70/200 and 100/400 or 70/200 plus teleconvertor?

[Blade]

Hi all,

I am selling my 28-300L IS USM, and plan to buy a 70-200L IS USM,
Is it worth getting the 100/400 as well, or would it be better to use the 70/200 with a convertor?

Obviously if im only buying the 70-200, (Plus Conv..) may also buy the 24/70L
But at the moment wonder if the 70/200 with conv will be as sharp as the 100/400?

Kind Regards
Stuart

[Jon]

First question - which TC - 1.4 or 2x?
Second question - are you otherwise covered for the 28-70 range if you go with the 100-400 instead of the 24-70?

I think the general concensus is that the 70-200 with 1.4xTC will stand up to almost anything out there, but with the 2x you're going to see a noticeable difference. If you're looking to push out to 400 mm, the 100-400 would be a better approach, but only as long as you aren't sacrificing the equally important wider end of the range.

[Blade]

Dear Jon,
Have limited cover...
Also own the 17/40L and 100mm Macro 2.8


Have also considered


24/70L and 70/200L with Canon EF 300 f4 L IS USM Lens with 1.4x would this give me a good range, considering i have the 17/40?

And if you could, add any comments would the 300 f4 still be sharp considering its a prime lens with the 1.4x?

And considering i have 17/40 could i get away with the 70/200 and 300 f4 leaving out the 24/70?

Kind Regards

Kindest regards again
Stuart

[Jon]

The 300 f/4 would be good with or without the 1.4x TC.
Whether you can get by without coverage between 40 and 70 mm is going to depend on you. You're going to leave yourself uncovered in the prime portraiture range, but if you don't do portraits that much, you can probably live with the 70 mm end. I'd say to take a look at your photos' EXIF data and see how often you're in the range 40-70 mm. At the very least, you may want to consider the 50 f/1.8.

[Blade]

Dear Jon,
I take your point and have at least made x2 decisions,

24/70 f2.8L
70/200L IS USM 2.8

My only problem for now though is how to extend past x200...
The 100/400L IS is the same price as 300f4 fixed lens.... and am not sure here...
The extra 100mm sounds great especially as i have no multipler to work with on my camera... however have never had a 'prime' lens and have heard the quality is fantastic, even though i could only afford the f4.

[Panza]

I would vote for the 70-200 IS with the teleconverter.
Mainly because it hasn't got push-pull zoom, but you will also get a larger apperture.

[cc10d]

The push pull zoom is not a problem for many of us. It sometimes seems easier to use. I love my 100-400 IS L... very sharp and versital.

[radar-eclipse]

Hey Blade,
How come your getting rid of the 28-300? Just curious.

[Blade]

To be honest the 28-300L in my opinion is the best all in one lens available, i have moved my photography to different needs hence changing to other options.

If you only wanted one lens i do not think you could better it, now though i have moved to different needs as i start to specialise.

My brother also has one but unfortunately he is having to sell his for different reasons
Kind Regards,

[Blade]

Just wanted to bring closure to this thread, and say thank you to all.

Have ordered 24-70L and 70-200L and am very much looking forward to delivery,
New lens line up will be..
1.4TC MkII
100mm 2.8Macro
17-40L
24-70L
70-200L

Will enjoy these, and look later at need for longer reach before making my final decision,

Thank you to all for the kind help in this.
Regards
Stuart

[raylks]

You may also consider 180mm Macro, a wonderful macro L lens.