I say that the 70-200 2.8 IS and the 1.4 is better all around but my buddy says 100-400...
shayneyasinski Senior Member 657 posts Joined Dec 2008 Location: Canada (sask) More info | Sep 22, 2011 19:05 | #1 I say that the 70-200 2.8 IS and the 1.4 is better all around but my buddy says 100-400... my gear Canon 7D, Canon 5DMK2, 70-200 f2.8 IS, 50mm f1.8, canon 430 speedlight, canon 17-55 2.8 IS, canon 100mm macro sigma 10-20, Canon 17-85 , 60 cokin filters , 2x telecoverter.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
frankk Senior Member 825 posts Joined Oct 2010 Location: NJ, USA More info | Sep 22, 2011 19:14 | #2 280mm f4 vs 400mm f5.6 isn't apples-to-apples. If I want reach, the 400mm has it.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Snydremark my very own Lightrules moment More info | Sep 22, 2011 19:15 | #3 Completely depends on what you're shooting and how you want to frame it; but for actual reach, the 100-400 is king, between those two. - Eric S.: My Birds/Wildlife
LOG IN TO REPLY |
2x tele then? my gear Canon 7D, Canon 5DMK2, 70-200 f2.8 IS, 50mm f1.8, canon 430 speedlight, canon 17-55 2.8 IS, canon 100mm macro sigma 10-20, Canon 17-85 , 60 cokin filters , 2x telecoverter.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Sep 22, 2011 19:22 | #5 Why I ask is cause a friend bought the 100-400 after I said buy the 70-200 as he shoots baseball and indoor hockey , but he had the crappy 70-300 and I think he fell in love with the extra100mm at the store, I know what my 70-200 2.8IS can do and I know the 100-400 is not all that fast so I was going to suggest the 70-200 and a tele for the range. my gear Canon 7D, Canon 5DMK2, 70-200 f2.8 IS, 50mm f1.8, canon 430 speedlight, canon 17-55 2.8 IS, canon 100mm macro sigma 10-20, Canon 17-85 , 60 cokin filters , 2x telecoverter.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Snydremark my very own Lightrules moment More info | Sep 22, 2011 19:22 | #6 Even the 70-200 MkII + 2x MkIII TC combo couldn't beat the results from the 100-400. YMMV - Eric S.: My Birds/Wildlife
LOG IN TO REPLY |
frankk Senior Member 825 posts Joined Oct 2010 Location: NJ, USA More info | Indoor hockey and a 100-400mm doesn't sound like a good match, though I've never shot indoor hockey. It might be brighter than basketball.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Sep 22, 2011 19:28 | #8 Snydremark wrote in post #13147585 Even the 70-200 MkII + 2x MkIII TC combo couldn't beat the results from the 100-400. YMMV Thats why I was thinking the 1.4 tc would be better , but In the end it is all about what he shoots, I am sure he will be dissapointed with the 100-400 in the rink tho.. my gear Canon 7D, Canon 5DMK2, 70-200 f2.8 IS, 50mm f1.8, canon 430 speedlight, canon 17-55 2.8 IS, canon 100mm macro sigma 10-20, Canon 17-85 , 60 cokin filters , 2x telecoverter.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Snydremark my very own Lightrules moment More info | Sep 22, 2011 19:36 | #9 Agreed; but I wouldn't want to try and use a 70-200 + 2x TC for the same reason. Ultimately, you'd want to be shooting with a lens of 2.8 or better and just be close enough to frame the shots properly; BUT, I would probably take the 70-200 + 1.4 and crop before trying to use the ole' dustpump for this particular endeavor. - Eric S.: My Birds/Wildlife
LOG IN TO REPLY |
![]() | x 1600 |
| y 1600 |
| Log in 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!
|
| ||
| Latest registered member is johntmyers418 763 guests, 121 members online Simultaneous users record so far is 15,144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018 | |||