Can someone please help me put my mind at ease?

nickjohnwatson

nickjohnwatson

Messages
3,307
Name
Nick
Edit My Images
Yes
I have recently started taking wildlife photos and was using a 10 year old 100-400 mk1 which was amazing. However the 70-200 sigma I had was very hit and miss so I've sold that and the 100-400 view a view to buying a 70-200 f2.8L IS ii & a mk3 2x converter, giving me the best 70-200 I can buy with the option of making it 400mm f5.6 for the bird stuff.

I've seen some photos from this combo using a 7dmk2 which is what I use too and they look great, IQ seems to be on par if not better than the mk1 100-400 and weight wise its very similar.

I was just wondering if anyone using this combination can comment on the focussing speed? My 100-400 was pretty quick and very accurate, I'm not so much worried about it using it as a 70-200 as I know that'll be lightning quick but its with the 2x converter that I'm interested in.

Thanks in advance folks :)

Hope you can help.

Nick
 
I've got the 70-200 IS ii and although it is a smashing lens, especially for portraits and mid-range "large" objects, x2 might be good on it - but would you be better off putting your pennies towards a sigma 150-600 or 150-500 contemporary - I've got the 600mm and its fantastic to be honest, I've got the sigma tcx2 for that as well but only used it on moon shots so far as I havent been out for any long walks but the 600mm on its own gives lovely reach and at F5.6-6.3, a nice aperture setting for birdies
 
I have a 70~200 and for wildlife I'd have kept the 100~400 or, as Carl says, go for the 150~500. Reach is everything in that area.
 
Agree with the above. I have a fantastic 70 - 200 IS ii, pop a x2 iii on it and it's average, nothing more.
 
I used the 70-200 mkII with the Kenko x2 TC for a while, mainly for airshows. Focus was okay but slower obviously, I wouldn't like to try it for BIF. For static subjects it was perfectly fine (and bigger more predictable stuff like aircraft). This was with the 7D, also at ISO 3200 so bear that in mind, stopped down to f8:


Pigeon by JJ, on Flickr

Wide open at f5.6 on the old 1Ds2:


Starling by JJ, on Flickr

At an airshow:


Abingdon Airshow 2013 by JJ, on Flickr

At the track:


Prescott Bike Festival 2014 by JJ, on Flickr
 
I have the 70-200 f2.8L IS ii & a mk2 2x converter. It is pretty slow at focusing on a 1DX. Don't know if the Mk3 converter is any better but would like to know.
 
Another option is to buy a 70-200 2.8 IS mk1 and just keep the 100-400 (I've only taken a desposit for the 100-400 at the minute)

Is there a HUGE difference between the mk1 & mk2 70-200? Bear in mind that if I kept my 100-400 it'd mean that I'd not need the TC so the 70-200 would be used at that range.

arghh
 
There was a big difference between the mk1 and mk2 70-200 IS lenses that I had. The original 70-200 I had was sharper than the mk1 IS.

I haven't tried it myself, but I've seen lots of praise for the Tamron 70-200. Might be worth looking into?
 
I've used a 1.4TC on the 70-200 lens and I was very pleased with the results and wasn't aware of any significant loss of AF or IQ - not used the 2TC, but it seems it does degrade more...

Have you thought about the 100-400mkII lens - it's a stunner of a lens and gives you what you were looking at - albeit loosing the 70-100 mm range, without the need / messing with using a TC and potential loss of IQ / AF speed etc...

And I think the lenses are a similar price...
 
andyred said:
I've used a 1.4TC on the 70-200 lens and I was very pleased with the results and wasn't aware of any significant loss of AF or IQ - not used the 2TC, but it seems it does degrade more...

Have you thought about the 100-400mkII lens - it's a stunner of a lens and gives you what you were looking at - albeit loosing the 70-100 mm range, without the need / messing with using a TC and potential loss of IQ / AF speed etc...

And I think the lenses are a similar price...
Click to expand...

The reason behind the change is that I want a decent 70-200, the sigma one i had wasnt great and i thought maybe a 70-200 plus the 2x TC would give me a reasonable quality 400mm zoom, replacing the need for the 100-400.

In reality, I think i'll just buy a canon 70-200 and keep the 100-400 as it looks to be too much of a compromise lol
 
nickjohnwatson said:
However the 70-200 sigma I had was very hit and miss so I've sold that and the 100-400 view a view to buying a 70-200 f2.8L IS ii & a mk3 2x converter
Click to expand...

nickjohnwatson said:
The reason behind the change is that I want a decent 70-200, the sigma one i had wasnt great and i thought maybe a 70-200 plus the 2x TC would give me a reasonable quality 400mm zoom, replacing the need for the 100-400.

In reality, I think i'll just buy a canon 70-200 and keep the 100-400 as it looks to be too much of a compromise lol
Click to expand...

Aah, I read your initial post as you had sold the Sigma 70-200 and the Canon 100-400 already...

If you still have the 100-400, then yes, I would buy the Canon 70-200, then maybe look to see if you could borrow / try out a 2TC with it and see how you feel the results are, especially as you can compare them directly to your 100-400 and go from there...
 
andyred said:
Aah, I read your initial post as you had sold the Sigma 70-200 and the Canon 100-400 already...

If you still have the 100-400, then yes, I would buy the Canon 70-200, then maybe look to see if you could borrow / try out a 2TC with it and see how you feel the results are, especially as you can compare them directly to your 100-400 and go from there...
Click to expand...
My 1st post was a bit misleading yeah as at that point I'd taken a deposit for the 100-400. Since then I've gave him it back as I can't bear to sell it I love it too much,

Good thinking on seeing if I can try out a 2xTC while I still have the 100-400 for comparison.

Now I just need to muster up the courage to shell out for the 70-200 lol, I was expecting to have funds from the 100-400 towards it but thats out the window!
 
andyred said:
Aah, I read your initial post as you had sold the Sigma 70-200 and the Canon 100-400 already...

If you still have the 100-400, then yes, I would buy the Canon 70-200, then maybe look to see if you could borrow / try out a 2TC with it and see how you feel the results are, especially as you can compare them directly to your 100-400 and go from there...
Click to expand...
My 1st post was a bit misleading yeah as at that point I'd taken a deposit for the 100-400. Since then I've gave him it back as I can't bear to sell it I love it too much,

Good thinking on seeing if I can try out a 2xTC while I still have the 100-400 for comparison.

Now I just need to muster up the courage to shell out for the 70-200 lol, I was expecting to have funds from the 100-400 towards it but thats out the window!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top