70-200 4L - 1.4x or 2x TC

[msbc]

I've been researching to try and decide between the 70-300 DO and the 70-200 4L. I've finally made the choice of the 70-200 based on image quality. I'm planning on adding a Canon TC to get me the extra focal length.

The 1.4x would make this into a 98-280 f5.6 and the 2x into a 140-400 f8. So, how do the two TC's compare as far as image quality go on this lens - anybody have either combination, or better still used both combo's and can give a comparson?

[drisley]

Good choice. The image quality of the 70-200 F4L will surpass the 70-300DO by quite a bit.

I havent used the teleconverters, but apparently the 1.4x TC works very well, with almost no image quality lost.
Most users here say steer clear of the 2x TC.

[scottbergerphoto]

Good choice. The image quality of the 70-200 F4L will surpass the 70-300DO by quite a bit.

I havent used the teleconverters, but apparently the 1.4x TC works very well, with almost no image quality lost.
Most users here say steer clear of the 2x TC.
I've used the 1.4 and 2x with the 100-400. The 2x makes it harder to focus due to the dimming of the viewfinder and there is some loss in sharpness. That said, in a pinch if you need the distance it works:

http://www.pbase.com/image/23527173.jpg

The 1.4 pretty much blends in seamlessly.
Scott

[CyberDyneSystems]

On the 70-200mm f/4 you will lose autofocus using a 2X t-con

With the 1.4X t-con AF will still work. :)

[Cadwell]

The EF 70-200mmF/4L and 1.4xTC works very well indeed. As has been said, you will lose autofocus with the 2xTC.

[martcol]

Same question different lens....

How about on the 100-400?

Martin

[scottbergerphoto]

Same question different lens....

How about on the 100-400?

Martin
See my post above. No AF with the 1.4(except on Series 1 body) or 2X with the 100-400.
Scott

[martcol]

See my post above. No AF with the 1.4(except on Series 1 body) or 2X with the 100-400.
Scott

:oops: I did read it (honest)

I have the range 28-70, 70-200 100-400 in L glass. I am going to get a converter next and can't make up my mind. What I am really thinking of is extending the range so, with the 2x I'd be going up to 800. But that will be with an f4 lens so, will only be really useful in good light. So do I keep the extra functionality and less loss of light (can you say that?) with the 1.4 or go for the extended range....

It's a pity I couldn't play with one for a couple of months and then change my mind!

Martin

[dn7elson]

No AF with the 1.4(except on Series 1 body) or 2X with the 100-400.

Since the 100-400 is an f4/f5.6 you should be able to autofocus at 100mm with the 1.4....does somewhat negate the benefit of using the extender :lol: :lol:

[Cadwell]

Since the 100-400 is an f4/f5.6 you should be able to autofocus at 100mm with the 1.4....does somewhat negate the benefit of using the extender :lol: :lol:

Actually, it's an F/4.5-F/5.6 so no, you can't (except on a 1 series body of course).

[dn7elson]

Actually, it's an F/4.5-F/5.6 so no, you can't (except on a 1 series body of course).

You are right. I stand corrected.....and head downstairs for another cup of coffee to wake up :lol:

[scottbergerphoto]

See my post above. No AF with the 1.4(except on Series 1 body) or 2X with the 100-400.
Scott

:oops: I did read it (honest)

I have the range 28-70, 70-200 100-400 in L glass. I am going to get a converter next and can't make up my mind. What I am really thinking of is extending the range so, with the 2x I'd be going up to 800. But that will be with an f4 lens so, will only be really useful in good light. So do I keep the extra functionality and less loss of light (can you say that?) with the 1.4 or go for the extended range....

It's a pity I couldn't play with one for a couple of months and then change my mind!

Martin
Personally, I won't use the 2x on the 100-400 agian unless I have to for the reach. It is very hard to get good focus even with good lighting. I discarded more then 1/2 the shots with that combination. To get that long you have to consider something like a 500mm prime and 1.4X. It gets pretty expensive. I bought the Sigma 500mm 4.5 EX APO for about $3400 (ouch!). The Canon variety are about $5000 and up.
Have you considered renting a couple of different lenses for a weekend and seeing what works for you?
Scott

[eric1]

well it's like this... the canon 1.4 will NOT af on 100-400. there is a
Tamron 1.4 that WILL. i read this on another site, and decided to try
it. i don't have the 100-400. i have the 400 5.6L, and AF DOES work
if you have enough light. you do NOT have to tape the pins. some of the
exif data is not sent back to the camera, and it thinks it's still at 5.6.
this works for me, and the thread i read was originally written for the
100-400. Tamron makes two t-cons, a standard and a SP. you must use the standard one. it's about $70USD at B&H. the quality is not as good as the canon, but it's not that far off. i also tested this on a friend's 75-300,
and also got AF. your mileage may very.

thanks,
eric1