No way! The current image quality rubric is much better. The black and white targets do a better job of showing sharpness and CA, the collage of images give a much better idea of the color saturation and contrast. Compare the Canon 70-300 L and non-L lens reviews, and you'll see what I mean. The L lens is cornucopia of resolution and poppy color compared to the other lens. It wouldn't be so obvious with the drab brick wall.
I struggled with this lens initially and eventually discovered that the only fault was ME. I have made my peace with this lens and Yes, Indeed this is a great lens.Work within it's parameters and you won't lose. I am coming from Nikon FE2 prime lens and fixed ISO perspective. I have had to modify my approach with this lens but I must say when you have gripped it then this lens delivers absolutely astounding results. On full frame I had no problems but on crop sensor I was nonplussed. This was me failing and not the lens. This lens is first rate. Love it.
Thanks Chris, excellent review. Unfortunately I bought the first version just six weeks before Canon announced this one. It was acceptable but no more really. I resisted getting the new one for a couple of years, but in the end went for it. Glad I did, the IQ, Image stabilization and AF speed are far better. It's a very fine lens.
Hello Christopher! Firstly, thank you for your reviews. It is due to them I am now a happy owner of Canon M6 II, as well as EF-M 32mm STM, EF-S 55-250 IS STM as well as EF-S 17-55mm IS USM. I think that at some point I will want to take a look for a long range zoom lens (for birding/wildlife). However, I am not sure at which one I am going to aim. There is this one (Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 IS USM 'L' 'ii' ), as well as Sigma 150-600mm Contemporary. As a Canon M6 II owner, I know that the sensor is very demanding. So as you own/owned Canon M6 II as well as the Sigmal lens - what can you say on the topic?
I shoot with both Canon full and crop frame and Sony APSC cameras. I did not want to purchase a second 100-400mm lens for the Sony system. IMO, neither the Sigma MC-11 nor the Metabones IV adapters worked up to my standards in adapting long focal length Canon lenses to Sony E-mount cameras. However the Viltrox Mark-2, Canon to E-mount focal reducer seems to work just fine with my Sony A6400. Even the IS works efficiently. I can hand hold the camera/lens at 400mm using 1/40 second and get sharp imagery. Focusing is accurate and relatively fast. I switched the OEM tripod ring for a Kirk replacement. The advantage of the Kirk Tripod ring is that the foot is grooved for an Arca Compatible clamp so I don't need an accessory clamp. I don't know why Canon and Sony can't groove their tripod ring feet for Arca Compatibility - after all, Tamron does. It certainly would not add much to the production costs of any lens. I tried to get a metal shop to groove the OEM foot but I was told that the OEM foot was cast aluminum and could not be grooved. If the foot was made of milled aluminum, I could have had it grooved for an Arca Compatible clamp... As far as performance on either the full frame Canon 6D2 or the APSC 7D2; this lens is an absolute dream! I LOVE IT and I am happy that I can use it with my Sony system...
I use the 100-400 MK1 on my 24MP EOS 80D and I absolutely love it. Unless you're working for National Geographic I can highly recommend even the first version.
Thanks for getting a review out of this amazing lens! My camera bag is full of lenses you had endorsed in previous reviews (Samyang 8mm Fisheye, Canon 10-18mm STM, Samyang 14mm f/2.8, Sigma 17-50mm OS & Canon 55-250mm STM), but this was the first (and by far most expensive) lens I'd pulled the trigger on without hearing your take on it beforehand. This review turned out to be a very satisfying validation for a lens that has proved to be a stellar performer and my workhorse for wildlife, birds and aviation photography. Keep up the awesome work!
Would love to see some of these canon lenses tested on your A6300 with the Sigma MC-11/Metabones. Especially the telephoto options. I think others would too.
This is a seriously stellar lens. I've been using it to shoot motorsports professionally for the past 2 years and it's a lens I can't live without. I rented the 400 f/2.8L IS USM and I honestly ended up enjoying the 100-400 MORE because of its size, weight, and ability to hand hold it. Not to mention, carrying around a lens that is valued at the price of a car makes it hard to enjoy when it was always in the back of my mind. Still, I really love this lens and can't recommend it enough...I think I've personally sold 3 of these to other photographers by talking it up and showing off its capabilities. LOL
As a motorsports shooter, could you give me an idea of how you think this lens would do filming Motocross? I've been between this, 70-300, and a 70-200 but leaning this way. Any thoughts would be great!
There is a comparison of the two lenses, basically for still photography where movement isn't important the Sigma is better optically, but as an allrounder the Canon is better and far far superior in AF and build quality. I should also say that whilst the Sigma is optically better it is fractional at most apertures and focal distances.
