Australian photographer Joshua Holko gets to go hands-on with the highly anticipated, long-ago-announced and as-yet-unreleased EF 200-400mm L IS 1.4x wünderlens...

Canon 200-400 Pre-Production Sample Lens Review on Vimeo

To me the most interesting thing about it is the price, said to be $11k to $13k thereabouts... yes, that much. Think I'm gonna fold on this plan and go find a $1600 EF 100-400mm f/4-5.6 L IS instead. Yowza! Confirmed to work with the add-on teleconverters, though.

That does look interesting. At $11K - $13K it's likely out of my range. (Even though I'll be shooting bears this summer - hmm).

I wouldn't waste money on the EF 100-400 f/4-5.6 L IS. It's one of the poorer L lenses in my book.

Thanks for the tip, Charles. Hmm... maybe I'll do the EF 300mm f/4 L IS instead.

The only thing about the 100-400 f/4.5-5.6 L IS lens I don't like is that it's a push-pull zoom. Shooting stills is okay but if trying to zoom while shooting video it's a no-go. I found the lens to be quite good otherwise... and with a 1.4TC, attached to the XL-H1A.. I think I'm getting over 3,000mm. And I got it for $1,400 in Hong Kong back in 2007. No plans to sell.

Wow. It lives! It's such a long time since that lens was first announced by Canon, that I thought it had tuned into the lens equivalent of vapourware. Wasn't there some sort of problem with the 1.4X actuating lever after the first prototypes were previewed. That might even have been back during the Olympics!

Thanks for posting Chris,

I was close to buying the 300 2.8L IS but will hold off now. This will reduce my travel load by two lens, cool.

Nice to see Joshua using the RRS tripod.

Wasn't there some sort of problem with the 1.4X actuating lever after the first prototypes were previewed. Maybe so, not sure -- but I heard that the primary reason for the delay was a design change to allow the use of an add-on extender. Originally there was no mention of teleconverter compatibility, but now you can hang a 2x or a 1.4x on the back.

This will reduce my travel load by two lens, cool.Those fast super telephoto primes take up a lot of room in the case, don't they!

They sure do, I was planning on the 300 and the 400. This will let me go from my 70-200 to 200-400. Very nice.

It looks a nice lens and I like the fact that the 1.4X is built in, making it quicker than fitting a separate converter...although with no way of taking it off means extra bulk, length and weight.

I'm sure the photo files are good (they should be at this extremely steep price point for an f/4 lens) but really can't see myself saving extra dosh over the latest version Sigma 120-300mm f/2.8 DG OS HSM, which is also weather sealed, has 4-stop image stabiliser, is able to take 1.4X and 2X converters and maintain autofocus.
The Sigma is also extremely sharp and maintains image quality with the 1.4x, although of course drops with the 2X (but still provides very good quality at 600mm for stills and video).

I've no doubt that the new 200-400mm Canon wide open would be sharper than the sigma wide open (the Sigma is 2.8 remember), but close the Sigma aperture to match the Canon's much slower f/4 and we'd probably be talking about pixel peeping to separate them in most situations...plus being able to use f/2.8 in low light and still holding f/4 in a longer telephoto range than the Canon (with 1.4X).

Test report by Robert Toole:
Eagle Tour Report - Robert OToole Photography (http://www.robertotoole.com/2012/04/05/eagle-tour-report/)

Test Report by John E. Marriott:
John E Marriott's Wildlife Photography Blog: October 2011 (http://blog.wildernessprints.com/2011_10_01_archive.html)

The above test reports were for the previous Sigma 120-300mm OS image-stabilized version (the same one that I use) shown here:
Product Sigma Canada (http://www.sigmacanada.ca/lenses/telephoto-zoom-lenses/sigma-120-300mm-f2-8-apo-ex-dg-hsm-optical-stabilized-for-canon--os120300hc/)

But an updated version is soon to be be released shown here:

Nice reviews Tony but it does not get the reach I need. Currently I have a Canon 300 f4 which is OK but most times I use the new Canon 70-200 with the new 1.4x. So for me I would like the 400 with 1.4x. But that said I never have owned or really look at Sigma and maybe I should start.

@Paul, the Sigma is an f/2.8 and so far better than the Canon 300mm f/4 IS for adding converters (I owned the Canon lens but sold it in preference to the latest OS sigma zoom). With 1.4X it turns the Sigma into a 168-420mm f/4 lens. Add a 2X converter and you have a wider range between 120-600mm.

