Finally - got one!

[rene7]

Really chuff'd - finally own a 100-400 worthy of the Canon 'L' moniker. Was burnt many years ago when buying the Mk1 100-400 'L' - which was the worst Canon lens ever IMO -despite Canon replacing that lens with a new one, their replacement was just as bad if not worse, and I sold it on fleabay for a large loss - ouch!
Since then have been wary when buying Canon Zoom's - the 2 other Canon's in the pic are great lenses so I knew Canon were capable of making a decent zoom - I was probably unlucky with the Mk1 100-400 - I know several good snappers who swear by them, but I've been unconvinced.
By chance I happened to walk pass a Photo shop which had the 'USED'!! 100-400 I bought for sale in the window, after a quick ' instore' trial I bought it - and now a week later after doing my best to fail it, am thrilled to finally have a 100-400 worthy of the Canon 'L' moniker
Anyone else had similar issues with a particular lens?
>

[havoc]

Just to clarify:-
- You didn't like the 100-400L Mk1. Get that...i've got one I now need to get rid of as I've just traded-up myself. It's a decent lens, but it's not a great L-series piece of kit (and I get the impression quality on them varied)
- You replaced that with...what? A late-build Mk1, or a Mk2? That you still didn't like?
- ...and you've now got a 100-400L Mk2?
(or have I misunderstood?)

For me it was the 24-105L It never felt like L-glass in terms of performance, more that they'd made it because they needed to be in that part of the market. I replaced it with a Tamron 24-70 f/2.8 which is sharper and lighter, if more fragile.

[YorkshireStu]

I agree re the original Mk1 EF 100-400 L. Sucked. Also the EF 24-105L, always a lacklustre kit lens.

Mk2's of both exceptional, however.

One of my fav lenses of all time was a very modest EF 75-300 which just happened to be a wonderful copy.

I've now only got RF lenses, all positively lovely. RF 100-500 L is as good technically as the EF 100-400 L but shorter, lighter, greater reach. RF 24-105L is very nice. Fav is my RF 70-200 2.8 L.

I have other RF lenses, mostly L's and some not used yet since I tend to favour the above.

[rene7]

havoc
had 2 tries with mk1 100-400 both new lenses - after both mk1's failed miserably, I eventually bought the 35 -350 'L' which was NOS - it's a great lens IMO though I know plenty of other's would disagree it also takes a 1.4 convertor [like the Mk2 100-400] which is very useful
I've never owned a 24-105 'l' - only short lens I use is 17--40 'L' which fits well with 35-350 - the 70-300 'L' IS is my 'Boat' lens again a great lens sadly that won't take a 1.4x convertor. Only other lens i own are the 4 Canon super tele prime's which are all fantastic IMO
Rene

[C n C]

In terms of Canon "L" zooms, I've had 2 copies of the EF 24-105 f4L mk1, and (unlike many it would seem) I've been generally very happy with both. The first did develop an issue with the manual focus override after many years, which led me to pick up a 2nd used copy, which has been great. I'm aware it is not renowned as the sharpest of Canon's lenses, but both copies I've had have been good in this respect, and the extra length of the 105mm as opposed to the 24-70 f2.8L has been useful on many occasions.

I'm sticking with EF lenses for the foreseeable future, as I still use a 5Dmk3, and use my R5 with the RF-EF converter.

I also bought a used EF 70-200 f2.8L IS years ago, and that, too has been brilliant.

Most recent (this year) was a new EF 11-24 f4L, and that (so far) has been exceptional, so maybe I've been lucky, but I don't have any issues with Canon L zooms in my personal experience.


I do recall a friend did have a 100-400 F4L mk1, and wasn't that impressed with it. If I recall correctly, the push/pull zoom could have a tendency to suck dust into the internals.

[havoc]

C n C said:

I'm sticking with EF lenses for the foreseeable future, as I still use a 5Dmk3, and use my R5 with the RF-EF converter.

I do recall a friend did have a 100-400 F4L mk1, and wasn't that impressed with it. If I recall correctly, the push/pull zoom could have a tendency to suck dust into the internals.

First point - same bodies as me. Keep toying with a 5D Mk4 for the quicker AF, and that'd be a lot more affordable than e.g. an R6.

Second point - agreed, mine is a mess inside. I'm going to flog it (probably eBay), but be honest that it needs a proper clean...can't sell it in good conscience otherwise.