I have the Sigma 150-600 contemporary lens already, to get this lens I’d really be pulling out all the stops (I’ve only bought 4 cars that have been more expensive than this!) do you think I’d be better off investing more time in using my Sigma and forgetting this (for the moment)? I was shooting at a motorsport circuit and to be honest whilst the Sigma was great for shots down the pit lane and of the driver in the garage during an in-car briefing it was too much for on track action at 600mm and over the top size, weight & aperture for 200-400mm shooting.
Christopher, i know your not answering my comments for many years but please i only have one question. I am thinking to upgrade my Canon ef 400mm f5.6 L lens that you reviewed to a canon ef 100-400mm F4.5-5.6 L Mark ii lens. all i care about is the sharpness (to get more keepers shots the i guess will help also) which one of those two sharper? i would have not troubled you with this question if you had the same tests for both lenses. (tests changed from the door to charts) hopefully you will find a spare minute for a simple answer. either way, thank you for your work. i am watching your videos from the day you started this channel and it helped me very much.
Here's me, late to the dance as usual. My new (used) 100-400 just showed up today, and I immediately put it on my 1DX Mk III and took a walk at lunchtime and took a few shots. On first blush, it is quite a step up from the Sigma 100-400 that I traded in. Looking forward to trying it on my 7D Mk II as well.
You are suggesting that the 2x converter will work. I find that you can only use the 1.4 iii and 5D iii and still be able to auto focus And even then you are limited to center metering plus 4 surrounding points. Even the 1.4 iii combo on the 6D is a no go. ( your experience with the other newer cameras my vary.
I just got this lens & am trying (for the life of me) to figure out where to attach my strap while not breaking my camera or lens. Some say that the strap should be attached to the tripod mount of the lens to avoid snapping it off, but seems like most people attach to the camera. Am I thinking too hard about this? Lol
santa has already delivered one to me and a little helper also left a m6 with two 11-22 mm lenses so will be passing on my m3 to our grandson with one of the 11-22mm leneses.Last summer, I gave him a canon G12 which he manages very well for a five year old. i've nicknamed him 'little tog' Hope with a M3 and some extra tuition he will take even more to photography and we then can enjoy more of one anothers company. Happy Christmas Chris to you and yours
+Christopher Frost Photography Chris can I ask ... you show this lens on an APSC but canon website say you can use it on an APSC but autofocus won't work and neither will IS. So I am thinking about it for my 750d.... work/wont work?
Since buying this lens my 70-200 F2.8 rarely gets used. I'm seriously impressed. Fortunately I don't need to use it in low light. But I have a wide angle 2.8 which covers that in terms of my photography
Nice review, as I thought it would be! I used to have the 400mm prime, but sold it so I could get this (I was missing the flexibility of being able to zoom). It's the best decision I ever made and I'm so happy with it! I shoot mainly wildlife and birds in flight . . . . it's a great lens! By the way, it was fantastic to see some photos of Llangrannog and Mwnt. We go there every year for a holiday :)
It has a lot of weight I have both the canon L 70-200 and L 70-300 i feel comfortable with the 70-300 after that hand held I found difficult with the 100-400 another point the 100-400 does not work well with tele converters I used my canon 2x and it caused problems however the teleplus 1.4 seemed to work at some settings.
After seeing this i feel I could have purchased 80D instead of 6D M ii. Today only ni bought it :-(. Coz my purpose is bird photography with this lens. Kindly advise.
Hi I have the canon 70-300 is usm ii nano and was considering upgrading to this 100-400mm 2 would this be a worthy upgrade? I'll be using it on a canon 80d and a canon 5dm4.
Great review and sounds like my next lens. I previously owned Canon`s 70-300mm L lens, and used it on my 7D with superb results, and this one sounds like a carbon copy in all respects. Its a lot more expensive and much bigger, but the extra reach is most welcome for wildlife pics, and being able to use Canons extenders is a big plus.
At what aperture, with this lens on a 24 mp camera like 80d, 77d, or t7i would diffraction become too limiting? I think my 80d is diffraction limiting at f/5.9. I dont know how bad the diffraction is beyond f/6, because I have not found a chart. But the DLA of my 80d, has made me nervous about buying any L series lens slower than f/2.8. Thanks for any additional help. I have gotten a lot of help from your video and I thank you for doing them.
On a 24mp APS-C camera, diffraction on nearly all lenses can become very slightly noticeable at f/8, a bit more noticeable at f/11, and very much so at f/16
it's for 2000$ 😅 The least it can do is to be perfect 🤷🏻♂️, whenever the notification is Christopher Frost, I go straight to youtube, your the best in here ♥️
please can you help me chris? i bought this lens for my 77d and was testing ai servo focus on a white paper with a black square in the middle. up to 300mm focusing on white so blury and slowly moving to the square the focus picked up the black square instantly but anything over 300mm it did nothing? at 400mm focused on white blury,moved over black box and nothing,no focus? this happens with my 70-300 usm too. any idea why it would do this?
looking at taking this one or the 70-300 L with my APS-C camera to an air show. Which one would you recommend for taking pictures of jets flying around at a show?
