Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
Thread started 05 Nov 2011 (Saturday) 13:54
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

70-200 mk II with TC vs 100-400

 
kory
Member
130 posts
Joined Oct 2011
     
Nov 05, 2011 13:54 |  #1

Here is my dilemma I have a 70-200 mk II but want more reach. How does this lens with a TC compare to the 100-400. Or do I need to go with a longer faster prime. I can spend more if the quality is much better. I was waiting for the new 200-400 with TC but it is taking forever. What do you guys think? I will only be using the lens 5-10 times a year. Mostly for sports and some birds. I shoot a 5d II. Thanks in advance. I have never
Used a TC or longer lens than my 70-200 II.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
birder_herper
Senior Member
778 posts
Likes: 25
Joined Feb 2009
Location: Cleveland, Ohio
     
Nov 05, 2011 17:00 |  #2

Another lens will give you better results than the 70-200 2.8 II. I have the 70-200 2.8 II and have tried a few test shots with the 2x II (not the newer III). I will have to find some more shots but here's a few to get started:

Example 1: Full image, then a crop thereof:

PHOTOBUCKET EMBEDDING IS DISABLED BY THIS MEMBER.
Photobucket sends ads instead of embedding photos from their free galleries.
Click the link (if available) below to see the image in a gallery page.

http://i441.photobucke​t.com …wamp_ratter/lig​htfull.jpg (external link)
HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Byte size: ZERO


PHOTOBUCKET EMBEDDING IS DISABLED BY THIS MEMBER.
Photobucket sends ads instead of embedding photos from their free galleries.
Click the link (if available) below to see the image in a gallery page.

http://i441.photobucke​t.com …p_ratter/light1​00crop.jpg (external link)
HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Byte size: ZERO


Example 2: Same deal here.

PHOTOBUCKET EMBEDDING IS DISABLED BY THIS MEMBER.
Photobucket sends ads instead of embedding photos from their free galleries.
Click the link (if available) below to see the image in a gallery page.

http://i441.photobucke​t.com …/swamp_ratter/c​atfull.jpg (external link)
HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Byte size: ZERO


PHOTOBUCKET EMBEDDING IS DISABLED BY THIS MEMBER.
Photobucket sends ads instead of embedding photos from their free galleries.
Click the link (if available) below to see the image in a gallery page.

http://i441.photobucke​t.com …amp_ratter/cat1​00crop.jpg (external link)
HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Byte size: ZERO


Example 3: same deal!

PHOTOBUCKET EMBEDDING IS DISABLED BY THIS MEMBER.
Photobucket sends ads instead of embedding photos from their free galleries.
Click the link (if available) below to see the image in a gallery page.

http://i441.photobucke​t.com …p_ratter/wheelb​arrow1.jpg (external link)
HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Byte size: ZERO


PHOTOBUCKET EMBEDDING IS DISABLED BY THIS MEMBER.
Photobucket sends ads instead of embedding photos from their free galleries.
Click the link (if available) below to see the image in a gallery page.

http://i441.photobucke​t.com …p_ratter/wheelb​arrow2.jpg (external link)
HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Byte size: ZERO


All with EOS 1D Mark III with 70-200 2.8 v2 with 2x II. All handheld. No sharpening or other adjustments. Converted straight from RAW.



  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
jhayesvw
Cream of the Crop
7,230 posts
Gallery: 167 photos
Likes: 270
Joined Jan 2011
Location: Tucson AZ
     
Nov 06, 2011 00:06 as a reply to  @ birder_herper's post |  #3

those all look pretty good to me.
i have a 100-400 and like it alot for its versatility.
I need to upgrade my camera body as the rebel just doesnt focus as fast as I need it to. or as accurately sometimes.



My Flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
onesickpuppy
Senior Member
Avatar
878 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 25
Joined Sep 2004
Location: Spokane WA
     
Nov 06, 2011 00:31 |  #4

the 70-200 will focus faster than the 100-400.....even with the TC on

You will get better quality with the 70-200 using the new version TC than that of the version II

I sold my 100-400 and get a great range of use with my 1.4 and 2x as well as straight 70-200




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
kevindar
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
5,050 posts
Likes: 38
Joined May 2007
Location: california
     
Nov 06, 2011 00:44 |  #5

I have both lenses, a 2x II tc, a kenko 1.4x tc, and a 5d2 and 7D.
100-400 definitely focuses faster, and tracks faster than 70-200 with 2x. it is sharper at 400 5.6, and balances much better on the camera. the 70-200with 1.4x will be faster focusing than 100-400, and sharper, but of course it makes it 280.
If you got money burning a hole in your pocket which it really sounds like you do, if you are waiting for what is estimated to be a 7k-8k monster of a lens, to use 5-10 times a year to take some sports or bird pictures, go for the 100-400, or even better the 400 2.8 IS prime, a beast, and lord of image quality. but honestly, if you are using it that infrequently, a tc may be a good solution.
Oh by the way, the sharpness would be very good with both combinations on 5dII do to lower pixel density.


