please give your opinion

I have the 70-200 2.8 non is and need some more reach for sports type stuff. should I get the 100-400 or throw a 1.4 tc on my lens and not have is? Please advise me on what you would do.

Thank you

I would try the 1.4 route first. If it does not work out for you there is a ready market for used converters.

When we started that was the recommendation of the local pro--It was his opinion that on cloudy days or early evening events the f5.6 @ 400 would be too slow to allow enough shutter speed.

I've got to agree with Dave: if it gets cloudy f5.6 is going to be tough to get action shots with. IS is nice, its better than nice, but its not going to freeze the action.

I shot with the 70-200 2.8L for years with both Canon extenders. If you shoot at 400 all the time get a 400 5.6L.(or the f2.8 if you are loaded) I still use the 70-200 / 1.4x and 70-200 / 2x combos a lot with good results.

Go with the 1.4x. It works quite well with the 70-200 and if you are shooting in the evening you can take it off when it gets dark.

If you need f/2.8 and reach the only options are the 300 and 400 f/2.8 versions.

TC is definately the cheaper route in my opinion.

Image quality and sharpness is one thing and a second, almost equaly important aspect is auto focus speed.

The 2x TC will slow down AF speed. Sports photography usually needs fast AF and this can be an issue.

I would use the 70-200/2.8 and a 400/5.6 or a 300/4 with the option to get the 1.4x TC on that

newfly5 wrote in post #2964457
I have the 70-200 2.8 non is and need some more reach for sports type stuff. should I get the 100-400 or throw a 1.4 tc on my lens and not have is? Please advise me on what you would do

Definitely get a 1.4x and give it a go. Having a 1.4x is nice to have in the bag regardless of if you add a longer lens later. Try the TC out on your 7-2 first, and see how you like it.

thanks everyone I will give it a go.