Free Shipping on ALL Products
camera reviewsbest cameraslens reviewsphotography tipscamera forumvideo toursphotography bookssupport me
It is currently Wed Oct 01, 2014 9:47 am

All times are UTC




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 12 posts ] 

Which lens?
100-400mm f4-5.6 IS L 38%  38%  [ 8 ]
70-200mm f2.8 IS L (Mark I) + 2xTC 62%  62%  [ 13 ]
Total votes : 21
Author Message
 Post subject: Help on lens choice....
PostPosted: Wed Dec 07, 2011 8:08 pm 
Hi guys and galls,
I am looking at getting my first L series lens and am bit stuck on a choice of two, was hoping for some feedback from people who own them or preferably own both.
I can't decide between the 100-400mm f4-5.6 IS L or a 70-200mm f2.8 IS L and a 2x teleconverter. I can't afford a new mark II version of the 70-200 so I would be buying second hand, preferably from a dealer rather than e-bay.

My thinking is the 70-200 with the TC would still give me f5.6 at 400mm, the same as the 100-400, but would I lose some image quality using the TC?
The 70-200 used without the TC would be a much more versatile bit of kit I think.

Which should I go for, bearing in mind I probably won't be able to afford another lens like it for several years. Oh and I want to use the lens for wildlife and sports photography mainly, and I do really want the 400mm reach, and its going to be stuck on the front of a 550d.


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Dec 07, 2011 8:54 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 12:48 pm
Posts: 8032
Location: UK
I think the question should reduce to the following: do you think you will use the 200-400mm range very often? If so, I think the 100-400 is the way to go. For wildlife, having all the zoom range in one go is handy too.

The 70-200 of course has its benefit from the bigger aperture up to 200mm (and maybe up to 280mm if you use a 1.4x on it too) but if you need to switch frequently for the longer lengths it gets tedious fast. Personally I never found a great need for the faster aperture for wildlife as it eats into the already shallow depth of field and makes decent focusing even harder.

You should note I don't do sports, so I don't know if the balance may be different there.

_________________
Canon DSLRs: 7D, 5D2, 1D, 600D, 450D full spectrum, 300D IR mod
Lenses: EF 35/2, 50/1.8, 85/1.8, 135/2+SF, 28-80 V, 70-300L, 100-400L, TS-E 24/3.5L, MP-E 65, EF-S 15-85 IS
3rd party: Zeiss 2/50 makro, Samyang 8mm fisheye, Sigma 150 macro, 120-300 f/2.8 OS, Celestron 1325/13
Tinies: Sony HX9V.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Dec 10, 2011 9:36 pm 
I was leaning towards the 70-200 with a TC, due to its versatility. I dont think swapping the TC will be much of an issue as I rarely shoot under 200mm with my current 70-300, so 140-400mm for a wildlife shoot shouldn't be too much of a problem.
Thanks for the reply too.


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Dec 10, 2011 10:10 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Oct 13, 2009 1:16 am
Posts: 237
You could rent both options (or go to your local store) to try them out first. In particular, you may want to see if the teleconverter with your current 70-300 is sufficient for your needs. The teleconverter alone is a much smaller purchase than either the 100-400 or the 70-200 + TC. You could also get over 400mm with just a 1.4x TC, which would have less of an effect on image quality.

Some relevant questions:
1) Which 70-300 lens do you have?
2) Where does your 70-300 fall short that you think a 70-200/100-400 would be better?

_________________
Body: Canon Rebel XS, Canon EOS 7D
Lenses: Sigma 17-70mm f2.8-4.0 OS HSM DC Macro, Canon EF-S 18-55mm f3.5-5.6 IS II, Canon EF 50mm f1.8 II, Canon EF-S 10-22mm f3.5-4.5 USM, Canon EF 85mm f1.8 II USM


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Dec 14, 2011 4:42 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Sep 17, 2010 1:33 pm
Posts: 165
The only way I would go with the 70-200 is if the sports you are shooting are indoor. Otherwise, the 100-400 is amazing for sports and wildlife.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Dec 29, 2011 10:11 pm 
Thanks for all the advice, still undecided, but some good 'pros' for the 100-400. Wildlife is my main subject, but the 70-200 is such a nice, even icon lens.


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Dec 30, 2011 7:47 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon May 02, 2011 5:30 am
Posts: 111
Location: Kerala, India
If u find using the focal length 300-400 more often , then 100-400 L will be right choice.