You finally got this Chris! That's one tank! Had a chance of using this monster... but it's a bit too costly. And maybe you should have some tea beside your reviews LOL
This sounds like a great lens, except for the pronounced focus breathing I've heard about. Turns this lens into a real 350 mm-370 mm true focal range. Limits birding even with a APC camera. Question the teleconverters. Heard a lot of mixed reviews about that. Any insights I would welcome.
I chose the 300 f4 IS with a the 1.4x teleconverter over this. It was a hard choice but I couldn't justify the difference in price, especially since I just needed 400mm and not a zoom. You effectively get a 400m (~420mm) f5.6, with a bit lower IQ than the 100-400 II. If you want a zoom though, the 100-400 II is obviously a much better choice. And it has somewhat better IS.
Awesome review.. Can you try with canon 80d+1.4x iii .... plzzzzzzz.... Sharpness and autofocus... I just want to know how well autofocus works at f8 on canon 80d with canon 1.4x iii... thank you👍
hi chris.. have you tried astro-photography using lenses with similar focal length with this one? If yes, I would like to know your recommendations. Thanks! :)
Do you have any plans to Review Sony's new G master 100-400mm ? I'm actually thinking about renting it for the Great American eclipse this summer if I can find one.
Really considering this lens for motorsport, adding to a 70-200. The f-stop is a clear disadvantage, but then again there's a great variability with it being a zoom rather than a prime.
Christopher, my wife and I enjoy and appreciate your thoughtful, well done reviews. I know you've reviewed the Canon prime 400 f/5.6 quite some time ago. Wanted to ask you, or anyone else here who has tested or owned both this 100-400 and the prime, which lens was sharpest? I have heard that both are as sharp as one another. I am thinking of selling my Sigma 150-600 C and the Canon 400 prime if the 100-400 mkII is at least the same sharpness. The Sigma just doesn't get used much, even though I have got some fantastic images from it the few times used. I hit a speed bump in life and lost feeling in left hand (stroke) not long after having purchased that big ol' Sigma. I can handle that prime still just fine, but often wonder if I'd get more very sharp 'keepers' with the image stabilized zoom. Anyway, appreciate any replies in advance. And keep up the fantastic reviews Christopher. We respect your opinion/reviews very much. All the every best to you and your Bride there. She's a pretty young lady. You came up Chris.. hehe.. I am kidding with ya ;-) ..Take care all! Thanks! ~Mike in Montana
I can't tell you for sure but I'm pretty certain they will both be as sharp as each other - it's even possible that the 400mm f/5.6 prime lens might be a little softer
@@christopherfrost Thank you Christopher. I appreciate your reply very much. I think I just may sell the Sigma and Prime and go ahead with the difference in costs.. All the very best to you and yours. God Bless. ~Mike
Hey Christopher, great review, as always. I have one question: Did you find it to be sharper than the 400mm 5.6 L as it is a prime or do you prefer this one for image quality (not counting the zoom ability)? Thanks and greetings from Germany
Hi Christopher - great videos ! I currently have a Sigma 150-600mm C being used on a Canon 7D Mkii - I am considering losing some reach with the 150-600mm, and buying the Canon 100-400 instead. Although my trusty Sigma has served me well for my wildlife photography, I wanted to know if you thought there would be any merit in me spending the money in swapping my 150-600 for the 100-400?....is the price difference REALLY worth it, or are the improvements (if any) only marginal? Thanks again for the great reviews...many of my lens choices have come from viewing your channel :)
I've used both the 150-600C an currently own the 100-400L II. The 100-400 blows the Sigma away. Even cropping the Canon to 600, the results are significantly better, IMO. Also, the Canon is easier to use hand held. This is just my own personal opinion from using both lenses, but I do not regret one bit buying the 100-400L II. It's an amazing lens.
sanjay suman I own both lenses, and they’re equally great. I personally like the 100-400 more because it offers greater range. If you already own the 70-200 an extender would be a cost effective way of mimicking the 100-400, but you will likely lose some sharpness/quality. Depends on how much you’re willing to spend, really. If you own neither lens, the 100-400 may be a better investment.
1:27 _Shooting birds?_ An interesting idea: Call a series of lenses that are made for bird phozography "rifle lenses". You know... you use them for shooting birds...
Really good review, i see your video review alot.. can you review samyang 10mm f2.8 lens? its looks like pretty good wide lens for apsc camera without barrel distortion...
