(IQ) 70-200 with Extender(s), or 100-400 Dust-Pump?

Hi,

From all I've read about 'L' telephoto zooms, it seems the 70-200's offer really great IQ. The 100-400 'dust pump' too, but perhaps not quite so stunning. Sound fair so far?

70-200 is a useful range to me, but there are times when I'm likely to need a bit longer. Of course I could use either 1.4X or 2X extenders on the 70-200 and get extra reach right up into the 100-400's territory. What does that mean for IQ though?

Would the 70-200 (considering both f/4 and f/2.8 at present) still deliver better IQ with an Extender fitted?

Thanks and regards,

Rob.

My 70-200 really takes a hit with a 1.4x, and I don't like to use the latter anymore.

The 100-400 will give you better IQ than any of the 70-200 with the 2x extender. But with the 1.4x, I would say that the quality is about the same . I would pick that combo , because the 70-200 got really good IQ without extenders

FactionOne wrote in post #8704015
Hi,

From all I've read about 'L' telephoto zooms, it seems the 70-200's offer really great IQ. The 100-400 'dust pump' too, but perhaps not quite so stunning. Sound fair so far?

70-200 is a useful range to me, but there are times when I'm likely to need a bit longer. Of course I could use either 1.4X or 2X extenders on the 70-200 and get extra reach right up into the 100-400's territory. What does that mean for IQ though?

Would the 70-200 (considering both f/4 and f/2.8 at present) still deliver better IQ with an Extender fitted?

Thanks and regards,

Rob.

if you need more than 200mm i'd think about the 100-400L. in fact for me it's not an either/or deal. i have and use both lenses.

i have the sharpest 70-200L -- f4 IS -- and it takes a 1.4 TC very well, but i don't even own a TC anymore because i have the 100-400L.

if you are using a 1.6 crop and you occasionally need more than 200mm a 1.4 TC first would make sense. that's how i started .

ed rader

100-400 hands down.


...and no, it's not a dust pump... Not unless you work in a sand storm on a daily basis...

I was just talking about the same decision, and tonight I ordered the Dust Pump. Got it for 1499 at Beach.

I'm hoping I get it on time for the airshow on October 10th.

I have both and would recommend the 100-400 for outside work. Mine is as sharp as my 70-200 2.8IS. Love both of them, but the extra reach is fantastic outside.

I had the same dilema and went this route. Craigs list 70-200 f4 and tamron 1.4 TC ($630),300 mm f4 IS ($950). It took a couple of months to find local sales so I could buy in person but all items are mint and the total package,
mind you no warranty,wasn't much more than a 100-400.

I have both and will always grab the 100-400 for outdoor shots that might go to 400 and for days when I will be using the rain gear. I can put the cover on it ( aquatech) and work the zoom easily where a zoom ring is just plain difficult to use in a rain cover of any kind. I try to keep the doubler out of the equation as much as possible, but have used it on the 70-200 (mines the 2.8 non IS) quite a bit and for most shots the IQ is acceptable. I have also used it with the 100-400 for spotting game but image quality is what you would expect- thats reaching a little too far.
get the 100-400.

I have both and anything between 300mm & 400mm needs the 100-400L (generally only airshows)

anything needing 300mm & below I use 70-200L 2.8 with or without a 1.4x TC

if you need or think you'd need more than 200, Get the 100-400...

If you -very- rarely, say 5% of the time, go beyond 200, Get a 70-200

What were you planning to use this lens for?

I just purchased the Tamron 1.4x Pro TC tonight to use with my 70-200mm. Usually, I don't need much over 200mm, but there are times (at the zoo, airport) where the extra range was nice with my 70-300 I had prior. I don't plan to use it all the time though.

Curious to how it will be!

First of all, thanks for your very helpful input folks

I only really use telephoto zoom in two main environments at the moment, the first is when standing at the threshold-of, or beside a runway with my dad. Usually we're pointing cameras at large, (comparitively) slow aircraft; very rarely fast jets. The other situation is at car club events, and every now and then there's track-action which telephoto can be useful for.

I thought it was probably worth looking at EXIF on some images I've had previously to see what range I'm really using the most. I'm using an APS-C body at the moment, but even multiplying by 1.6x (it's looking like I'm going for a FF body along with this new glass), and I'm very often inside 200mm. Some really nice shots have been (rather frustratingly) just outside that range - 200-220mm; but I guess if I've got 21MP to play with, that's not going to be a horrendous crop.

There are some shots further beyond that range, but not many (there are a couple at a full 480mm (from my 300mm lens)).

I'm leaning towards having a 70-200 for it's IQ (perhaps f/4 IS as that seems to be regarded as VERY sharp, possibly moreso than the f/2.8 IS?), with a 1.4x in the bag for 'emergencies'.

I do have an old Sigma 170-500 knocking around which I guess could be used if I'm desperate for reach, but it's not exactly a Rolls Royce in terms of IQ, and you can make a brew while waiting for it to focus; but again, in (rare) emergencies it might be enough to mean I don't miss-out on the IQ advantage of a 70-200 (over 100-400) in the majority of my shots.

...Again, I'd appreciate thoughts/comments/sugg​estions on the above

Thanks and regards,

Rob.

Tough choice really...

For me, I wouldnt trade my 100-400 in a lot of situations, Yet I still sometimes want a 70-200 zoom...just for times when light starts getting low and i need some speed

if you're "just inside" of 200 on a 1.6 camera for a lot of shots, I'd say be safe and go with the 100-400...You might find you like having the option of going to 400 more than you think...

The good news? if you change your mind you'll not likely to lose much selling it or trading for the other lens

no brainer really..getting a focal length that you need nativley is always going to be better than attaching extenders etc.