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 27 Aug 2006 (Sunday) 22:28
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

70-200 f/2.8L IS vs. 100-400L IS

 
calgaryphotographer
Senior Member
338 posts
Joined Mar 2005
     
Aug 27, 2006 22:28 |  #1

Hello -

Yes I know that there are already many topics reguarding this, but mine is a little different.

I don't shoot that much wildlife, actually, hardly any at all. Most of my animal shooting is my two rat terriers.

To the question, for Photojournalism, people, travel, the odd bit of indoor sport, and a fair bit of aviation would a 70-200 f/2.8L IS + 1.4x TC provide a better, more versitle, sharper combination over the 100-400L IS?

P.SThis will be complimented by a 16-35 f/2.8L


CANON EOS 300D | Canon 100-400 f/4.5-5.6 L IS | CANON EF-S 18-55 F/3.5-5.6 | Some soft Hood | CANON EF 75-300 F/4.5-5.6 III USM | Canon ET-60 Hood | Canon EF 50 f/1.8 | Canon ES-62 Hood | CANON 430EX | MANFROTTO TRIPOD | Canon RC-1 Remote | A WHACK OF BP-511'S | SANDISK CF CARDS | LOWEPRO MINI-TREKKER AW |

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
LightRules
"flat out embarrassing"
Avatar
9,909 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Jun 2005
     
Aug 27, 2006 22:46 |  #2

calgaryphotographer wrote:
for Photojournalism, people, travel, the odd bit of indoor sport, and a fair bit of aviation would a 70-200 f/2.8L IS + 1.4x TC provide a better, more versitle, sharper combination over the 100-400L IS?

Yes. Go with the 7-2IS.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
calgaryphotographer
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
338 posts
Joined Mar 2005
     
Aug 27, 2006 22:49 as a reply to  @ LightRules's post |  #3

fStopJojo wrote:
Yes. Go with the 7-2IS.

What's the quality like with teleconverters?


CANON EOS 300D | Canon 100-400 f/4.5-5.6 L IS | CANON EF-S 18-55 F/3.5-5.6 | Some soft Hood | CANON EF 75-300 F/4.5-5.6 III USM | Canon ET-60 Hood | Canon EF 50 f/1.8 | Canon ES-62 Hood | CANON 430EX | MANFROTTO TRIPOD | Canon RC-1 Remote | A WHACK OF BP-511'S | SANDISK CF CARDS | LOWEPRO MINI-TREKKER AW |

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
LightRules
"flat out embarrassing"
Avatar
9,909 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Jun 2005
     
Aug 27, 2006 22:55 as a reply to  @ calgaryphotographer's post |  #4

calgaryphotographer wrote:
What's the quality like with teleconverters?

I've shot with many 7-2IS lenses and a few 1-4IS lenses. The short of it is that at 400mm f5.6, the 7-2IS cannot match the 1-4IS either in resolution or contrast (especially the latter). You can try to PP the heck out of the image from the 7-2IS + 2xTC but it just has an artificial look to it. Good enough for some, not good enough for others. The 1-4IS is still quite a bit better at 400mm.

At 280-300mm, it's closer, especially in sharpness, but the 1-4IS still has better contrast reproduction wide open than the 7-2IS + 1.4x. I think contrast is where it really takes a hit with the TC. That said, IQ is still good with the 7-2IS with 1.4x. Stop the lens down by 1 and IQ is very good.

I think using a 1.4x on the 7-2IS is a very usable combination, especially 1 stop down. Of course remove the TC and IQ is flat-out stunning.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
amonline
Goldmember
Avatar
3,558 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Jul 2006
     
Aug 28, 2006 00:21 |  #5

It sounds like (based on your interests) that you wouldn't use the TC very often. Start with the 70-200 and save the money on the TC for now. TC's will soften the image fairly dramatically at the higher ranges. If you really need 400, I think you'll come to that conclusion far down the road (not immediately) and would be ready for an additional lens by that time... giving you both in the long run. I can speak from experience on this one. I have the 100-400... but rarely do I actually use it. (same generally situation as you really)




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
calgaryphotographer
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
338 posts
Joined Mar 2005
     
Aug 28, 2006 02:09 |  #6

Alright, thank you all.

Considering, I believe there is room for a 400 f/5.6L if I really see the need.