I would like the expensive Canon 200 L lens but i cant afford paying $5,000. I would like to use this lens for Wedding portraits. What is your opinion ?
Hello Chris I noticed your review was simular to my review I did 2 years ago when I got this lens. The problem I noticed was auto focus was very slow and as seen in your video it confirms this. Many people say the auto focus is very fast but looking at your test at 400mm auto focus is very slow. When I tested this lens I used a 7D and 600D and focus was slow since my test I watched a video of the 1DX on this lens and it appeared the focus was 3 times faster it does seem to me canon is making a big mistake here. On the newer cameras the focus is many times faster than on older cameras. Were you able to test the lens on the 7DII and or maybe compare focus speed with an older camera such as the original 7D or 60D. I believe the m3 you used to do your aps-c test uses an adapter and the m3 has a smaller battery so your test is floored. Did you try the 70D on this lens? I have gained alot of criticism on my review of the 100-400mm L II lens but my focus tests were very slow as soon as I tested the sigma 150-600 I found focus speed many times faster than the canon L lens. Please let m know what you found out I am thinking about getting the lens again and testing it with a 80D to find out if the old vs new camera is the issue here on focus speed.
![Canon 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS ['Nano'] USM II lens review with samples (Full-frame and APS-C)](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/Iws0RqitJUc/mqdefault.jpg)
Another great review Christopher. I really appreciate your straightforward, honest reviews and consistent methodology.
This channel is one of the most reliable I've encountered. So thanks very good.
You should call your channel "The Most British Photography reviews ever"
David Thorpe might disagree xD
Kai's Digitalrev era gained 1.6 million subscribers and his own channel now has 300 thousand.
He's talking about "Britishness", not amount of subs
Random Ibis that's right. Was the formulation incorrect?
Are you American or Canadian? That's a very American/Canadian thing to say.
The content on this channel is amazing, your videos are excellent. Thank you very much, Christopher!!
Excellent review. Very comprehensive.
I got this for an African safari. Killer lens
i miss the brick house you use to use for sharpness review
That was a loooong time ago now, hehe
I like the brick house test too, did you move on?
Yes, I moved far away from the brick house.
Oh no. I thought the landlady only stopped you from taking pictures of her/his house.
No way! The current image quality rubric is much better. The black and white targets do a better job of showing sharpness and CA, the collage of images give a much better idea of the color saturation and contrast. Compare the Canon 70-300 L and non-L lens reviews, and you'll see what I mean. The L lens is cornucopia of resolution and poppy color compared to the other lens. It wouldn't be so obvious with the drab brick wall.
Thank you so much Christopher! Seriously love your reviews and your honesty!
I struggled with this lens initially and eventually discovered that the only fault was ME. I have made my peace with this lens and Yes, Indeed this is a great lens.Work within it's parameters and you won't lose. I am coming from Nikon FE2 prime lens and fixed ISO perspective. I have had to modify my approach with this lens but I must say when you have gripped it then this lens delivers absolutely astounding results. On full frame I had no problems but on crop sensor I was nonplussed. This was me failing and not the lens. This lens is first rate. Love it.
Thanks Chris, excellent review. Unfortunately I bought the first version just six weeks before Canon announced this one. It was acceptable but no more really. I resisted getting the new one for a couple of years, but in the end went for it. Glad I did, the IQ, Image stabilization and AF speed are far better. It's a very fine lens.
Great review. I use this lens on my 1DX MKII and absolutely love it......much easier to carry when on foot than several prime lenses.
Hello Christopher!
Firstly, thank you for your reviews. It is due to them I am now a happy owner of Canon M6 II, as well as EF-M 32mm STM, EF-S 55-250 IS STM as well as EF-S 17-55mm IS USM.
I think that at some point I will want to take a look for a long range zoom lens (for birding/wildlife). However, I am not sure at which one I am going to aim. There is this one (Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 IS USM 'L' 'ii' ), as well as Sigma 150-600mm Contemporary.
As a Canon M6 II owner, I know that the sensor is very demanding. So as you own/owned Canon M6 II as well as the Sigmal lens - what can you say on the topic?
Best reviewer in youtube
I shoot with both Canon full and crop frame and Sony APSC cameras. I did not want to purchase a second 100-400mm lens for the Sony system. IMO, neither the Sigma MC-11 nor the Metabones IV adapters worked up to my standards in adapting long focal length Canon lenses to Sony E-mount cameras. However the Viltrox Mark-2, Canon to E-mount focal reducer seems to work just fine with my Sony A6400. Even the IS works efficiently. I can hand hold the camera/lens at 400mm using 1/40 second and get sharp imagery. Focusing is accurate and relatively fast.
