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 10 Feb 2006 (Friday) 21:43
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Canon 100-400mm f4 Vs 70-200mm f2.8 + 1.4x convertor?

 
mckay ­ photography
Senior Member
Avatar
676 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 3
Joined Nov 2005
Location: Sydney Australia
     
Feb 10, 2006 21:43 |  #1

Hi there,

I'm looking at a new zoom lens for landscape and wildlife shots....this might not be an easy answer but what do people think between the 100-400mm IS USM f4 lens vs a 70-200mm USM f2.8 lens with the addition of a 1.4x or even 2x convertor?

My initial take was definitely for the 100-400mm due to superior range and the IS. But on reflection the smaller size and weight plus better short range zoom of the 70-200mm, plus being a faster lens at f2.8 makes me think it might be a better purchase.

One question is: how much loss of quality would I get by using the extender on the 70-200mm?

Any ideas would be appreciated.

Darryn


Gear: 5D mkiii x 2, 35 1.4 L, 16-35 L, 24-70 mkiiL, 70-200 L, Sigma Art 50 1.4
Wedding Photography Sydney (external link)
| Wedding Photography blog (external link) | Wedding photography Bowral (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
fWord
Goldmember
Avatar
2,637 posts
Joined Jan 2006
Location: Melbourne, Australia
     
Feb 10, 2006 22:03 |  #2

The 70-200mm f/2.8 is will probably heavier with a TC stacked on. With a 1.4X TC, the quality might still match or even beat the 100-400mm lens, but the range is nowhere near as far.

With a 2X TC stacked on, there is said to be a distinct loss of image quality and in a matchup between the two setups, the 100-400mm is a clear winner.

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/​lenses/400v400.shtml (external link)

In the end, it might boil down to what sort of subjects you wish to shoot. For example, if you wish to do some indoor sports photographs, it might be pushing it with the 100-400mm, but with the 70-200mm f/2.8, even with a 1.4X TC on, it might still be manageable. That said, someone at this forum did do indoor sports with the 100-400mm before, at ISO 3200 and using a noise-removal software after which.

If you use a 1.4X TC on your 70-200mm, it might still be a little short if you want to get involved in photographing smaller wildlife or birds. For bigger animals in the zoo, it might do well even on it's own, but over here I've found that the more dangerous animals are generally further away and you won't be able to get up close at 200mm, even on a 1.6X FOV crop camera.

And of course, if you wish to shoot primarily handheld, then IS is a good idea. I found myself wanting more range, plus wanting IS because I don't use a tripod. So the 100-400mm was the answer for me.

There's other nice choices out there for birds and wildlife too, such as the Sigma 50-500mm and Canon 400mm f/5.6L. But if you're looking to do some unusual landscape shots and photograph tame animals, then the 70-200mm (IS or non-IS) might be a better choice for you. But quite frankly, I haven't found the focal length range between 55mm and 100mm (between the kit lens and the 100-400mm lens) to be very crucial as of yet, especially since I don't do portrait shots.


LightWorks Portfolio (external link)
Night Photography Tutorial: Basics & Minutiae (external link)
Gear List (Past & Present)
The Art of Composition IS the Art of Photography.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Jon
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
69,628 posts
Likes: 225
Joined Jun 2004
Location: Bethesda, MD USA
     
Feb 10, 2006 22:19 |  #3

The 70-200 isn't much smaller, and is heavier, than the 100-400. If you put a 2x TC on it, I'd expect (was going to try a test this weekend, but we're expecting snow) it'll be worse than the 100-400 at the long end. If you need f/2.8, that's one thing. If you need 400 more than 70, that's another. I got the 100-400 first and added the 70-200 later. I'm not about to give either up, though.


Jon
----------
Cocker Spaniels
Maryland and Virginia activities
Image Posting Rules and Image Posting FAQ
Report SPAM, Don't Answer It! (link)
PERSONAL MESSAGING REGARDING SELLING OR BUYING ITEMS WITH MEMBERS WHO HAVE NO POSTS IN FORUMS AND/OR WHO YOU DO NOT KNOW FROM FORUMS IS HEREBY DECLARED STRICTLY STUPID AND YOU WILL GET BURNED.
PAYPAL GIFT NO LONGER ALLOWED HERE

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Stan43
Goldmember
Avatar
1,206 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Nov 2005
Location: Louisville KY
     
Feb 11, 2006 07:23 |  #4

I have both. As you described your needs the 100-400 will fit best. If.. you want to take indoor sports you will want the 70-200 2,8. Save up and add that later.


Canon: 5DSr,5Dmk3,1DXmk2 5d MK4,11-24L,35L,70-200 2.8L2,24-105L,24-70L,Sigma 24-105 Art,50 1.4 Art,Tamron SP85 1.8,Tamron SP90 Macro. Zeiss 135 F2 Milvus
Pentax 645Z,90 2.8 Macro,55 2.8,24-48 . Fuji: EX2,XT1,14mm,18-55,56,55-200,Zeis Touit 2.8 Macro

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mckay ­ photography
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Avatar
676 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 3
Joined Nov 2005
Location: Sydney Australia
     
Feb 12, 2006 20:28 |  #5

Hi,

Fword cheers for that link, it compares the two setups perfectly. The difference in sharpness at 400m is significant.....and enough to sway me towards the 100-400mm for the longer range shots.

Good point too re the 55-100mm range not being crucial....I can cover that with other lenses I have, although they wont be as sharp. Interesting the two setups would be similar weight, for some reason I thought the 70-200mm would be lighter!

I dont think I'll be shooting indoor sport much, more likely outdoor beach volleyball and as there's usually plenty of light the 100-400mm would be easily fast enough.

I guess the other advantage of the 100-400mm is that if I need even more range i could get a 1.4x or 2x TC.

Thanks everyone for some good comments!

Darryn


Gear: 5D mkiii x 2, 35 1.4 L, 16-35 L, 24-70 mkiiL, 70-200 L, Sigma Art 50 1.4
Wedding Photography Sydney (external link)
| Wedding Photography blog (external link) | Wedding photography Bowral (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
fWord
Goldmember
Avatar
2,637 posts
Joined Jan 2006
Location: Melbourne, Australia
     
Feb 12, 2006 21:37 as a reply to  @ mckay photography's post |  #6

The 70-200mm f/2.8 would be heavy, I imagine, because of the large constant aperture. However, given that almost everyone else is better built than me, handling such a lens shouldn't be too much of an issue.

If I didn't need to stretch the range all the way to 400mm, the 70-200mm f/2.8 IS would certainly be something I would have considered too in the past. Add a 1.4X TC and it's ready to go. Also, the improved IS is excellent.

Another option is the 300mm f/4L IS. Add a 1.4X TC for increased range, or work it as a 300mm prime. But even so I doubt if it's fast enough for indoor sports.

It's possible to extend the range of the 100-400mm with a TC, but there will be no AF on entry-level bodies, such as the one I have, and I haven't seen what the quality is like with a TC attached.


LightWorks Portfolio (external link)
Night Photography Tutorial: Basics & Minutiae (external link)
Gear List (Past & Present)
The Art of Composition IS the Art of Photography.

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

2,328 views & 0 likes for this thread
Canon 100-400mm f4 Vs 70-200mm f2.8 + 1.4x convertor?
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 Ivy Yeh
638 guests, 232 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.