It will depend on the IQ. If it is significantly better that the current 300L f4.0, than I would expect price over $2600

dgenx24 wrote:
Where's 400 5.6 IS?

300 f/4L IS II + 1.4x TC III would fit that bill nicely.

skibum5 wrote:
It will be $2800 based upon 300 2.8 IS and Mark II and 300 f/4 IS.
enjoy



It should be about 1/3 the price so around $2300 IMO.

dgenx24 wrote:
Where's 400 5.6 IS?


Why does every lense need IS? Why can we learn to shoot properly without it?

far148 wrote:
dgenx24 wrote:
Where's 400 5.6 IS?


Why does every lense need IS? Why can we learn to shoot properly without it?




400mm and f/5.6 is pretty rough unless all you shoot is subjects under direct noon sunlight so IS can kinda help

Pixel Perfect wrote:
skibum5 wrote:
It will be $2800 based upon 300 2.8 IS and Mark II and 300 f/4 IS.
enjoy



It should be about 1/3 the price so around $2300 IMO.

$2500

I agree about a 400 instead. Geesh, they just released the 70-300, and a wonderful revised 300 f2.8, I can only conclude they are reserving a 400 length as a luxury cost lens, forcing people to pay up. Why not a revised 100-400 or a 400 5.6 with IS? They would sell so mamy more!

A teleconverter in the lens would make this lens hot! But no, i love my 300f4 and wont part with it either. Does canon really think this will be a big seller?

Maybe if I had a robot body with carbon fiber kegs I could learn to be stable, but only being human, I need IS or a Hitzo.

EBH

Why does every lense need IS? Why can we learn to shoot properly without it?

I have a 70-200 with 4 stops of IS. I can set it at 200mm, and get a sharp picture at 1/12 sec. I would be more than eager to watch you hand hold a 300mm non IS lens, and demonstrate to me how sharp you can hold it at 1/18 second!

far148 wrote:
dgenx24 wrote:
Where's 400 5.6 IS?


Why does every lense need IS? Why can we learn to shoot properly without it?



not every lens need IS.
If we had arms that transforms into robot armpods in deep in the woods at late afternoon after doing lots of BIF shots during the day.
This will be big hit for for nature photogs.

It sounds like you guys need to learn how to shoot without crutches.



Don't stop shooting,
Steven

Its difficult to shoot with crutches because you cannot hold the camera as easily. I prefer a walking stick depending on how bad my leg/foot is. If your particular application does not benefit from VR it is smoke to turn off. You can't turn it on if it does not exist.

Ebh

EB-1 wrote: If your particular application does not benefit from VR it is smoke to turn off.

Canon does not have VR. That's a Nikon thingy.

If we read your statement as "IS" instead of "VR", then it doesn't make sense and is wrong:

When shooting on a tripod you must turn IS off. Otherwise there is likely to be spurious IS movement that can ruin a photo.

far148 wrote: Why does every lense need IS? Why can we learn to shoot properly without it?

1. Because not everybody makes the mistake of thinking that everybody else shoots the same subject matter the same way as they do.

2. Because not everybody shoots in sunlight or cloudy bright conditions.

3. Because not everybody shoots by panning simple targets.

4. Because not everybody shoots at f/4 or f/5.6. Sometimes they use f/16 or f/22.

5. Because not everybody is as fabulously skilled as you. Or as perfectly healthy as you.

And its not every lens (note spelling).

far148 wrote: It sounds like you guys need to learn how to shoot without crutches.

It sounds like you need to get out of your comfort zone and attempt some other subject matter and in other conditions requiring the tools that many skilled photographers use. Many experienced photographers who know "how to shoot without crutches" use IS when appropriate for great results not obtainable any other way.

Monito wrote:
far148 wrote: Why does every lense need IS? Why can we learn to shoot properly without it?

1. Because not everybody makes the mistake of thinking that everybody else shoots the same subject matter the same way as they do.