CANON EOS 300D | Canon 100-400 f/4.5-5.6 L IS | CANON EF-S 18-55 F/3.5-5.6 | Some soft Hood | CANON EF 75-300 F/4.5-5.6 III USM | Canon ET-60 Hood | Canon EF 50 f/1.8 | Canon ES-62 Hood | CANON 430EX | MANFROTTO TRIPOD | Canon RC-1 Remote | A WHACK OF BP-511'S | SANDISK CF CARDS | LOWEPRO MINI-TREKKER AW |

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
malla1962
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
7,714 posts
Likes: 4
Joined Jul 2004
Location: Walney Island,cumbria,uk
     
Aug 28, 2006 02:55 as a reply to  @ calgaryphotographer's post |  #7

For what you are saying I would go for the 70-200 all day long,even with the 1.4TC tou get a 280 f4 that is still very sharp.:D


Gear List

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
estart
Member
87 posts
Joined Jul 2006
Location: NJ
     
Aug 28, 2006 04:19 |  #8

70-200 IS better choice


Frank canon20D
EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM
EF-S 17-55 f/2.8 IS USM
EF 85mm f/1.8 USM
EF 135mm f/2L USM
EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM
EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM
EF 50mm f/1.4 USM
Speedlite 580EX
Extender EF 1.4x II

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
chris ­ clements
Goldmember
Avatar
1,644 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Mar 2004
Location: this scepter'd isle (bottom right corner)
     
Aug 28, 2006 04:47 |  #9

An ancient, unweildy dust-collecting trombone or the jewel in Canon's crown.
... not a difficult choice :)




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Lord_Malone
Cream of the Manpanties.....​... Inventor Great POTN Photo Book
Avatar
7,686 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Oct 2005
     
Aug 28, 2006 04:54 |  #10

I got the 70-200 with the 2x and I'm content. I don't need that long of a reach most of the time, but when I do it's there. At some point in my life I'd love to have a dedicated prime in that range, but I just don't see it happening any time soon. If you ask me, the TC doesn't degrade the image quality as bad as some people make it out to be. Very usable in fact. But then again, I don't have a gallery full of 100% crops. ;)


~Spaceships Don't Come Equipped With Rear View Mirrors~
http://www.myspace.com​/chocolate_thai (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Lightstream
Yoda
14,915 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Feb 2006
Location: Cult of the Full Frame
     
Aug 28, 2006 05:55 as a reply to  @ Lord_Malone's post |  #11

Lord_Malone wrote:
I got the 70-200 with the 2x and I'm content. I don't need that long of a reach most of the time, but when I do it's there. At some point in my life I'd love to have a dedicated prime in that range, but I just don't see it happening any time soon. If you ask me, the TC doesn't degrade the image quality as bad as some people make it out to be. Very usable in fact. But then again, I don't have a gallery full of 100% crops. ;)

Come on, you know the 300 f/4L IS and the 400 f/5.6L are calling you ;)

I bought the 300 f/4L IS and a teleconverter over the 100-400 ISL or the the 70-200 + 2X TC. Very soon I get to find out how much I miss the 100-200 zoom range..... but the 300 f/4L IS is absolutely stunning.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Lord_Malone
Cream of the Manpanties.....​... Inventor Great POTN Photo Book
Avatar
7,686 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Oct 2005
     
Aug 28, 2006 10:07 as a reply to  @ Lightstream's post |  #12

Lightstream wrote:
Come on, you know the 300 f/4L IS and the 400 f/5.6L are calling you ;)

Dude, I AM getting a 300L eventually. No question! ;)


~Spaceships Don't Come Equipped With Rear View Mirrors~
http://www.myspace.com​/chocolate_thai (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Dorman
Goldmember
Avatar
4,661 posts
Joined Feb 2006
Location: Halifax, NS
     
Aug 28, 2006 10:27 |  #13

CalgaryPhotographer, just go for the Lord Malone triple threat, you know you want to. ;)
The 16-35, your 50 1.8, and 70-200 IS would be an awesome combination for most of what you want to shoot.



  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
calgaryphotographer
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
338 posts
Joined Mar 2005
     
Aug 28, 2006 19:51 as a reply to  @ Dorman's post |  #14

Dorman wrote:
CalgaryPhotographer, just go for the Lord Malone triple threat, you know you want to. ;)
The 16-35, your 50 1.8, and 70-200 IS would be an awesome combination for most of what you want to shoot.

And if my lustful side lets me purchase a 1d Mark IIN :D

Thanks Guys!


CANON EOS 300D | Canon 100-400 f/4.5-5.6 L IS | CANON EF-S 18-55 F/3.5-5.6 | Some soft Hood | CANON EF 75-300 F/4.5-5.6 III USM | Canon ET-60 Hood | Canon EF 50 f/1.8 | Canon ES-62 Hood | CANON 430EX | MANFROTTO TRIPOD | Canon RC-1 Remote | A WHACK OF BP-511'S | SANDISK CF CARDS | LOWEPRO MINI-TREKKER AW |

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Lord_Malone
Cream of the Manpanties.....​... Inventor Great POTN Photo Book
Avatar
7,686 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Oct 2005
     
Aug 28, 2006 20:25 as a reply to  @ calgaryphotographer's post |  #15

calgaryphotographer wrote:
And if my lustful side lets me purchase a 1d Mark IIN :D

Thanks Guys!

Once you start down the dark path, forever will it dominate your destiny.


~Spaceships Don't Come Equipped With Rear View Mirrors~
http://www.myspace.com​/chocolate_thai (external link)

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

2,664 views & 0 likes for this thread
70-200 f/2.8L IS vs. 100-400L IS
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 xemlicham
1083 guests, 257 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.