New version III extenders and 200-400 benefits

I have found a few articles online about the benefits of pairing the new version III extenders with the new version II telephoto lenses. All the articles were written prior to the retail release of the 200-400 so I'm wondering if the same benefits would apply when pairing the new version III extenders with the 200-400. Has anyone read anything on the subject?

http://www.learn.usa.c​anon.com …ertelephoto_art​icle.shtml

http://www.slrgear.com …les/canon_tc/ca​non_tc.htm

I thought 200-400mm came with built in extender.

bobbyz wrote in post #16326599
I thought 200-400mm came with built in extender.

Yes but sometimes the 1.4 might not be enough.

http://www.timlaman.co​m …400-f4l-with-2x-extender/

Amazing lens.. And then I googled the price... Holy sh*t

Lloydd wrote in post #16357424
http://www.timlaman.co​m …400-f4l-with-2x-extender/

Thank you. I read this review, but it doesn't talk about the benefits of the new version III extenders that are supposed to extend to the new version II super teles like the 500 and 600.

What's not to love about an equivilent 1800mm lens on a crop, other than the F/11 part of course.

Nick_Reading.UK wrote in post #16357533
Amazing lens.. And then I googled the price... Holy sh*t

As a pro who shoots Nikon told me "It is twice the price of the Nikon but 4 times the lens. So it is a bargain really!"

Unbelievable pricing But I believe it is a great lens.

vengence wrote in post #16358834
What's not to love about an equivilent 1800mm lens on a crop, other than the F/11 part of course.

The light having to pass thru multiple extenders before it hits your sensor. There's not much to love about that. Stacking extenders has a really bad affect on IQ. Using an $11,000 lens to create soft, blurred images doesn't seem to make much sense to me. This lens was designed to make beautiful, sharply resolved images . . . why use it in a way that cancels out it's excellent optics? Stick to one extender and you'll still get nice, sharp, detailed images.

This 200-400 is not really intended as a replacement for a big prime. The people I know who have this lens use it as a compliment to their 600mm or 800mm lenses.

Tom Reichner wrote in post #16360509
The light having to pass thru multiple extenders before it hits your sensor. There's not much to love about that. Stacking extenders has a really bad affect on IQ. Using an $11,000 lens to create soft, blurred images doesn't seem to make much sense to me. This lens was designed to make beautiful, sharply resolved images . . . why use it in a way that cancels out it's excellent optics? Stick to one extender and you'll still get nice, sharp, detailed images.

This 200-400 is not really intended as a replacement for a big prime. The people I know who have this lens use it as a compliment to their 600mm or 800mm lenses.

I don't think I need longer than 400mm but I might need faster. Do many people use this to complement a 200 f2 or a 300 f2.8?

I'm not a pro and admittedly not a great photographer which is why I'm happy to get help from the gear. That said, it is hard to justify more than one super telephoto given the very limited use.

Tom Reichner wrote in post #16360509
This 200-400 is not really intended as a replacement for a big prime. The people I know who have this lens use it as a compliment to their 600mm or 800mm lenses.

Tom,

What you just said is the route I'm eventually going to take. Down the road, I will definitely own the 200-400...and then I'll either get the 600 or 800 prime. That will pretty much complete my lens line-up and I'm pretty sure that I may not ever need to buy another lens until Canon changes it mounting format.

Bryan

bps wrote in post #16360839
Tom,

What you just said is the route I'm eventually going to take. Down the road, I will definitely own the 200-400...and then I'll either get the 600 or 800 prime. That will pretty much complete my lens line-up and I'm pretty sure that I may not ever need to buy another lens until Canon changes it mounting format.

Bryan

"Never" is a long time.

I thought this would be my only telephoto but I'm still thinking of the 200, 300, 400 primes.

Tom Reichner wrote in post #16360509
The light having to pass thru multiple extenders before it hits your sensor. There's not much to love about that. Stacking extenders has a really bad affect on IQ. Using an $11,000 lens to create soft, blurred images doesn't seem to make much sense to me. This lens was designed to make beautiful, sharply resolved images . . . why use it in a way that cancels out it's excellent optics? Stick to one extender and you'll still get nice, sharp, detailed images.

This 200-400 is not really intended as a replacement for a big prime. The people I know who have this lens use it as a compliment to their 600mm or 800mm lenses.

I have to disagree here. Whilst I agree that this lens (which I own) is a great lens to compliment a 600mm or an 800mm, there's many situations where it's simply not possible to carry two big whites with you. The 200-400 performs very well indeed with an external extender (giving a 784mm f/8). Of course it's not as sharp but it's absolutely useable and sharp. NOT "soft and blurry".

On my website I have an article dedicated to samples of this lens using two extenders. I won't post it directly here for fear of sounding a little too self-serving, but if you wanted to find it in Google you could do so very easily, along with my full review of the lens which also contains samples from this combination.

A 600mm would be sharper of course, but what you're paying for with this lens is the versatility. No you shouldn't buy it if you were previously considering an 800mm, it's no match, but it works very well indeed.

This thread is 4 months old....