I switched the OEM tripod ring for a Kirk replacement. The advantage of the Kirk Tripod ring is that the foot is grooved for an Arca Compatible clamp so I don't need an accessory clamp. I don't know why Canon and Sony can't groove their tripod ring feet for Arca Compatibility - after all, Tamron does. It certainly would not add much to the production costs of any lens. I tried to get a metal shop to groove the OEM foot but I was told that the OEM foot was cast aluminum and could not be grooved. If the foot was made of milled aluminum, I could have had it grooved for an Arca Compatible clamp...
As far as performance on either the full frame Canon 6D2 or the APSC 7D2; this lens is an absolute dream! I LOVE IT and I am happy that I can use it with my Sony system...
I use the 100-400 MK1 on my 24MP EOS 80D and I absolutely love it. Unless you're working for National Geographic I can highly recommend even the first version.
MacPhantom i agree
Works with 70D also?
@@naineshpoojary6559 yes
Thanks for getting a review out of this amazing lens! My camera bag is full of lenses you had endorsed in previous reviews (Samyang 8mm Fisheye, Canon 10-18mm STM, Samyang 14mm f/2.8, Sigma 17-50mm OS & Canon 55-250mm STM), but this was the first (and by far most expensive) lens I'd pulled the trigger on without hearing your take on it beforehand. This review turned out to be a very satisfying validation for a lens that has proved to be a stellar performer and my workhorse for wildlife, birds and aviation photography. Keep up the awesome work!
CHRISSSSSSSSS YOUR REVIEWS ARE EXCELLENT
Can you do a comparison between this and the rf 100-500? Am not sure if it’s really worth switching when going from the 7D2 to the R7
Hey Chris, how do you think this would do on an R5 or even a 90D 32MP
Let me answer that. It will. I use it on eos R, 30 mp, and on eos 7d mk ii with no issues. Great lens on all canon cameras.
Would love to see some of these canon lenses tested on your A6300 with the Sigma MC-11/Metabones. Especially the telephoto options. I think others would too.
This is a seriously stellar lens. I've been using it to shoot motorsports professionally for the past 2 years and it's a lens I can't live without. I rented the 400 f/2.8L IS USM and I honestly ended up enjoying the 100-400 MORE because of its size, weight, and ability to hand hold it. Not to mention, carrying around a lens that is valued at the price of a car makes it hard to enjoy when it was always in the back of my mind. Still, I really love this lens and can't recommend it enough...I think I've personally sold 3 of these to other photographers by talking it up and showing off its capabilities. LOL
Kevin DiOssi I agree canons flourite glass, the stabilization is fantastic, the close focusing is a bonus and i could go on and on.
As a motorsports shooter, could you give me an idea of how you think this lens would do filming Motocross? I've been between this, 70-300, and a 70-200 but leaning this way. Any thoughts would be great!
Can't wait for a comparo with the new Sigma 100-400. :)
+1
Me too!
There is a comparison of the two lenses, basically for still photography where movement isn't important the Sigma is better optically, but as an allrounder the Canon is better and far far superior in AF and build quality. I should also say that whilst the Sigma is optically better it is fractional at most apertures and focal distances.
Cvgb bgughhttyyyhh
Joel Spencer with a full frame camera you are right but once you go apsc the canon beats out the sigma
I have the Sigma 150-600 contemporary lens already, to get this lens I’d really be pulling out all the stops (I’ve only bought 4 cars that have been more expensive than this!) do you think I’d be better off investing more time in using my Sigma and forgetting this (for the moment)? I was shooting at a motorsport circuit and to be honest whilst the Sigma was great for shots down the pit lane and of the driver in the garage during an in-car briefing it was too much for on track action at 600mm and over the top size, weight & aperture for 200-400mm shooting.
Excellent work, Christopher. Thanks for this great review! :)
Christopher, i know your not answering my comments for many years but please i only have one question.
I am thinking to upgrade my Canon ef 400mm f5.6 L lens that you reviewed to a canon ef 100-400mm F4.5-5.6 L Mark ii lens.
all i care about is the sharpness (to get more keepers shots the i guess will help also) which one of those two sharper?
i would have not troubled you with this question if you had the same tests for both lenses. (tests changed from the door to charts)
hopefully you will find a spare minute for a simple answer.
either way, thank you for your work. i am watching your videos from the day you started this channel and it helped me very much.
Here's me, late to the dance as usual. My new (used) 100-400 just showed up today, and I immediately put it on my 1DX Mk III and took a walk at lunchtime and took a few shots. On first blush, it is quite a step up from the Sigma 100-400 that I traded in. Looking forward to trying it on my 7D Mk II as well.
Christopher thanks for the review of the 100-400mm are you going to do a review on the new Canon 70-300 ii I think that it is
more in my price range.
