100-400L or 70-200L 2.8 + 2X Extender ?

stu.artd

stu.artd

Messages
1,151
Name
Stuart
Edit My Images
No
I have a Canon 7D and have been considering a Canon 100-400L for a while but have a couple of concerns, the main one being the push/pull zoom. As an alternative I'm looking at getting a Canon 70-200 2.8 and a Canon mk3 2x extender. That would give me one of the best 70-200 lenses available and mean I could get to 400mm without carrying a 2nd big lens about. :)

Can anyone with experience of both give any advice regarding image quality and focus speed comparisons ? I've ruled out the 400L 5.6 prime as I want the flexibility of a zoom.
 
Ive not used a 2 times converter so can't fully answer your question but have got the 100-400 , don't let the push pull zoom put you off its excellent
 
I sold my 100-400, it was a great lens, and bought the 2x III extender to bolt onto my 70-200 f/2.8 II and it's much better, as you point out, more versatile!
 
admirable is not the first I've heard say that. But for me the 100-400 was better than a 70-200 with x2 TC. AF and general sharpness better. Also have advantage of a big range that you can react to quickly with push-pull - it's better than twisty when you need to "react", trust me.

BTW I'm not a fan of telecons, as soon as you put one on you feel the difference compared to a naked lens. Even with fast primes (well I do).
 
Up until the Canon 70-200mm MkII and the 2x Mk3 converter the 100-400mm used to blow and 70-200mm + TC out of the water in all aspects.

No longer is that the case. Compare the new combo to a 100-400mm and there is hardly anything in it now.
 
RichardtheSane said:
Up until the Canon 70-200mm MkII and the 2x Mk3 converter the 100-400mm used to blow and 70-200mm + TC out of the water in all aspects.

No longer is that the case. Compare the new combo to a 100-400mm and there is hardly anything in it now.
Click to expand...

:agree:

I did some side-by-side comparisons with both of these lenses and I saw no advantage to having the 100-400mm. Before anyone jumps on me, these comparisons weren't particularly 'scientific' but it proved a point for me.
 
Thanks for the replies. As there's not a huge difference in range with the extender fitted (100-400 vs 140-400) it sounds like there's not a big reason for me to get the 100-400.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top