100-400 or 2x TC

[Jonny]

Guys,

I have a 70-200 2.8 IS and desperately want more reach. As this is my longest lens i am considering the 100-400 L. I already have a 1.4x TC and this is OK but it still too short.

Can anyone post some sample pics of the 70-200 + 2x ?? i hear that it is a little soft but is this something i can address in PS?

Money is tight right now so i'd rather not spend more than i need but i don't want to waste cash on a 2x if i won't be happy.

Also does anyone have any sample pics on a 2x and 1.4x stacked on this lens? Will that give me real soft images? will i still get the AF?

Thanks everyone

[cmM]

on a 20D you can't use the 100-400 with a TC,you won't be able to AF. I think ther was a way by taping some contacts or something, but still... no autofocus.

[defordphoto]

That wasn't the question, cmM. ;)

Jonny, if you want more reach get the 100-400. You are going to keep the 70-200 too right? You'll miss the f/2.8 for those low light shots when you need it. Believe what everyone says about the 2.0x TC. It's soft and you will not like it. Not only that, it'll turn your lens (70-200) into a pig. It'll slow down AF and several reduce it's accuracy. I don't have any shots currently, but I guess I could shoot a couple later today.

[CyberDyneSystems]

on a 20D you can't use the 100-400 with a TC,you won't be able to AF. I think ther was a way by taping some contacts or something, but still... no autofocus.

His question is whether to invest in a 2X for his 70-200m or to get a 100-400mm...

At this point I would suggest that if the 70-200mm is still to short with a 1.4X,. then just get the 100-400mm...

But I would qualify that statement ,.. as it would edepend on how often you find yourself "too short"

If it's the majority of the time,. get th 100-400mm,. or even the 400mm prime.

If it is for only odd times that you find the 1.4X is not long enough,. then maybe the 2X would make sense for occsional use.

[defordphoto]

Geeze. CDS and I typed at the exact same time. Scary. :)

Yeah, I forgot about the 400 prime. Sweet lens. Light, fast AF. No IS though.

[cmM]

That wasn't the question, cmM. ;)
:o That's the second one today... something's wrong this morning.

[defordphoto]

:o That's the second one today... something's wrong this morning.

Time for coffee. :)

[malla1962]

you could even go for the 300 f4 prime and use your 1.4 on it and still have af and is.

[CyberDyneSystems]

Geeze. CDS and I typed at the exact same time. Scary. :)

Yeah, I forgot about the 400 prime. Sweet lens. Light, fast AF. No IS though.

:lol:

I didn't even realize it as I didn't wait for the page to reload! :lol:

Anyway,. I definitely agree that the 2X is not a good solution.... if cost is a huge obsticle it can be a stop gap,... but the dmage done to image quality is high.

[Jonny]

Thanks guys, looks like i will wait a while and get the 100-400.
I thought about the 300 prime but as i will use it for sports i feel i will miss the zoom too much.