Thanks for your review, I bought one recently because of this :)
Good review. I have been thinking of getting this lens. It has helped me a lot. Thanks Christopher.
Hi can i ask the picture quality of this lens is better than the canon 70-300 L
They're basically as great as each other
Looks like an interesting lens to use on 5dsr with its crop modes.
Do you recommend the new 100-500 RF lens over this? Or save 400 by going with this lens?
The new 100-500 should be even better but I haven't tested it yet
You are suggesting that the 2x converter will work. I find that you can only use the 1.4 iii and 5D iii and still be able to auto focus And even then you are limited to center metering plus 4 surrounding points. Even the 1.4 iii combo on the 6D is a no go. ( your experience with the other newer cameras my vary.
I just got this lens & am trying (for the life of me) to figure out where to attach my strap while not breaking my camera or lens. Some say that the strap should be attached to the tripod mount of the lens to avoid snapping it off, but seems like most people attach to the camera. Am I thinking too hard about this? Lol
It's an excellent piece of kit. Only thing I can complain about is that dust seems to get in begind the front element.
how does the image stabilization work on rf mounts that does not have ibis?
santa has already delivered one to me and a little helper also left a m6 with two 11-22 mm lenses so will be passing on my m3 to our grandson with one of the 11-22mm leneses.Last summer, I gave him a canon G12 which he manages very well for a five year old. i've nicknamed him 'little tog' Hope with a M3 and some extra tuition he will take even more to photography and we then can enjoy more of one anothers company. Happy Christmas Chris to you and yours
+Christopher Frost Photography Chris can I ask ... you show this lens on an APSC but canon website say you can use it on an APSC but autofocus won't work and neither will IS. So I am thinking about it for my 750d.... work/wont work?
It should work normally.
I've used this lens on multiple APS-C cameras (T3i, 77D and 80D) and it works perfectly.
Thanks , do you know if the EF lens hood fits the RF
Excellent review Christopher. Thank you.
Considering this lens at the moment, great review Chris, thank you :)
Can you please do a review and compare 70-200 f/2.8Liii with 2x tele converter vs canon 100-400 ver2 L lens?
Since buying this lens my 70-200 F2.8 rarely gets used. I'm seriously impressed. Fortunately I don't need to use it in low light. But I have a wide angle 2.8 which covers that in terms of my photography
Truly the best lens ever made!
Nice review, as I thought it would be! I used to have the 400mm prime, but sold it so I could get this (I was missing the flexibility of being able to zoom). It's the best decision I ever made and I'm so happy with it! I shoot mainly wildlife and birds in flight . . . . it's a great lens! By the way, it was fantastic to see some photos of Llangrannog and Mwnt. We go there every year for a holiday :)
It's lovely to be living here :-)
I own Canon and Sony system. How new sony 100-400 GM compared to canon with and without 1.4x?
It has a lot of weight I have both the canon L 70-200 and L 70-300 i feel comfortable with the 70-300 after that hand held I found difficult with the 100-400 another point the 100-400 does not work well with tele converters I used my canon 2x and it caused problems however the teleplus 1.4 seemed to work at some settings.
After seeing this i feel I could have purchased 80D instead of 6D M ii. Today only ni bought it :-(. Coz my purpose is bird photography with this lens. Kindly advise.
Don't know what advice to give you exactly! Your 6D will be a lovely camera :-)
Hi I have the canon 70-300 is usm ii nano and was considering upgrading to this 100-400mm 2 would this be a worthy upgrade? I'll be using it on a canon 80d and a canon 5dm4.
Will this lens work on Canon 700D?
Yes
Great review and sounds like my next lens. I previously owned Canon`s 70-300mm L lens, and used it on my 7D with superb results, and this one sounds like a carbon copy in all respects. Its a lot more expensive and much bigger, but the extra reach is most welcome for wildlife pics, and being able to use Canons extenders is a big plus.
At what aperture, with this lens on a 24 mp camera like 80d, 77d, or t7i would diffraction become too limiting? I think my 80d is diffraction limiting at f/5.9. I dont know how bad the diffraction is beyond f/6, because I have not found a chart. But the DLA of my 80d, has made me nervous about buying any L series lens slower than f/2.8. Thanks for any additional help. I have gotten a lot of help from your video and I thank you for doing them.
On a 24mp APS-C camera, diffraction on nearly all lenses can become very slightly noticeable at f/8, a bit more noticeable at f/11, and very much so at f/16
@@christopherfrost thanx. With post processing, can't the slight defraction be corrected?
Does the autofocus on a lens like this still work well on a crop sensor?
May I suggest to test also on Sony Fe 100-400 GM ?
it's for 2000$ 😅 The least it can do is to be perfect 🤷🏻♂️, whenever the notification is Christopher Frost, I go straight to youtube, your the best in here ♥️
Why doesn't this video show up in your Canon lens playlist...?
