Best place to buy Canon 100-400mm L ?

[alistair1234]

Amazon sell it for £1,175 and I get 6.75% discount which makes it roughly £1,100 which I was happy to pay.

Did a quick google and found ProCameraShop selling it for £1,009.

Are they a reputable company? As someone who is fairly new to it, this will be my most expensive lens and i don't really know the best places to buy from.

Will be replacing a 70-300mm IS USM.

Thanks

[bobs4c]

I replaced my Canon 70-300 with a 100-400L, no regrets. Couldn't afford new, so I bought a used one from MPB Photographic, which has been faultless. They have a few.

Bob

[r1flyguy1]

You only looking to buy new?

TP forum always have a couple of these in the for sale section, being sold in relatively new condition and between £700-£850

[JSS 911]

bobs4c said:

I replaced my Canon 70-300 with a 100-400L, no regrets. Couldn't afford new, so I bought a used one from MPB Photographic, which has been faultless. They have a few.

Bob

+1 for MPB I always use them

[tenohfive]

Pretty sure Procamerashop do grey imports, so depends on whether or not that put's you off.

[alistair1234]

I'd heard that with L series lenses it didn't matter where/how they were bought, the warranty was worldwide?

I'm happy to buy second hand, but if second hand is £900 and I can get for £1,000 I'm more than happy to pay the but extra.

Would rather steer clear from eBay at this price point.

[99hjhm]

Bought mine from Talk Photography, faultless. Very honest bunch on there.

[markmullen]

Canon lens warranties are worldwide, it is only the camera body warranties which are country specific.

[350Wedge]

I bought my current one from One Stop Digital, they are brilliant, always had great service from them.

They are HK sellers but I've ordered stuff and had it within three days from them!

[S47]

Ebay always have plenty for sale, I sold 2 on there, which I'd bought new from UK Canon dealers. I guess i was unfortunate - I had 2 very poor Canon 100-400's never took 1 useable shot with either lens
I replaced these with 70-300'IS' 'L' USM which is an awesome lens, or as other's would say Chalk & Cheese.
It's about time Canon replaced the existing 100-400 with a new version the 100-400 does NOT deserve an 'L' monika

[alistair1234]

I'm after the extra reach of 400mm.

Sigma 150-500 any good?

If they replace the 100-400, I've heard there will be one this year, it will be more like £2k won't it?

[MonkeyHanger]

Another vote for MPB. £900 will get you one that looks as good as new (probably no box) with a 6 month warranty.

[tim-b]

S47 said:

Ebay always have plenty for sale, I sold 2 on there, which I'd bought new from UK Canon dealers. I guess i was unfortunate - I had 2 very poor Canon 100-400's never took 1 useable shot with either lens
I replaced these with 70-300'IS' 'L' USM which is an awesome lens, or as other's would say Chalk & Cheese.
It's about time Canon replaced the existing 100-400 with a new version the 100-400 does NOT deserve an 'L' monika

Oh dear, why was that? Images soft or focus needed tuning? I got one 2nd hand last year and love it, super-sharp, IS works great in both modes and AF is good. Only thing is it's a bit slow (f5.6 @400mm) but I couldn't expect more for the price.

I don't have the full-res of this here at work, so you'll have to trust me that at 100% you can see each star on the flag and easily read 'Made in England' on the tail light...! (400mm, f5.6, 1/640s @ ISO 100)


LMC-034 by motion_captured, on Flickr

[S47]

TmB
Yep both were u/s - not sharp at all, I returned both to canon uk but both lenses came back stating they were within acceptable limits
Basically I don't think canon uk could be arsed to adjust or re-calibrate them. Possibly they don't have skilled enough techs to do this skilled job?
The problem was definitely with the lenses coz i tried everything to get a sharp image from them, The 70-300 'L' on the otherhand is always sharp, just like 'L' lenses ought to be.
If you have a sharp 100-400 then I suggest that you're a lucky man

Edited by S47 on Monday 19th August 14:56

[covboy]

S47 said:

TmB
Yep both were u/s - not sharp at all, I returned both to canon uk but both lenses came back stating they were within acceptable limits
Basically I don't think canon uk could be arsed to adjust or re-calibrate them. Possibly they don't have skilled enough techs to do this skilled job?
The problem was definitely with the lenses coz i tried everything to get a sharp image from them, The 70-300 'L' on the otherhand is always sharp, just like 'L' lenses ought to be.
If you have a sharp 100-400 then I suggest that you're a lucky man

Edited by S47 on Monday 19th August 14:56

I suppose I must be a lucky man then with the one I bought off Amazon

[tim-b]

S47 said:

TmB
Yep both were u/s - not sharp at all, I returned both to canon uk but both lenses came back stating they were within acceptable limits
Basically I don't think canon uk could be arsed to adjust or re-calibrate them. Possibly they don't have skilled enough techs to do this skilled job?
The problem was definitely with the lenses coz i tried everything to get a sharp image from them, The 70-300 'L' on the otherhand is always sharp, just like 'L' lenses ought to be.
If you have a sharp 100-400 then I suggest that you're a lucky man

Sounds very unlucky to have 2 bad copies...

tim-b said:

I don't have the full-res of this here at work, so you'll have to trust me that at 100% you can see each star on the flag and easily read 'Made in England' on the tail light...! (400mm, f5.6, 1/640s @ ISO 100)

BTW just in case anyone thought I was exaggerating in the statement above, here are the areas at 100%....

[alistair1234]

So what are the oppinions on the Sigma 150-500?

[The Moose]

I'm surprised you didn't get on with the 100-400. My favourite lens. And get fantastic shots from it all the way from 100 to 400mm!