70-200mm f/2.8L USM with 2x extender versus 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS USM

dogface · 3rd of June 2007 (Sun)

I always shoot our outdoor swim team meets. Last year I stepped up to the 70-200mm f/2.8 on a 5D vice a Tamron 70-300mm f/4.0-5.6 on the orginal digital Rebel. Either combination has given me good shots but the 5D with the 70-200 gave me a lot better shots (and a lot better chance of getting the shot). I really like the speed of this lens. The only thing I miss about the Rebel combination is loss of the 300mm (combined with the 1.6 crop factor effectively giving me a 400mm+ zoom).

This year, I'm itching to step up to the 100-400mm but am at odds with just using my 70-200 with my 2x extender. As soon as practices start up I'm going to give that a try to see how I like it. Meantime, I'm looking for opinions...

downhillnews · 3rd of June 2007 (Sun)

We have both lenses, but using them on 20 D bodies. The 100-400 is slower when focusing but gives much greater length. It is also a little less sharp overall! Just my 2 cents??

Jkim13 · 3rd of June 2007 (Sun)

If you look at this thread towards the middle, it seems most people seem to like hte 70-200 w/ extender better than the 100-400.
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/...d.php?t=329024

ibdb · 3rd of June 2007 (Sun)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jkim13

If you look at this thread towards the middle, it seems most people seem to like hte 70-200 w/ extender better than the 100-400.
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/...d.php?t=329024

They're referring to the 1.4 extender though, not 2X -- which could make a difference for speed and quality. The 1.4x are usually better received -- not that I've tried either.

michael_ · 4th of June 2007 (Mon)

i have had zero issues with my 70-200 and 2xTC and never noticed any reduction in IQ i dont have the 100-400 to compare though.

RichNY · 4th of June 2007 (Mon)

The 100-400 will give you better IQ than using a 2x extender on your 70-200. Yes there is a big difference between the 1.4xIQ and the 2xIQ.

Heck, we'd all love to not have to buy another big heavy white lens if a TC would suffice but there is a performance hit going that way.

Picturesports · 4th of June 2007 (Mon)

My 2 cents worth - My 100-400 is a dark lens that needs lots of light. As downhillnews says it is a little slower focusing but gives great depth.

My 70-200 is just so sharp and I tend to crop rather than put an extender on it.

Jkim13 · 4th of June 2007 (Mon)

lol I just skimmed thorough it really quick and didnt realize they were talking about a different extender. Sorry abou that

Kyl3 · 4th of June 2007 (Mon)

I prefer the 70-200 + 2xtc over the 100-400 personally

Here's a shot with said combo at ~380mm http://www.kylesharpphoto.com/galler...tonnsw0801.jpg

dogface · 4th of June 2007 (Mon)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Picturesports

My 2 cents worth - My 100-400 is a dark lens that needs lots of light. As downhillnews says it is a little slower focusing but gives great depth.

My 70-200 is just so sharp and I tend to crop rather than put an extender on it.

That's another thing I like about the 70-200mm f/2.8L over the 75-300 f/4.5-5.6. Meets start at 8 a.m. and our home pool is shaded by some towering woods until between 9:30 and 10:00. I of course can get better shots in the morning with the bigger aperture. I've also been cropping more using 5D with good results.

I think I'm leaning toward just getting a 1.4x saving a stop over the 2x. My wife will be glad.

3rd of June 2007 (Sun)	#1
dogface Member Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 92	70-200mm f/2.8L USM with 2x extender versus 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS USM I always shoot our outdoor swim team meets. Last year I stepped up to the 70-200mm f/2.8 on a 5D vice a Tamron 70-300mm f/4.0-5.6 on the orginal digital Rebel. Either combination has given me good shots but the 5D with the 70-200 gave me a lot better shots (and a lot better chance of getting the shot). I really like the speed of this lens. The only thing I miss about the Rebel combination is loss of the 300mm (combined with the 1.6 crop factor effectively giving me a 400mm+ zoom). This year, I'm itching to step up to the 100-400mm but am at odds with just using my 70-200 with my 2x extender. As soon as practices start up I'm going to give that a try to see how I like it. Meantime, I'm looking for opinions... __________________ A bunch of stuff.

