Lens decision

[SMT]

Hi,

Which would you consider the better option as there is not much difference in cost between these 2 set up's.

1. Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS USM + 2x convertor

or

2. Canon EF 100-400mm f4.5-5.6 L IS USM

Thanks
Simon.

 

[Scarecrow]

The first option will give you greater flexibility in your choice of focal lengths, but I'm not sure the IQ of the 70-200 with a 2x converter attached will match that of the 100-400.

I guess your choice will be dictated by what you do most with your photography. If it's something like motorsports or birds, I would say go for the 100-400. If you are more likely to be using a 'general purpose' zoom, with the occasional dab at motorsports and the like, I would suggest the 70-200 and converter.

If it's any help, I will shortly be ordering the 70-200, and if I do any motorsport photography before I can acquire a 100-400, I'll hire one for the odd occasion when it will be useful.

 

[petersmart]

The 100-400mm since the 2x extender will cut the quality and the aperture of the 200mm lens.

The 1.4x extender gives better quality and less light loss but used with 200mm will only give a length of 280mm but with better quality.

You can compare the different combinations here:

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/...meraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=5&APIComp=3

 

[desperatedan1992]

Last thing i heard this is going back a year or two the 100 - 400 was a dust pump?? Please correct me if im wrong, i would go for 70 -200

 

[photostar_1]

Last thing i heard this is going back a year or two the 100 - 400 was a dust pump?? Please correct me if im wrong, i would go for 70 -200

I have used the 100-400mm in dusty conditions with no problem at all.

 

[HoppyUK]

Hi,

Which would you consider the better option as there is not much difference in cost between these 2 set up's.

1. Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS USM + 2x convertor

or

2. Canon EF 100-400mm f4.5-5.6 L IS USM

Thanks
Simon.

Welcome to TP

Out of those two combos, the 100-400L wins. No question.

However, Canon recently launched a MkII version of the 70-200L 2.8 IS. Given that the old version was generally reckoned to be damn good, it was a bit of a mystery as to why they bothered. Now we know - they new lens is sensationally good. As a standalone lens, it simply sets a new standard, so much so that even with a 2x telecon attached it is now a close match to the 100-400L. It's selling now for around £2300 but seems like it might be worth every penny.

The-Digital-Picture have just published the test chart shots on their unique comparative website. The full review isn't up yet but the bit you want to see is. They have clearly had problems with one copy of the lens, and that is presumably the reason for the delay, but what they have now put up is fantastic! It's here, compared directly with the 100-400L, with and without telecons http://www.the-digital-picture.com/...meraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=7&APIComp=2 You can load up any combination of focal lengths and apertures to compare, and against different lenses.

What this new lens plus a 2x telecon amounts to is a 70-400 mm f/2.8-5.6 zoom with four stops IS, weather-sealing etc. I wonder if Canon will now bother to update the venerable 100-400L Meanwhile, I want this new lens

 

[SMT]

Thanks for the welcomes and advice.

I do mainly want the lens for wildlife, so it looks like the 100-400 is the way to go. It would be nice to go for the MKII 70-200, but at the current price there is not much chance of that happening!

Maybe I should hang on a little longer and wait to see if the price of the MKII 70-200 drops a bit.

Thanks again
Simon.

 

[HoppyUK]

Thanks for the welcomes and advice.

I do mainly want the lens for wildlife, so it looks like the 100-400 is the way to go. It would be nice to go for the MKII 70-200, but at the current price there is not much chance of that happening!

Maybe I should hang on a little longer and wait to see if the price of the MKII 70-200 drops a bit.

Thanks again
Simon.

Sounds like a plan. I can't see the new 70-200 dropping below £2k for a long time and at 400mm the 100-400L beats it anyway. Of course, you lose the devastating sharpness at shorter focal lengths, and the f/2.8 bit (not to mention the much better IS, weather-sealing etc) but that old lens just keeps on delivering. There's nothing else like it as an overall package. Holds its value very well.

