Review on Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS II USM Lens - Lens Only for Improved SEO by Chris Prix

I've only had this lens for 2 months but have tried it. Probably 1000 shots+. Everything from insects to flowers, birds and landscapes. I use it on a Canon 7D Mark II and it's my lens of choice. Out of the box, my copy had a backfocus problem at 100mm, but a quick micro adjustment fixed the problem (-10). Since I shoot handheld, it was very difficult for me to get used to the extra 100mm of my EF 70-300L f/4-5.6 IS USM lens. I was nice when I was disappointed with how little I was given that extra 100mm. Not sure what I was expecting but it was more than what I got lol. I have to be very careful to control camera shake with 100-400 because as we all know, the longer the focal length, the more shake. The statistical stabilization of this lens is 4 stops. I took pictures with a single room bulb in 1/10th of a second and they were as sharp as you would expect. I have trouble taking photos in crowded places like tree leaves. The camera wants to chase a little more than it likes. In these situations, the EF 70-300L has easily corrected itself. I use the 1st AF point in the 7D2, a square within a square so I can literally point the focus through the leaves and branches. I get that autofocus is mostly done in camera and the 7D2 is great, but there's something about this lens that makes it hunt in those few situations. I autofocus the lens from 3m to infinity and that helps but doesn't fix the problem. 90% of the time it gets fixed right away, even in a mess. I suspect the dim light is to blame. It just forces me to take as many shots as possible until the subject is gone. Sometimes I get 100%, other 60% (I'm used to 90%) with 7D2 and EF 70-300L. I'm not stupid so I know camera shake plays a part. Another problem I'm getting used to, but it's a good problem, is finding my target when I've zoomed in to 400mm. Well here's what I don't understand. All reviews say that the zoom ring rotation is too long. I have small hands and fingers and I just don't get it. I can go from 100mm to 400mm instantly in one turn and it's just as good. I'm not sure if these people have ever used this lens or if their technique is wrong. I just don't get it EDIT: Note that this lens focuses 3ft even at 400mm. You have to be aware of your depth of field or you'll think you're having trouble focusing. Check out a YouTube video of a man testing this lens in the Galapagos. The close focus is what really drew me to this lens. I realize the images uploaded don't reflect the lens very well, but you might get something from these shots: 1) hummingbird from 30 feet; Rosy Spoonbills at 200 feet; lizard at 6 feet (400mm); seagull at 100 feet; Skipper at 4ft (400mm); flower and bee at 5 feet (400mm); Folded Woodpecker at 50 feet; Mandatory moon shot : ) All these shots have been CROPED. EDIT 5/26/2019: This lens holds up well. I'm notorious for not caring about things and being a little rude, which is why I even mention it. You expect it too, but I'm not a regular user. It's been dropped, knocked, performed in the rain, in the fog, in the heat, in the cold. did you understand the picture I always do this LOL.EDIT 8/24/2019 to add some predator shots. All are scaled/cropped from 50-75% and at min. 200 feet tall.