2. Because not everybody shoots in sunlight or cloudy bright conditions.

3. Because not everybody shoots by panning simple targets.

4. Because not everybody shoots at f/4 or f/5.6. Sometimes they use f/16 or f/22.

5. Because not everybody is as fabulously skilled as you. Or as perfectly healthy as you.

And its not every lens (note spelling).

far148 wrote: It sounds like you guys need to learn how to shoot without crutches.

It sounds like you need to get out of your comfort zone and attempt some other subject matter and in other conditions requiring the tools that many skilled photographers use. Many experienced photographers who know "how to shoot without crutches" use IS when appropriate for great results not obtainable any other way.

@ Monito, thanks for pointing out the obvious, well stated!

@ far...think a bit!

No crutches used here, a power wheelchair is tho, been shooting from one for 34+ years and in the last 5yrs IS has helped a ton. It's not needed all the time but it does help...I doubt you have to break your neck to figure out that IS can assist in many instances...even for your ablebodyness, Unless you can't pull your skull out your pants and think a bit

Cheers!

Jerry

Whatever

Happy shooting,
Steven

Only the early IS lenses did not detect the tripod and need to be turned off. This includes the 300 f4L IS and 100-400L IS. This chart, page 4, explains everything:

http://cpn.canon-europe.com/content/education/infobank/lenses/image_stabilisation.do

surf monkey wrote:
AJSJones wrote:
The 300 II +1.4x III may be just as fast as the 400 f/5.6 I

Seems unlikely since the 400 is one of the fastest lenses in terms of AF. One reason why it's such a BIF favorite.

An upgrade to the 400f5.6 makes more sense to me.
That would be nice, too
However, they could put the 400/5.6 AF motor/control into the new 300 too.

Don Clary wrote:
Only the early IS lenses did not detect the tripod and need to be turned off. This includes the 300 f4L IS and 100-400L IS. This chart, page 4, explains everything:

http://cpn.canon-europe.com/content/education/infobank/lenses/image_stabilisation.do

The chart is very helpful - thanks

The only ones (as of 2012) that need you to turn off IS when on a tripod are: 28-135, 75-300 (1st incarnation), 100-400 and 300/4 All of the others can detect it!

Looks like the 300/4 and 100-400 are long in the tooth

Monito wrote:
far148 wrote: Why does every lense need IS? Why can we learn to shoot properly without it?

1. Because not everybody makes the mistake of thinking that everybody else shoots the same subject matter the same way as they do.

2. Because not everybody shoots in sunlight or cloudy bright conditions.

3. Because not everybody shoots by panning simple targets.

4. Because not everybody shoots at f/4 or f/5.6. Sometimes they use f/16 or f/22.

5. Because not everybody is as fabulously skilled as you. Or as perfectly healthy as you.

And its not every lens (note spelling).

far148 wrote: It sounds like you guys need to learn how to shoot without crutches.

It sounds like you need to get out of your comfort zone and attempt some other subject matter and in other conditions requiring the tools that many skilled photographers use. Many experienced photographers who know "how to shoot without crutches" use IS when appropriate for great results not obtainable any other way.

Besides all of the above, there are advantages to IS even with high shutter speeds.

First, regardless of how steady some may think that they are, there is always camera shake and camera shake always degrades image quality. Thus, the question is not whether there is camera shake. Instead, the question is, at what level does that camera shake have noticeable impact on image quality? I find that, even with high shutter speeds, when examined closely, there can be a difference in sharpness between images taken with IS and without IS. In many situations, those differences are irrelevant, however, when one wishes to print large or when severe cropping is a necessity, those differences can become relevant.

Further, when shooting many subjects, especially ones that are moving quickly such as birds in flight, part of the challenge is getting the focus point on the subject, locking in focus, and keeping the focus point on the subject. Even if IS was not otherwise necessary, with IS steadying the image in the viewfinder, acquiring initial focus and maintaining focus can be much easier than it would be without IS and with the image jumping around in the viewfinder. Without IS and with the image jumping around in the viewfinder, the benefits of a fast focusing lens can be completely lost with the extra time it takes to acquire focus.

I find that most/many on internet forums who deny the benefits of IS are those who made the choice of buying a non-IS version of a lens and who have some apparent need to justify that their purchase decision was the correct one.

Les