Jerry, there could be a long wait for 100-400 MkII, but probably a worthwhile wait.
I have just finished talking to a Canon Canada authorised dealer, and they tell me that 200-400 comes without the usual long lens trunk, nor any other bag.
That info is so bizarre, that it might indeed be true . Mind you, the standard trunk is only good as a shipping crate, and I'd welcome a high quality shoulder bag supplied instead.
I like zoom lenses because of the flexibility that they offer, realizing their are compromises. Most likely I will buy, however since this is a new from the ground up lens I think that waiting until the flaws, if any, surface (6-12 months).
PetKal wrote:
I have just finished talking to a Canon Canada authorised dealer, and they tell me that 200-400 comes without the usual long lens trunk...
That would be strange. What would they pack the lens in for secure shipping? I also saw that in each dealer's "what's in the box" description, the case is listed as being included. I'd resent having to pay $700 for a case on top of the $12k for the lens. Of course, my wife's Benz came without floor mats, so I guess it's just par for the course....
PetKal wrote:
Jerry, there could be a long wait for 100-400 MkII, but probably a worthwhile wait.
I have just finished talking to a Canon Canada authorised dealer, and they tell me that 200-400 comes without the usual long lens trunk, nor any other bag.
That info is so bizarre, that it might indeed be true . Mind you, the standard trunk is only good as a shipping crate, and I'd welcome a high quality shoulder bag supplied instead.
B&H and Adorama list it as included. Agree that it is not very useable and unnecessarily increases the price by almost $700.00
I have been wanting this kind of zoom in a good Canon version for about as long as the Nikon version has existed. Within days of the development announcement over two years ago, I talked my local dealer in to accepting my pre order, and gave him a fully refundable deposit. As those two years have passed by, I have followed the rumors and field sightings, and have been encouraged by the reports I have seen. I really think this is a great lens for my needs, and it will fulfill my long lens requirements well. I have never bought any of the Canon supertelephotos over 300mm, but have on occasion rented them in the past. So for me, it is not a question of which long reach lenses I keep after I get the 200-400, because I do not have any of the "big boys".
I use a Wimberley full gimbal a lot for my long shots, and expect to use it with the 200-400 much of the time. But my lever quick release on the Wimberley platform will allow me to change to hand held in seconds when the need arises. I also should probably work on increasing my arm strength, and perhaps my exercise program will be to shoot 1000's of hand held shots with the lens.
I am hopeful that the image quality lives up to the high expectations that Canon and others seem to be promoting. I am also hopeful that my particular copy is at the good end of any variation in quality that might occur. I think I will be getting one from the initial wave of lenses, and have always wondered if Canon might pay particular attention to quality for the first batches, in order to build a good reputation.
I view the 1DX as kind of magical in how well it performs, and how well the technology has been integrated in to it. I am hoping that this lens also has a kind of magic to it, and that the combination of a 1DX plus the 200-400 is even more than magical.
Not sure if I will keep my 100-400L, which of course fills a need for many situations. I have always had a hard time adapting to the push pull operation compared to the 5 other Canon L zooms I own with rotating zoom rings. And the long end has been of a little less image quality than I would prefer. Perhaps now that the 200-400 is "out of the way" for being released, we might get a replacement for the 100-400L with improved image quality, and with a zoom ring. The fairly recient 70-300L is an example of a lens that extends a lot like the 100-400 does, but that uses a zoom ring rather than being push pull.
PetKal wrote:
Jerry, there could be a long wait for 100-400 MkII, but probably a worthwhile wait.
I have just finished talking to a Canon Canada authorised dealer, and they tell me that 200-400 comes without the usual long lens trunk, nor any other bag.
That info is so bizarre, that it might indeed be true . Mind you, the standard trunk is only good as a shipping crate, and I'd welcome a high quality shoulder bag supplied instead.
Those cases cost several hundred dollars to replace, and I assume even though the 200-400L won't be getting one, the price will still be included
Roland W wrote:
I also should probably work on increasing my arm strength, and perhaps my exercise program will be to shoot 1000's of hand held shots with the lens.
Yes, I think that is a good way, and one key side benefit of persistent handholding practice is that the steadiness of camera/lens aim usually improves as well.
200-400 is fairly hefty, however, I think that 1-2 hrs of moderate intensity handheld shooting with it should be attainable by folks of normal/unexceptional body strength.
Roland W wrote:
I have been wanting this kind of zoom in a good Canon version for about as long as the Nikon version has existed. Within days of the development announcement over two years ago, I talked my local dealer in to accepting my pre order, and gave him a fully refundable deposit.
You are one patient person. You should get the 1st one sold for having a deposit for that long..
PetKal wrote:
Jerry, there could be a long wait for 100-400 MkII, but probably a worthwhile wait.
I have just finished talking to a Canon Canada authorised dealer, and they tell me that 200-400 comes without the usual long lens trunk, nor any other bag.