You can get a mint 100-400L for around £850 on here - I sold mine recently (mistake). Then there is Kerso for new stuff - do you know him? He's an independent importer who gets stuff from the US and can always beat even the lowest prices. Highly respected and trusted guy - Ian Kerr. PM him for a price as kerso. His kit has full UK warranty and I think EU also, but those Frogs are a funny sort...

Or kerso1123@msn.com

 

[SMT]

You can get a mint 100-400L for around £850 on here - I sold mine recently (mistake). Then there is Kerso for new stuff - do you know him? He's an independent importer who gets stuff from the US and can always beat even the lowest prices. Highly respected and trusted guy - Ian Kerr. PM him for a price as kerso. His kit has full UK warranty and I think EU also, but those Frogs are a funny sort...

Or kerso1123@msn.com

A 100-400L it is then. Content removed I've been scouring the forums over the past few weeks for information on various bits & pieces and very useful it has been too. I did come across Kerso during that search, but thanks for the pointer anway.

Yes, anything to do with the French and any kind of paperwork is to be avoided at all costs! :bang:

 

[n1kcy]

I would hang fire for a couple of weeks, Jacobs & Cameraworld were selling the mark II version of the 70-200 for £1889 & £1898 respectively at the Focus show. They say those prices were strictly limited to the show, but you have to ask yourself how long it will be before they fall,. I bought one at the show and it is amazing.

 

[ali g]

Welcome to TP

Out of those two combos, the 100-400L wins. No question.

However, Canon recently launched a MkII version of the 70-200L 2.8 IS. Given that the old version was generally reckoned to be damn good, it was a bit of a mystery as to why they bothered. Now we know - they new lens is sensationally good.


Are you on commision!!!!!

 

[HoppyUK]

I would hang fire for a couple of weeks, Jacobs & Cameraworld were selling the mark II version of the 70-200 for £1889 & £1898 respectively at the Focus show. They say those prices were strictly limited to the show, but you have to ask yourself how long it will be before they fall,. I bought one at the show and it is amazing.

Welcome to TP

Out of those two combos, the 100-400L wins. No question.

However, Canon recently launched a MkII version of the 70-200L 2.8 IS. Given that the old version was generally reckoned to be damn good, it was a bit of a mystery as to why they bothered. Now we know - they new lens is sensationally good.

Are you on commision!!!!!

CameraWorld still have a few of the 70-200 Mk2 left at £1890. See here http://www.talkphotography.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=212713

Not much commission at that price

 

[SpikeK6]

I was in your shoes about a month ago and got the 100-400.

Got advised not to go the 200 route for the reasons above.
you will not regret it one bit beleive me it is a cracking lens, yes it is a pump action but no dust in mine at all and itrs nearly 2 years old.

Good luck with your choice.

Oh by the way, they hold their price well 2nd hand, kerso does a good deal and to me it is worth the extra £150 to £200 to have a new one as opposed to a second hand one.

spike

 

[c_robinson]

what about the 300/4 and 1.4x converter, or the 400 f/5.6

the 300/4+1.4x tc is meant to be sharper than the 100-400 at 400, and it's actually 420mm with the converter attached, as is the 400 f5.6, sharper than the 100-400 that is.

what you loose in flexibilty you gain in IQ

 

[artyman]

Another lens to consider is the Sigma 150-500, gives you that little bit extra reach, always useful for wildlife, and it has an awesome OS system.

 

[HoppyUK]

what about the 300/4 and 1.4x converter, or the 400 f/5.6

the 300/4+1.4x tc is meant to be sharper than the 100-400 at 400, and it's actually 420mm with the converter attached, as is the 400 f5.6, sharper than the 100-400 that is.

what you loose in flexibilty you gain in IQ

100-400L beats the 300 4 +1.4x http://www.the-digital-picture.com/...p=113&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLI=1&API=0

400 4.6 beats them both but obviously not a zoom, has no IS and also rather a long minimium focusing distance.

Whichever way you play it, that flippin 100-400L keeps doing the business.

 

[SMT]

I sold one of my bikes today for a tidy profit , so have taken the plunge and ordered a 100-400L. Thanks again for the advice.

Simon.