• Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.

    Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
ZEISS DTI thermal imaging cameras. For more discoveries at night, and during the day.

New 100-400 (1 Viewer)

I don't think any zoom is what it says it is at the long end. That's why I prefer primes - you know where u are haha
 
Long zoom lenses only get near the max focal length when shooting at infinity and even then there is an allowable tolerance. The nearer you are to your subject the less max focal length you will get. This is often referred to as 'focus breathing' and is characteristic of zoom lenses. Some zooms are worst than others, in that respect the Tamron 150-600 is rated very good at the long end and comes close to 600mm. I have checked to Tammy at 400mm v the Canon 400/5.6 and also the Tammy at 560mm v the 400/5.6 + 1.4x tc (560mm) and from around 20-30 feet there is very little in it although the prime is slightly 'larger', shooting at infinity it is near identical.
 
Very true Steve but they do reach more than 400. If canon were to produce a 150-600 L to compete what would the price be? Surely a fair bit more than £1599.99

If Canon were to make a zoom they would not make it f6.3. To make it f5.6 it would involve 1/3 more glass than the 6.3 models. Also, for this type of lens they would only make it if they could make of high quality like their the 70-200 IS II.

Since this amount of glass would be very similar to the 300 f2.8 is and because the zoom would add more engineering challenges I'm quite confident it would cost more than the 300 f2.8 is ii.
 
Release Price: $2199 according to THIS. Not sure about the UK start price but could be around £1600-£1700 I would guess (its hardly ever the GBP to USD actual conversion rate)
 
Yes its quite a bit of cash but so is the 70/200 for its range, its all about IQ if they get that right this would be great on a 7d mkII a sort of lightish setup.

Rob.
 
$2200 is £1668 at today's conversion rate, by the time you've added on the VAT (US prices don't include taxes). If it's significantly under £1800 I'll be surprised.
 
$2200 is £1668 at today's conversion rate, by the time you've added on the VAT (US prices don't include taxes). If it's significantly under £1800 I'll be surprised.
I would not disagree that it could well be £1800 + in the UK but not sure how you work out that $2200 is converted to £1668* - the conversion rate is around 1.6 $ to the £ so that would make 2200 USD = to 1375 GBP (*£1650(ish) inc 20% VAT - is that what you meant?).

To complicate matters further still The US tax seems varies from state to state I believe and is generally made up of a state + city tax. As an example It appears that if you buy goods from an online New York store they will apply something like 8.85% tax but if they ship to an address outside of NY then the tax will not be charged! If so does that mean that the buyer pays his local tax when he receives it, if so who applies/collects it? Perhaps one of our US friends could clarify the tax system on Cameras and lenses.
 
State and local (county and/or city) tax on goods varies from zero to close to 10%. States charge the lion's share, with local taxes usually in the 1.0-1.5%. For instance, ST in Chicago breaks down as follows:

Illinois State 6.250%
Cook County 1.750%
City of Chicago 1.250%

Larger urban areas typically have higher local tax rates, but it seems the smaller cities are catching up. Services are not taxed in Illinois, but there is talk about doing so.

Retailers are generally not forced to collect it unless they have some sort of presence within the state it is purchased from. In Illinois you are supposed to keep track of purchases made from out of state, then account for the sales tax you should have paid in your state income tax filing. I would guess compliance with that is about 0.01%. Local retailer groups have been lobbying for an "Amazon" tax (forcing online retailers to collect sales taxes from all customers) citing unfair competition. I'm sure that plays a part, but I believe convenience and good selection play a big part in online purchases and local stores won't see much effect from an Amazon tax. As governments always need more money to save the poor and the children I'm sure the Amazon tax will arrive sooner or later.

A VAT is ocassionally discussed at the national level but it hasn't got very far...yet.
 
Last edited:
State and local (county and/or city) tax on goods varies from zero to close to 10%. States charge the lion's share, with local taxes usually in the 1.0-1.5%. For instance, ST in Chicago breaks down as follows:

Illinois State 6.250%
Cook County 1.750%
City of Chicago 1.250%

Larger urban areas typically have higher local tax rates, but it seems the smaller cities are catching up. Services are not taxed in Illinois, but there is talk about doing so.

Retailers are generally not forced to collect it unless they have some sort of presence within the state it is purchased from. In Illinois you are supposed to keep track of purchases made from out of state, then account for the sales tax you should have paid in your state income tax filing. I would guess compliance with that is about 0.01%. Local retailer groups have been lobbying for an "Amazon" tax (forcing online retailers to collect sales taxes from all customers) citing unfair competition. I'm sure that plays a part, but I believe convenience and good selection play a big part in online purchases and local stores won't see much effect from an Amazon tax. As governments always need more money to save the poor and the children I'm sure the Amazon tax will arrive sooner or later.

A VAT is ocassionally discussed at the national level but it hasn't got very far...yet.
Very interesting Bill, thanks for that :t: I noticed that B&H say that 'We do not collect tax for orders shipped out of New York State'.
I guess in the UK if it was left to us to declare our purchases for paying sales taxes we to would have a compliance of about 0.01% as well. But with it being a point of sales tax (VAT@20%) we have no chance of skipping it unless one buys from grey importers who somehow manage to evade the Tax!!!!!
 
Last edited:
If I buy from B&H I pay no sales tax here in Arizona, but if I buy from Amazon I do. Strange world.
 
Looks great. I hope its much sharper at the long end than the current one which seems to have a fair amount of sample variation.
 
That is a very good question Miguel, if it does it will be an awesome lens. The mfd and the weight would be a great walk about lens compared to the sigma 560mm with a tc of course. We will have to wait for some solid reviews.
 
The question is: will it be sharper and AF faster with a tc than the Sigma or the Tamron?

I'm looking at it a bit differently, for full frame users instead of adding a tc add a 7dmkII this equates close to the ef 200/400 but a lot cheaper and a lot lighter too.
it should af faster and be quicker than the sigma/tamron
Rob.
 
Warning! This thread is more than 9 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top