefer to use fast lenses on my D800E (Sigma Art f/1.4 primes and Nikon f/2.8 zooms). I found that even a little weight training (I'm in my mid-50's and not exactly buff) helps me hold the camera steadier and allows me to shoot a little longer before taking a rest.

On-topic: the latest big zooms from Canon and Nikon are looking pretty attractive!

I agree with your off-topic comment Another approach is BIF shooting with a 500 or 600mm f/4 lens from either Canon or Nikon. This is good exercise too.

And yes, the most recent lenses are really up in quality compared to what they replace. One thing Canon finally got right is the wide angle and ultra wide angle zoom lenses which was a weakness for years.

[NancyP]

That's what I am working up to, BIF with a Big White. First I get back into weight training, and learn my way around my brand new 7D2, and warm up with my beloved 400 f/5.6L "toy lens". Then - vacation during migration season, with rental of a Big White and a proper gimbal. I have no illusions that I am going to shoot a f/4 Big White hand-held all day!

[michael]

On a tangent...

I'll be testing this lens together with a Metabone IV on the Sony A7RII next week.

Michael

[labirdman]

Michael,

You don't perchance have a 400 f5.6 you could test too, do you? 

Most reports are that the 400 won't AF with the A7RII adapters, but there are a few who report success.

[michael]

No, I have no other Canon lenses. I used to have the original Canon 100-400. It was a lens that I love to hate. Image quality wasn't great, but it was really versatile. I also disliked the trombone zooming, but the new lens has done away with that, has much better coating, and twist zooming.

The new 100-400 II is, by all account, a remarkable lens. It has captured my interest.

There is nothing like it in the Sony world, other than the A series 70-400mm f/4-5.6 G2, which has a very good reputation.

Ideally I would like to compare both, but no one in Toronto seems to have one in stock for me to test.

If the Canon works well with the Metabones on the A7RII this may be worth my considering for a shoot I have coming up later this year. I have the Tamron 150-600mm, but it's physically to large for the kind of travel I'll be doing.

Michael


Michael

[Hans Kruse]

No, I have no other Canon lenses. I used to have the original Canon 100-400. It was a lens that I love to hate. Image quality wasn't great, but it was really versatile. I also disliked the trombone zooming, but the new lens has done away with that, has much better coating, and twist zooming.

The new 100-400 II is, by all account, a remarkable lens. It has captured my interest.

There is nothing like it in the Sony world, other than the A series 70-400mm f/4-5.6 G2, which has a very good reputation.

Ideally I would like to compare both, but no one in Toronto seems to have one in stock for me to test.

If the Canon works well with the Metabones on the A7RII this may be worth my considering for a shoot I have coming up later this year. I have the Tamron 150-600mm, but it's physically to large for the kind of travel I'll be doing.

Michael


Michael

Sounds like a review that would interest a lot of people. If you haven't touched a Canon lens for years there are some remarkable zoom lenses released recently like the 24-70 f/2.8L II, 16-35 f/4L IS, 11-24 f/4L and the slightly older 70-200 f/2.8L IS II. They may all work well with the A7R II and some could be compared with Sony zoom lenses.

[mcbroomf]

On a tangent...

I'll be testing this lens together with a Metabone IV on the Sony A7RII next week.

Michael

There is a long thread listing EF lens compatibility with Metabones and other adapters here.  The 100-400 II does not appear to play well.  It's a lens I'm interested in so your tests will be good to see.
http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1379624

In this post Metabones appear to be saying that they are working on new firmware to improve the mk IV performance.  Perhaps you can get a better response from them ...
http://forum.luminous-landscape.com/index.php?topic=102670.msg847833#msg847833

[Tony Jay]

There is a long thread listing EF lens compatibility with Metabones and other adapters here.  The 100-400 II does not appear to play well.  It's a lens I'm interested in so your tests will be good to see.
http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1379624

In this post Metabones appear to be saying that they are working on new firmware to improve the mk IV performance.  Perhaps you can get a better response from them ...
http://forum.luminous-landscape.com/index.php?topic=102670.msg847833#msg847833

I have recently acquired this lens.
I plan to use it specifically for a trip to Southern Africa later this year.
Although I own a 5D mark III and could mount it on this camera my plan is to use it mounted on a the new Sony A7R mark II via a Metabones IV adaptor.
I admit to not yet using this lens in anger - on either camera - but I have tested its autofocus ability (to some degree at least) with Sony /Metabones combination and it works fairly well (in rough comparison I would equate it to the autofocus ability of a 5D mark II).
The 100-400mm lens will not work at all with a 1.4X tele-extender on the Sony/Metabones combo. I don't actually regard this as an issue because I have bought it to cover its native focal lengths.

Whether it is actually a workable combination for wildlife photography time will tell.
At least I have a very good fallback in my 5D mark III but ideally I want mount my 500mm f4.0 on it with 2.0X tele-extender for birds and more distant shots.
I have only had the lens for three days and I will do more extensive testing prior to departure in November.

Tony Jay

[Jeremy Roussak]

I have recently acquired this lens.

...

I have only had the lens for three days and I will do more extensive testing prior to departure in November.

I'd be very interested in your conclusions, Tony. I'm musing on buying both the Sony and the lens.

Jeremy

[Hans Kruse]

For what it is worth I can say that this lens is super sharp and focusses very fast with the Canon 5DsR.