Otherwise, for all other purpose, new 70-200 Mark ii is the best

_________________
CAMERAS:- Nikon D800 & Sony H50
LENSES:- Nikon AFS 50mm F1.8 G, Nikon AFS 24-70 F2.8 G, Sigma APO 70-200 F2.8 EX DG OS HSM
Wish list:- Nikon SB 700, Elinchrom FX 400


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jan 12, 2012 8:40 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu May 29, 2008 3:02 am
Posts: 444
Location: Chennai
As a owner of 70-200 F2.8 mk2 and if your interest is wildlife , better you opt for 100-400... coz sometimes when i go to shoot wildlife or bird photography , i feel that i am having a beast in my hand , but ultimately its too short for me to reach the subject.. after all you cant expect a tiger or vulture to sit beside you so that you can aim at them conveniently... i love my 70-200 to the core but for wildlife its just not sufficient unless you plan to go for converters like 1.4x or 2x... i tried with new 2x on my lens but i felt the AF is a bit slow.. actually the reviews said that 2x is much faster than its predecessor but for me i am not that happy.. if you are so much interested in wildlife , there is also other alternative lens for you which is 400 f5.6 , its brilliant for wildlife and especially for bird in flight shots... its AF is one of the fastest , you can refer the reviews of this lens on net... i personally recommend you for this unless you are looking for much shallow depth of field in your photographs..

this is my two cents...

all the best..

_________________
Canon EOS 5D mk III|Canon EOS 7D | 70-200 F2.8 L IS II USM | 400 F5.6 L USM


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jan 13, 2012 11:49 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2010 11:55 pm
Posts: 894
Location: SE Texas
While I own neither, of the two choices, based on much on-line reading and comparing, the 100-400mm would be my pick. I chose the 400mm 5.6L, and love the light weight, compared to some heavier telephoto zoom lenses I have handled. Some reviewers have written that the 400mm 5.6L focuses faster than its 100-400mm zoom counterpart. Mine does focus right quickly!

_________________
Canon 7D/5D/40D/1D2N; Nikon F6, D700, FM3A, & Coolpix A; Canon 40mm 2.8 STM, 135L, 50L, 35L, 50mm 1.8 I, 100mm 2.8L Macro, 10-22mm EF-S, 28-135 EF, 400mm 5.6L; Nikkor 50mm 1.2 AI-S, 50mm 1.4G, 50mm 1.8D, 16mm 2.8D Fisheye, 180mm 2.8D, 100-300mm 5.6 AI-S, 18mm 2.8D, Voigtlander 90mm f/3.5 SL II


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Jan 14, 2012 3:46 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jan 07, 2008 6:50 am
Posts: 425
Location: Sydney Australia
RexGig, have you used the 300mm f/4 when you were looking at the 400mm f/5.6? Is it any good? I just bought a 70-200 f/4 but Im looking for a longer prime, would you recomend the 400 over the 300?

_________________
1) Olympus OM1 [Zuiko Auto-S 50mm f/1.8]
2) Pentax MZ-60 [Sigma 28-90 & 100-300]
3) Canon 7D [EF-S 15-85 & 70-200mm f/4 IS & 50mm f1.4]
4) Leica M [50mm Summicron Pre-aspherical - Silver]

http://www.poetproductions.net


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Jan 14, 2012 9:32 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2010 11:55 pm
Posts: 894
Location: SE Texas
Leo, the only lens with which I have used the 300mm focal length is a Nikkor 100-300mm 5.6 manual-focus zoom. I think it best for someone else to answer your question, as I am simply not qualified to do so.

_________________
Canon 7D/5D/40D/1D2N; Nikon F6, D700, FM3A, & Coolpix A; Canon 40mm 2.8 STM, 135L, 50L, 35L, 50mm 1.8 I, 100mm 2.8L Macro, 10-22mm EF-S, 28-135 EF, 400mm 5.6L; Nikkor 50mm 1.2 AI-S, 50mm 1.4G, 50mm 1.8D, 16mm 2.8D Fisheye, 180mm 2.8D, 100-300mm 5.6 AI-S, 18mm 2.8D, Voigtlander 90mm f/3.5 SL II


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Feb 27, 2012 9:09 pm 
I have rented the 100-400mm and it is SO nice, I have to send it back tomorrow and don't want to let it go. I have been to my local zoo several times this week (the joys of an annual pass, and living 10 minutes away). I have several hundred photos, and the keeper rate is way up compared to my crap 70-300.
Even indoors in the reptile house I managed to get some nice shots at 100mm, even with <1/60s.

You understand why an L series costs so much once you have a good play with one.


Top
  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 12 posts ] 

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  

All words, images, videos and layout, copyright 2005-2012 Gordon Laing. May not be used without permission.
/ How we test / Best Cameras / Advertising / Camera reviews / Supporting Camera Labs

Webdesign by Alphabase IT
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group