In use for me includes the A-S mount, so that may vary.
I would not advocate using the 100-400 II on an adapter unless already owning the 100-400 II and not wanting to upgrade to the 100-500. Even the crummy tripod mount is not enough to discourage.
The 100-500 is better in most other ways and the IS seems to work better in conjunction with the IBID.
It is one of the very few lenses that keeps me using Canon.
My weight comparisons are without tripod mounts or hoods. The 1/2 lb weight gain from the original 100-400 to the II was quite noticeable to me at the time. For the record, I was very happy with my EF lenses, so I'm talking progress, not revolution.
Gochugogi wrote:
I don't think many DSLR users even knew their camera had a viewfinder. Even nearly two decades ago I constantly saw people using their Rebel/Kiss models only in live view. Plus, LV doesn't mess up makeup and is natural for the smartphone generation.
What I mostly saw was people with m43 Pens, and EOS Ms, smaller compacts and the like. You can do it reasonably well with the lightest DSLR lenses, once they attach something like 24-70/2.8L, they'll find the viewfinder very quickly IMO.
Nevertheless LV worked well for macro and "over the fence" photos and similar.