That info is so bizarre, that it might indeed be true . Mind you, the standard trunk is only good as a shipping crate, and I'd welcome a high quality shoulder bag supplied instead.
So they'll ship the 200-400 in a thin cardboard box with a bit of molded styrofoam to keep it happy while UPS or whomever tosses it about like a box of fruit...how flocking crazy...guess this should be an order with personal pickup...and then you just have to hope the delivery to the store was handled well. Cutting cost on a $12k item....no hard case, no padded bag...nutters, just plain nutters
Yeah there could be a long wait on the 100-400, I've got time to do so as you know, getting back to using a 300 is 1st on the recovery list, before any bigger white guns are purchased
Jerry, that info on the 200-400 trunk missing is someone's joke most probably.
I am 99.99% confident the trunk will be supplied, whatever good it does.
A major Canadian retailer have apparently sold three of them yesterday.....to the same buyer.
Now, I reckon that is either Robert trying to dry up the initial Canadian lens allotment, or Roland "Netexpress" making sure he's got the 200-400 review monopoly on FM.
PetKal wrote:
Jerry, that info on the 200-400 trunk missing is someone's joke most probably.
I am 99.99% confident the trunk will be supplied, whatever good it does.
A major Canadian retailer have apparently sold three of them yesterday.....to the same buyer.
Now, I reckon that is either Robert trying to dry up the initial Canadian lens allotment, or Roland "Netexpress" making sure he's got the 200-400 review monopoly on FM.
Sure hope so Peter you need another case for your collection, without the case your working museum would be quite incomplete
The lens appears to be excellent, however, the five figure price point, points me in the direction of the new 120-300 2.8 Sigma and a adding a Mik 3 converter or two
PetKal wrote:
Jerry, that info on the 200-400 trunk missing is someone's joke most probably.
I am 99.99% confident the trunk will be supplied, whatever good it does.
A major Canadian retailer have apparently sold three of them yesterday.....to the same buyer.
Now, I reckon that is either Robert trying to dry up the initial Canadian lens allotment, or Roland "Netexpress" making sure he's got the 200-400 review monopoly on FM.
Monopoly is that traditional Monopoly or Canadian Monopoly or Hockey Monopoly, is it the board version or the online computerized version?
I just remmebered it is the Canon monopoly complete with the renamed Boardwalk (Canon 50 1.0L Complete with box)
StillFingerz wrote:
Sure hope so Peter you need another case for your collection, without the case your working museum would be quite incomplete
Jerry, every and each new Canon long lens acquired adds to the pile of accessory detritus such as lens trunks, front dust caps and stock tripod mount feet.
Now, they are also including a trunk strap and a smaller monopod foot on the side.
Has anybody ever sent a memo to Canon about those feet ? One of the first things 99% of long lens users do is either replace the stock foot with an aftermarket QR foot, or bolt a QR plate to the stock foot.
PetKal wrote:
Jerry, every and each new Canon long lens acquired adds to the pile of accessory detritus such as lens trunks, front dust caps and stock tripod mount feet.
Now, they are also including a trunk strap and a smaller monopod foot on the side.
Has anybody ever sent a memo to Canon about those feet ? One of the first things 99% of long lens users do is either replace the stock foot with an aftermarket QR foot, or bolt a QR plate to the stock foot.
Creating a deliverable/product that serves all users is mostly impossible, complexity of design, often very little 'actual user' feedback or listened to feedback all lend to feed the third party market. If indeed 99% of tele users actually remove the stock foot then Canon is either stuck in the past; not willing to change, doesn't listen to the majority preferring to cater to the non-foot-changers, or simply don't want to play the foot/plate game due to profit motives, letting 3rd parties fight it out. I'm guessing profits are the end reason.
Why not include a tripod collar/foot for selected L tele lenses, 100L, 70-200 f4L, etc., yes some use them and some don't, much like the big glass...is it for user convenience or purely profit driven; the latter me thinks in this case.
Stupidity, bad or old designs are often the breeding grounds for dissatisfaction, when enough voices be heard the 3rd party product is born...and many benefit. Monopolies rarely innovate with any speed and usually resort to silly and/or gimmicky gifts to boost sales, competition on the other hand is leaner and can be of much higher quality/usability; at least for accessories...the little annoying stuff that bugs the crap out of us but usually doesn't stop us buying the bigger/pricier item
. Mind you, the standard trunk is only good as a shipping crate, and I'd welcome a high quality shoulder bag supplied instead.
all lend to feed the third party market. If indeed 99% of tele users actually remove the stock foot then Canon is either stuck in the past; not willing to change, doesn't listen to the majority preferring to cater to the non-foot-changers, or simply don't want to play the foot/plate game due to profit motives, letting 3rd parties fight it out. I'm guessing profits are the end reason.