More reviews of the superb Sigma 120-300mm OS lens:

Sigma 120-300mm f/2.8 EX DG OS HSM Lens Review (http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Sigma-120-300mm-f-2.8-EX-DG-OS-HSM-Lens-Review.aspx)

Field Review: Sigma 120-300 F2.8 OS Lens - The Nature, Wildlife and Pet Photography Forum (http://www.nwpphotoforum.com/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=37426)

Bob Atkins 3-part review (please note that the first photo in the review shows the earlier non-stabilized version, and all the other photos show the 1st OS version):

Sigma 120-300/2.8 DG OS HSM review - Bob Atkins Photography (http://www.bobatkins.com/photography/reviews/sigma_120-300os_review.html)

Sigma 120-300/2.8 DG OS HSM review - Part II Performance - Bob Atkins Photography (http://www.bobatkins.com/photography/reviews/sigma_120-300os_review2.html)

Sigma 120-300/2.8 DG OS HSM review - Part III Comments and conclusions - Bob Atkins Photography (http://www.bobatkins.com/photography/reviews/sigma_120-300os_review3.html)

I look forward to see the first detailed tests of the Canon 200-400mm f/4 IS.

Here is a large photo file taken with the 120-300mm OS lens to view:

Sigma 120-300 F2.8 OS Example - Robert OToole Photography (http://www.robertotoole.com/2012/04/07/sigma-120-300-f2-8-os-example/)


Robert Otoole's second review on the Sigma site photographing eagles and mountains:

LENS EXPLORATION: 120-300mm F2.8 EX DG OS HSM, Part II | SIGMA Blog (http://blog.sigmaphoto.com/2012/lens-exploration-120-300mm-f2-8-ex-dg-os-hsm-part-ii/)


Review by Lindsay Adler of the same lens, but this time with a beautiful woman as the subject. Click on each image to enlarge view:

Lens Exploration: 120-300mm F2.8 OS lens by Lindsay Adler | SIGMA Blog (http://blog.sigmaphoto.com/2011/lens-explorations-120-300mm-f2-8-ex-dg-os-hsm/)

Thanks all good information. It is interesting that Robert says the lens is more 270mm not 300mm. As I said earlier my EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM with the new Canon 1.4x III is my best long combination at this point. But I need longer often for some actions sports.

So the Sigma 120-300 does not add the reach and I have no need for the 120-200 part of the lens.

The 300 f4 is fine on its own but with the 1.4x it is just a bit too soft for my liking after using it for surfing in Puerto Rico. But it was all I had. Sure speed of the lens helps but I am using the 1DX so that helps if I go f4. All of this is for stills, I have not put the 300 on my C300 yet.

Too bad there are not other options that produce a very sharp image in the 300-500 range that take 1.4x and stay sharp. That is why the new Canon could fit nicely.

The lens is 300mm at distance, but shortens slightly at closest distances...but this is true of almost all telephoto zoom lenses, including the 70-200mm and probably the 200-400mm IS too. The 300mm f/4 prime remains at 300mm even in semi-macro mode, as do most primes.

If it is only more reach than the 300mm you need and not the shorter focal lengths, then a fixed 400mm, 500mm or 600mm would be a far better option for you I think. I normally prefer the fixed telephoto lenses for stills, but need wide-ranging zooms for my video work.

I am going to wait till the 200-400 is out prior to buying any primes. If the lens is as good as I think it will be then I will rent one for a week. Three large primes does not work for me, I fly to jobs about 50 times a year with all my video and still gear. Light and small is key.

You're sounding like me Paul. It would be so nice not to have to undergo the headaches and extra time spent trying to fit my mountain of gear into airline baggage limits!

If you buy the new 200-400mm IS don't forget to let us us know your views on how it performs.

Yea, thank god for Think Tank they are the best bags I have used and I have owned dozens of bags. Both are carry on, one backpack and one roller. Sure I have to check my personal items and tripod but monopod comes on board. Even the local TSA at my airport ask, "were are you off to film this time?".

Not sure I will dive right in and buy the 200-400 but renting for a week will be a great test. Rental houses might not have it till summer.

Best to all in New England, snow has started in RI.

It has started to snow again here too...

Regarding your Think Tank, I use a variety of bags, including the LowePro Nature Trekker, but my main bag for flights including most of my work, is the superb Kata-502;
http://www.camera-warehouse.com.au/product_images/mid/KATA-BP-502.jpg

http://www.cambags.com/canon/1d/backpack/images/kata_bp-502/kata_bp-502_canon_1d_2.jpg

Looks nice,

A lot of great bags on the market.