Well, that didn't take long! :)
I think it will be my next purchase and I will use it only for surfing photography. Am I thinking well?
It would probably be very good for that
Is it worth it to go from a 70-300L to this?
please can you help me chris? i bought this lens for my 77d and was testing ai servo focus on a white paper with a black square in the middle. up to 300mm focusing on white so blury and slowly moving to the square the focus picked up the black square instantly but anything over 300mm it did nothing? at 400mm focused on white blury,moved over black box and nothing,no focus? this happens with my 70-300 usm too. any idea why it would do this?
I have no idea. Perhaps you're trying to focus too closely to your subject - it's not a macro lens
target was 30ft away?
Sorry, I don't know
It's worth remembering that cameras can't really autofocus on a blank colour / space if there's nothing for it to actually lock on to.
it was locking onto the black grid perfect upto 300mm then wouldn't between 300-400. no worries, thx for reply ;-)
Can we use this lens in canon 1500d
thanks for the great review, how does this compares against sigma/tamron 150-600mm in sharpness, focus and useability if budget is no issue?
I've only tried the older Tamron 150-600
They are terrible
what is this stabilizer 1,2,3 switch?
not that i could afford it anyways but... :D
looking at taking this one or the 70-300 L with my APS-C camera to an air show. Which one would you recommend for taking pictures of jets flying around at a show?
Definitely the 100-400
thank you sir!!!
You finally got this Chris! That's one tank! Had a chance of using this monster... but it's a bit too costly.
And maybe you should have some tea beside your reviews LOL
Just picked one up, very pleased with it.
This sounds like a great lens, except for the pronounced focus breathing I've heard about. Turns this lens into a real 350 mm-370 mm true focal range. Limits birding even with a APC camera. Question the teleconverters. Heard a lot of mixed reviews about that. Any insights I would welcome.
Robert Bohnaker I heard it's around 383mm on the long end but it's so close focusing I've never run into any issues with it on my 6D
Please review the new Sigma Contemporary 100-400 lens, if possible.
Please do a review of the SIGMA 150-600 mm contemporary.
He did
can you please review new sigma 100-400mm C lens and tamron 90mm f2.8 Macro VC Lens.
I chose the 300 f4 IS with a the 1.4x teleconverter over this. It was a hard choice but I couldn't justify the difference in price, especially since I just needed 400mm and not a zoom. You effectively get a 400m (~420mm) f5.6, with a bit lower IQ than the 100-400 II.
If you want a zoom though, the 100-400 II is obviously a much better choice. And it has somewhat better IS.
This Lens on the M6 ii, what you think about?
Awesome review..
Can you try with canon 80d+1.4x iii .... plzzzzzzz....
Sharpness and autofocus... I just want to know how well autofocus works at f8 on canon 80d with canon 1.4x iii... thank you👍
I don't have the 1.4x extender I'm afraid
Can this lens be attached on my canon t7i APSC- sensor without any mount?
It will mount directly to your camera.
As usual, a very good review!
hi chris.. have you tried astro-photography using lenses with similar focal length with this one? If yes, I would like to know your recommendations. Thanks! :)
Haven't tried that, really!
You said you liked the push pull zoom in the 1 version. I notice you like every lens you research.
I like and dislike all kinds of things about all kinds of different lenses.
Can I use this lens on Cannon 1500D
Do you have any plans to Review Sony's new G master 100-400mm ? I'm actually thinking about renting it for the Great American eclipse this summer if I can find one.
lazerman121 I love how people hate on Sony for releasing a 100-400 but canon has the same lens and it's "amazing". Lol
No plans at the moment, although I will be reviewing a few more Sony lenses as time goes on
Really considering this lens for motorsport, adding to a 70-200.
The f-stop is a clear disadvantage, but then again there's a great variability with it being a zoom rather than a prime.
I have this lens now and i am happy
When I ever get the money I will buy this one for sure.
Christopher, my wife and I enjoy and appreciate your thoughtful, well done reviews. I know you've reviewed the Canon prime 400 f/5.6 quite some time ago. Wanted to ask you, or anyone else here who has tested or owned both this 100-400 and the prime, which lens was sharpest? I have heard that both are as sharp as one another. I am thinking of selling my Sigma 150-600 C and the Canon 400 prime if the 100-400 mkII is at least the same sharpness. The Sigma just doesn't get used much, even though I have got some fantastic images from it the few times used. I hit a speed bump in life and lost feeling in left hand (stroke) not long after having purchased that big ol' Sigma. I can handle that prime still just fine, but often wonder if I'd get more very sharp 'keepers' with the image stabilized zoom. Anyway, appreciate any replies in advance. And keep up the fantastic reviews Christopher. We respect your opinion/reviews very much. All the every best to you and your Bride there. She's a pretty young lady. You came up Chris.. hehe.. I am kidding with ya ;-) ..Take care all! Thanks! ~Mike in Montana
I can't tell you for sure but I'm pretty certain they will both be as sharp as each other - it's even possible that the 400mm f/5.6 prime lens might be a little softer
@@christopherfrost Thank you Christopher. I appreciate your reply very much. I think I just may sell the Sigma and Prime and go ahead with the difference in costs.. All the very best to you and yours. God Bless. ~Mike
Got it and LOVE it!!! As sharp with more keepers. Image stabilization is great!
