Archive 2022 · beloved 10+ year old EF 100-400, is it time to retire & replace?

TeamSpeed
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #1 · p.2 #1 · beloved 10+ year old EF 100-400, is it time to retire & replace?

I can completely see that, and there size is the differentiating factor. For some that is a big concern. I always keep the EF adapters on my EF lenses, they don't leave and at $50 a pop, that makes sense to have a dedicated adapter per lens. If I use the lens on the 5D4, then I take the adapter off.

The 100-500 gets you 100mm into the 160mm that that 100-400+1.4x gives you, and if that is enough, and you don't need the RF 1.4x, then that is nice.

The price deltas are still a big hurdle for many, especially given how much inflation has cost them across other things more important in their lives.

I just blew my discretionary funds on a vehicle trade to a Tesla Model 3, so that I can stop going to a gas station. Going from 15mpg to an EV that realistically gets about 85mpg is pretty nice.

It will be a while until I can even think about getting more gear. I really want an R3...

Once I sell the 5D4 this year, then the only need for EF lenses would be for my M50, since it cannot use RF lenses.

Edited on Apr 01, 2022 at 09:59 AM · View previous versions

Apr 01, 2022 at 09:55 AM

melcat
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #2 · p.2 #2 · beloved 10+ year old EF 100-400, is it time to retire & replace?

tuxbailey wrote:
Is the RF 100-500 a major improvement because of size and operation or is it optically much better than the V2?.

They both have fairly poor operation/handling due to the fact they physically extend when zooming. While acceptable in a wide or normal lens, this is a problem with long lenses. I haven't used the RF, but the EF Mk II is not a lens I can comfortably zoom with it held up in shooting position. (I'm only about 10kg heavier than our OP.) The Mk II is already uncomfortably fat, and the RF slightly fatter again; but, as I say, they both get a "failing" grade in handling for me so an extra degree of poor handling isn't very significant.

Apr 01, 2022 at 09:58 AM

Z250SA
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #3 · p.2 #3 · beloved 10+ year old EF 100-400, is it time to retire & replace?

tuxbailey wrote:
Is the RF 100-500 a major improvement because of size and operation or is it optically much better than the V2?

I am personally thinking about the RF 100-400 for my R6.

It would be hard to be much better than the 100-400 v2 (never used v1). On the 5D4 it was very close to perfect without some serious peeping in the corners or opinions (that differ) about bokeh. The 100-500 is as good on the R5 as the v2 is on the 5D4. In my admittedly rather humble opinion. (I tend to look at the subject not the background. A bit odd here around perhaps.)

The diameter of the whites, yes, they are close to max for me too despite apparently being twice as heavy. The 100-500 is the same as the 100-400 v2 (according to https://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Lens-Specifications.aspx?Lens=1510&LensComp=972). But I have never thought of any inconvenience or problems with them extending when zooming.

Apr 01, 2022 at 01:06 PM

mikeengles
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #4 · p.2 #4 · beloved 10+ year old EF 100-400, is it time to retire & replace?

I have the mk2 and it is a bit more sharp, but not that much so. I miss the push pull as the focus ring was ALWAYS in hand. It is much needed as the mirrorless have trouble focussing on low contract objects and need a manual focus nudge. I am always searching for the focus ring.

Apr 01, 2022 at 01:55 PM

maver
Offline
•
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #5 · p.2 #5 · beloved 10+ year old EF 100-400, is it time to retire & replace?

I went from the original EF 100-400L on a 5D4 to an RF 100-500L on an R5. I skipped the EF 100-400L-II.

While image quality on the RF combo is undeniably better than the EF combo, I really miss the push-pull zoom of the EF. As others said before me, the push-pull is much faster and feels more natural than the twist zoom mechanism. On the RF, going from 100 to 500 needs a twist, reposition and twist again. I never seem to be able to do it in one go.

I used the EF100-400 on the R5 with an adapter for a while. It felt a bit more responsive but the adapter made the lens longer and heavier.

In all 3 instances of the zoom, the foot is not arca swiss compatible.

Apr 01, 2022 at 03:06 PM

TeamSpeed
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #6 · p.2 #6 · beloved 10+ year old EF 100-400, is it time to retire & replace?

I keep hearing about how the adapter makes lenses so much longer that it is one of the listed hindrances.

Every single EF lens on an R6, for example, extends away from the R6 viewfinder the width of a US dime (about 20mm) over the identical combination using the 5D4. It isn't very much at all.

The reason for this is that the R6 sensor sits farther forward 20mm more than the 5D4 (using the focal plane markers on the bodies).

I also measured this by actually placing the 5D4 and R6 next to each other and marked, then measured, the difference in the mounting plane of the EF lenses, which matches the delta of the focal plane markers on the bodies.

This means when you hold the R6 and use EF lenses with the adapter, your left hand is out a tiny bit more, the distance equaling the diameter of a dime.

As to using EF lenses on the R6 and having to use an adapter on the lens makes them heavier, yes, EF lenses are a bit heavier by about 3 oz., or to carry my coin analogy over, $2.75 in US quarters.

Apr 01, 2022 at 09:09 PM

1 2 end
FM Forums \| Canon Forum \| Join Upload & Sell 1 2 end

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.