3rd of June 2007 (Sun)	#2
downhillnews Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2007 Posts: 1,295 IMAGE EDITING OK	Re: 70-200mm f/2.8L USM with 2x extender versus 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS USM We have both lenses, but using them on 20 D bodies. The 100-400 is slower when focusing but gives much greater length. It is also a little less sharp overall! Just my 2 cents??

3rd of June 2007 (Sun)	#3
Jkim13 Member Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: La Palma, CA Posts: 108 IMAGE EDITING OK	Re: 70-200mm f/2.8L USM with 2x extender versus 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS USM If you look at this thread towards the middle, it seems most people seem to like hte 70-200 w/ extender better than the 100-400. http://photography-on-the.net/forum/...d.php?t=329024 __________________ - John

4th of June 2007 (Mon)	#5
michael_ Goldmember Join Date: May 2006 Location: sydney... Posts: 3,446 IMAGE EDITING OK	Re: 70-200mm f/2.8L USM with 2x extender versus 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS USM i have had zero issues with my 70-200 and 2xTC and never noticed any reduction in IQ i dont have the 100-400 to compare though. __________________ michael ... michael vettas photography (me) \| myGear (all my equipment) \| sportshooter (my sportsshooter member page) AFL Sydney (AFL Sydney Official Photographer) \| circlework sports media (motorsport, netball, basketball, tennis, cricket, afl, hockey)

4th of June 2007 (Mon)	#6
RichNY Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Posts: 1,801	Re: 70-200mm f/2.8L USM with 2x extender versus 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS USM The 100-400 will give you better IQ than using a 2x extender on your 70-200. Yes there is a big difference between the 1.4xIQ and the 2xIQ. Heck, we'd all love to not have to buy another big heavy white lens if a TC would suffice but there is a performance hit going that way. __________________ Nikon D3, D300, 10.5 Fisheye, 35 f/1.4, 50 f/1.4, 85 f/1.4, Zeiss 100 f/2, 105 f/2.5, 200 f/4 Micro, 200 f/2, 300 f/2.8, 14-24, 24-70, 70-200, SB-800x4, SB-900, SU-800, (3) Sunpak 120J (2) Profoto Acute 2400s,Chimera softboxes, (4)PW Multimax, (6) C-stands, (3) Bogen Superbooms, Autopoles

4th of June 2007 (Mon)	#7
Picturesports Member Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: Grantham, Lincolnshire Posts: 474	Re: 70-200mm f/2.8L USM with 2x extender versus 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS USM My 2 cents worth - My 100-400 is a dark lens that needs lots of light. As downhillnews says it is a little slower focusing but gives great depth. My 70-200 is just so sharp and I tend to crop rather than put an extender on it. __________________ www.picturesports.co.uk

4th of June 2007 (Mon)	#9
Kyl3 Member Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Sydney, AU Posts: 225	Re: 70-200mm f/2.8L USM with 2x extender versus 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS USM I prefer the 70-200 + 2xtc over the 100-400 personally Here's a shot with said combo at ~380mm http://www.kylesharpphoto.com/galler...tonnsw0801.jpg __________________ http://www.kylesharp.com.au http://www.circlework.com.au

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Tele-Extender w/Canon 70-200mm F2.8 IS USM	Rmclain3	Canon EOS Digital Cameras	1	11th of June 2007 (Mon) 12:29
EF 100-400mm f4.5-5.6L IS USM •OR• EF 70-200mm f/4L IS USM Please Advise	PrOxY	Canon EF and EF-S Lenses	8	22nd of February 2007 (Thu) 02:48
EF 400mm f/2.8L IS USM and EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS USM	james0052	Canon EF and EF-S Lenses	12	15th of May 2006 (Mon) 07:04
MF Issues -- Canon EF 400mm f/5.6L USM with a EF 1.4x II Extender -- Help!	Davidsl222	Canon EF and EF-S Lenses	19	28th of April 2006 (Fri) 23:26
100-400mm 4.5-5.6L or 70-200mm 2.8L w/2.0x Extender	Moody Blues	Canon EF and EF-S Lenses	15	6th of October 2004 (Wed) 08:58