Hey Christopher, great review, as always. I have one question: Did you find it to be sharper than the 400mm 5.6 L as it is a prime or do you prefer this one for image quality (not counting the zoom ability)? Thanks and greetings from Germany
Hmm. I think it's probably just as sharp as the 400mm prime. It is amazingly sharp
Love your channel - keep up the great work. Wondering why the same lens would be sharper on the full frame when compared to the crop body?
A 24mp crop body is higher resolution so its more demanding
Where is the brick building Chris?
A long way away from where I live now
Hi Christopher - great videos !
I currently have a Sigma 150-600mm C being used on a Canon 7D Mkii - I am considering losing some reach with the 150-600mm, and buying the Canon 100-400 instead.
Although my trusty Sigma has served me well for my wildlife photography, I wanted to know if you thought there would be any merit in me spending the money in swapping my 150-600 for the 100-400?....is the price difference REALLY worth it, or are the improvements (if any) only marginal?
Thanks again for the great reviews...many of my lens choices have come from viewing your channel :)
I would personally keep the 150-600 just for the extra reach
I've used both the 150-600C an currently own the 100-400L II. The 100-400 blows the Sigma away. Even cropping the Canon to 600, the results are significantly better, IMO. Also, the Canon is easier to use hand held. This is just my own personal opinion from using both lenses, but I do not regret one bit buying the 100-400L II. It's an amazing lens.
Hi chris another great review, do you have any intentions of doing a review for the tamron 70-200 G2 lens? thanks again!
Sure, when I finally get some spare time
Great review of unrivaled lens!
Next one Canon EF-S 35mm f/2.8 Macro IS STM pls.
Hi Chris, nice review. Could you please review efm lens 55-200 mm?
I will do, in a few months' time
Is it parfocal?
Should i buy 70-200 is ii with 2x or 100-400 is ii
sanjay suman I own both lenses, and they’re equally great. I personally like the 100-400 more because it offers greater range. If you already own the 70-200 an extender would be a cost effective way of mimicking the 100-400, but you will likely lose some sharpness/quality. Depends on how much you’re willing to spend, really. If you own neither lens, the 100-400 may be a better investment.
1:27 _Shooting birds?_
An interesting idea: Call a series of lenses that are made for bird phozography "rifle lenses". You know... you use them for shooting birds...
Really good review, i see your video review alot.. can you review samyang 10mm f2.8 lens? its looks like pretty good wide lens for apsc camera without barrel distortion...
What focus point did you use for the focus test? Thanks.
Middle
@@christopherfrost thanks.
Have you ever tested the canon 28-300mm L lens?
Nope. I'd love to one day
please review 28-300...
I was thinking about buying a 5d mk iv but after seeing this I may use the money for the lens instead.
I would like the expensive Canon 200 L lens but i cant afford paying $5,000. I would like to use this lens for Wedding portraits. What is your opinion ?
For portrait photography you'll really want somthing with a much wider maximum aperture
Did you happen to try this with the 1.4x?
No
Hello Chris I noticed your review was simular to my review I did 2 years ago when I got this lens. The problem I noticed was auto focus was very slow and as seen in your video it confirms this. Many people say the auto focus is very fast but looking at your test at 400mm auto focus is very slow.
When I tested this lens I used a 7D and 600D and focus was slow since my test I watched a video of the 1DX on this lens and it appeared the focus was 3 times faster it does seem to me canon is making a big mistake here. On the newer cameras the focus is many times faster than on older cameras. Were you able to test the lens on the 7DII and or maybe compare focus speed with an older camera such as the original 7D or 60D. I believe the m3 you used to do your aps-c test uses an adapter and the m3 has a smaller battery so your test is floored. Did you try the 70D on this lens? I have gained alot of criticism on my review of the 100-400mm L II lens but my focus tests were very slow as soon as I tested the sigma 150-600 I found focus speed many times faster than the canon L lens.
Please let m know what you found out I am thinking about getting the lens again and testing it with a 80D to find out if the old vs new camera is the issue here on focus speed.
It worked nice and fast on my 6D :-)