My Flickr (external link)
Gear List
https://photography-on-the.net …/showthread.php​?t=1205576

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
kory
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
130 posts
Joined Oct 2011
     
Nov 07, 2011 11:39 |  #6

kevindar wrote in post #13359651 (external link)
I have both lenses, a 2x II tc, a kenko 1.4x tc, and a 5d2 and 7D.
100-400 definitely focuses faster, and tracks faster than 70-200 with 2x. it is sharper at 400 5.6, and balances much better on the camera. the 70-200with 1.4x will be faster focusing than 100-400, and sharper, but of course it makes it 280.
If you got money burning a hole in your pocket which it really sounds like you do, if you are waiting for what is estimated to be a 7k-8k monster of a lens, to use 5-10 times a year to take some sports or bird pictures, go for the 100-400, or even better the 400 2.8 IS prime, a beast, and lord of image quality. but honestly, if you are using it that infrequently, a tc may be a good solution.
Oh by the way, the sharpness would be very good with both combinations on 5dII do to lower pixel density.

Thanks for your input. I may just end up getting a TC and wait for the 200-400 or look at the 400 2.8. I have some other primes but end up using my zooms more often for everything other than portraits. A non zoom might be tough with sports. I know I am wasting money but these lenses don't really depreciate that much so if I don't use it I can always resell it. Would you recommend the 2.0 or the 1.4? Is the canon that much better than the Kenko?




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
simonjs
Member
57 posts
Joined Jan 2011
Location: UK
     
Nov 07, 2011 14:11 |  #7

The mk III 2x extender is better than the mk II in my experience.

The 1.4x extender with the 70-200mm mk II is a realy good combination but as mentioned above it is 280mm.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
drumsfield
Goldmember
Avatar
1,601 posts
Likes: 27
Joined Oct 2009
Location: Bethesda Md
     
Nov 07, 2011 14:28 |  #8

I have all 3. The 2x MKii, the 70-200mm MK II and the 100-400mm. I carry the 70-200mm and 2x on long trips and the 100-400 and 2x when I'm outdoors hiking. I rarely find the need for 400mm unless I'm shooting wildlife and the 800mm with manual focus is just plain neat to have when I'm outdoors.


Canon 5D MkIII | Olympus OM-D | Olympus E-P2 | 16-35L MKII | 24-70L MKII | 70-200L MKII | 85L MKII | EF 50mm 1.4 | EF 100mm 2.8 | 100-400mm L MKII | 20mm 1.7
Feedback and Full gear list
Website (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
noisejammer
Goldmember
Avatar
1,053 posts
Likes: 5
Joined May 2010
Location: Toronto ON
     
Nov 07, 2011 17:27 |  #9

I did a test between the 70-200 Mk II + 1.4x Mk II against at 300/4. On a tripod or monopod, the 300/4 won it pretty easily. When I took it off the support, it was very difficult to tell.

Recently, I tried a 400/4 DO against the 70-200 Mk II with a 1.4x and cropped to the same scale... There was no comparison - the 400/4 won this contest whether it was hand held or on a support.

Some review sites have commented that they believe the 100-400 L is sharper than the 400/4 DO... while I dispute this statement, it does suggest that the 100-400 will do very nicely when stacked up against the 70-200 Mk II with a 2x converter. You can compare them here... (external link) Wide open, I see the 100-400 to be sharper in the centre and it's slightly better in the corners.

Edit - I found that there wasn't a lot of optical difference between the 1.4x Mk II and the Kenko 1.4x Pro alphabet soup. That said, the mechanical build of the Canon is considerably better. Having had the Canon 1.4 II and III, I'd offer that the Mk III is better sealed and seems to suit the 70-200 Mk II really well.


Several cameras and more glass than I will admit to.
Flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

2,310 views & 0 likes for this thread
70-200 mk II with TC vs 100-400
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is LoDesertWolf
813 guests, 166 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.