I got One!!!!!!!!!!

[scotgasch]

Well I finally did it.....
I will have the 70-200 2.8 L in my hot little hands by Friday at the latest (hopefully Thursday).
Bought it off ebay for 900.00.....good deal, I thought.
I am now thinking of getting the 1.4x or 2x extender....
Any pros or cons to either would be greatly appreciated.

[Canuck]

Well I finally did it.....
I will have the 70-200 2.8 L in my hot little hands by Friday at the latest (hopefully Thursday).
Bought it off ebay for 900.00.....good deal, I thought.
I am now thinking of getting the 1.4x or 2x extender....
Any pros or cons to either would be greatly appreciated.

The 1.4x tc you make it an F4 lens and 2x tc makes it an F5.6 lens at 1.4x or 2x indicated focal length respectively. I am not really too sure about image degredation.

Pros:
You have an L lens an are now eligiable for the Lcahoilics anonymous pending review/proof of ownership of said lens.

You will no doubt enjoy this one. Now having L glass opens up a whole world of cool stuff!

Cons: These are ment as mostly a joke unless otherwise stated
Where to start? Well you now are entitled to have Macaroni & Cheese for some time! Enquire with IanD, he can point you in the right direction.

You will quickly become an Lcaholic and there is no cure! You will want all the lenses in the EF L lineup before too long and money becomes only another item in passing.

The list goes on...

[GenEOS]

I have found the 1.4x TC and the 70-200 IS to be a very versatile combo. I have a 100-400, so I use it when a 400 is needed. But, if I did not have a 100-400, I would buy the 2x TC. It may soften a bit, but it is a cheaper alt. to get 400mm.

The 1.4 TC is a must have.

[IndyJeff]

Does this mean I can now throw away that sign I was told to wear? You know the one that says, "Newest member of the Lcaholics club. KICK ME."

[Haifidelity]

I just recieved that same lens (traded for it with my 70-200 f/4L+Ca$h). So far, a stellar lens.

Pros - Tack Sharp, Fast AF, Great Color/Contrast/Bokeh, f/2.8..and Performs as good as my old f/4L at all applicable apertures.

Cons - Large and Heavy, making it a little difficult to get rid of hand shake with shots of 1/100 or slower, hand held. Looks Big and Obvious.

Some other things:

1.) Get used to all the looks you'll recieve when people see that hunk of glass pointed in their direction.

2.) Get ready to get a new camera bag!!!

-hza

[rockos]

well i have the 70-200 f/4 L coming and will be here on Friday as well. it is not the 2.8 but i think i will like it being my first L glass lense I have ever owned. congrats and happy shooting

rockos

[Olegis]

Congradulations !
I myself just bought the 70-200 f/2.8L last Friday. It was used lens, about 3 years old, and I've got it for about $800 (which is VERY cheap here in Israel).
So far I love the lens, it's fast (both bright and AF), sharp even wide open compared to my Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 and very reliable from the focus accuracy point of view.

Can you show us some samples from your 70-200 ? Here are mine (first day with the L glass, what an exitement 8) ) :

http://www.pbase.com/olegis/wildlife&page=all

[Haifidelity]

Olegis,

I saw these when you posted on dpreview.com--great shots! Did you use a monopod/tripod for any of these?

-hza

[Olegis]

Thanks,
All the shots were handheld (I just made sure that the shutter speed was fast enough to maintain the 1/FL rule) :wink:

[CyberDyneSystems]

Hey Scott,. good deal.

Unless you are absolutely set on a cheap way to get to 400mm fast... I'd go for the 1.4X first.. it has very minimal effect on overall image quality.

the 2X will do in a pinch.. but I just can't live with it on my lens the way I can with the 1.4X

[Flyball Rebel]

Almost at the point of purchasing a Canon 17-40mm f/4 L USM lens. If anybody out there owns this L lens...any comments would be gratefully received. Regards [F.R.] :)

[psk4363]

Scotsgash - may I add my welcome to the others re your joining of the L club. Now watch your bank balance drop or your credit card balance increase as you get the taste of L and want even more. :lol:

Flyball - No doubt about this - get it! Go on! What are you doing still reading this! The next bit is for when you get back from ordering your new lens - I've had mine since January (it was my first L, then I got hooked on that superb glass!) and can't fault it on both of my cameras. Edge to edge sharpness, even fully open, vivid contrast, relatively light-weight - brilliant! Over here in the UK, 'Practical Photography' magazine this month rated it best wide-angle zoom beating the Nikon, Sigmas, Tokina, Tamron, et al.

Hope this helps,
Barry

[VonClev]

Scotts:

A really excellent reviewhere was posted a few months back comparing the 70-200L IS with and without the old and new 2X TC to the 100-400L IS. Above an f/8 the the 70-200L IS with 2X TC was identical to the 100-400L IS in sharpness. So yes in the range of f5.6-8.0 you loose some, but is that worth shelling out an extra $1,000? I have both the 70-200L IS and a 2X and love the combo; yes someday I'll probably get a 100-400L (and then put the 2X on that for a pure magnification rush....), but for now the 70-200L IS + 2X TC does the trick.

Happy shooting,

Chuck

[scotgasch]

The loveley Fed Ex lady showed up at the office with my "L" around 2pm.

WOW what a lens....I have shot with one before but now to OWN one is truly amazing.

I will post pics of the ensuing madness that followed the parting of the Fed Ex lady, a little later. I just like to sit and hold it....I'm so pathetic I know.

[theflyingkiwi]

Almost at the point of purchasing a Canon 17-40mm f/4 L USM lens. If anybody out there owns this L lens...any comments would be gratefully received. Regards [F.R.] :)

Hi

I have got this lense, and I think it is great. I had taken it to queenstown, NZ with me and managed to get some really good shots.

If you have a need for a really wide lense I would recommend this one.

Mark