Quick question about a lens.

G

GavSterry

Messages
192
Name
Gavin
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi all, just woundering has anyone used the Canon ef 70-200 F4 L USM lens with a 1.4x or 2x converter for taking pictures of birds? I was just looking at it and it has very good reviews. But it is quite considerbly cheaper than the Canon 100-400mm. Any advice would be apriciated.
I was looking at this as an upgrade from mt Tamron 70-300.
Thanks
Gav
 
Not a Canon shooter myself, however I doubt that the 2x TC will AF with your camera, as you will be at f8 with the 70-200f4, plus unless you are putting the 2xTC on a fast (f2.8) lens image quality will suffer.

I would stick with the 70-300 and save for a bit longer until you can afford either the 100-400, 300 f4 + 1.4TC, or 400 f5.6.
 
I can't comment on that particular combination but you do realise that you are going to have problems with auto focus. You may just keep it with a 1.5x (max f5.6) but you will lose it with a 2x as you lose 2 stops therefore you will shooting at a max of F8.


...just beaten to it ....
 
GavSterry said:
Hi all, just woundering has anyone used the Canon ef 70-200 F4 L USM lens with a 1.4x or 2x converter for taking pictures of birds? I was just looking at it and it has very good reviews. But it is quite considerbly cheaper than the Canon 100-400mm. Any advice would be apriciated.
I was looking at this as an upgrade from mt Tamron 70-300.
Thanks
Gav
Click to expand...
Hi Gav, The 70-200/4 is a very good lens that takes a 1.4tc very well for a zoom but the 280mm that a tc will give you is still a bit short for birds. I used this combo as my first birding lens several years ago but then I upgraded to the 400/5.6 prime and the extra 120mm made the world of difference. Unless you can get really close to the birds I would suggest you wait a while and save up for a 400mm lens.
Mind you the 70-200/4 is also a very good lens for things other than birds and if you feel you would get a lot of use from it then it is worth considering.

BTW a 2x tc is really out for this lens, you will not get AF with your Camera and image quality obviously takes a big hit.
 
I would also go for the 100-400mm as a starter. It was my first and still gets lots of use.

If you keep your wits about you you can get one very cheaply second hand.
 
Thanks all, thats pretty much said it all for me. I did know about the loss of auto focus with the 2x but just woundered out of interest. I will just save up until i can afford the 100-400mm. Im not in any rush will just keep plodding away with my tamron.
Thanks again
Gav
 
When I was looking at getting my 100-400 lens I asked the exact same question and got told to buy the longer lens as some IQ will be lost by the converter. see here
http://www.talkphotography.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=201689

I was thinking of cost at the time and trying to get 2 lens's for the price of one if you see what i mean but in the end got the longer one.

Spike
 
Last edited:
Gavin You may get a good surprice shortly after Christmas as prices on eBay tend to go down as do some of the second hand ones in shops.
 
The Sigma 120-400 & 150-500 are definitely worth thinking about & researching. There is a general feeling that the 100-400 is slightly better than the "half price" Sigma's, whether it is nearly twice as good is another matter, & a decision for you.

I don't know whether the 120-400 has OS, but I can vouch for the effectiveness of the system on the 150-500, I have taken shots @ 1/30 @ 500mm. With the latter, of course, you gain another 100mm which is very valuable when it comes to bird photos.
 
Comfortably Numb said:
The Sigma 120-400 & 150-500 are definitely worth thinking about & researching. There is a general feeling that the 100-400 is slightly better than the "half price" Sigma's, whether it is nearly twice as good is another matter, & a decision for you.

I don't know whether the 120-400 has OS, but I can vouch for the effectiveness of the system on the 150-500, I have taken shots @ 1/30 @ 500mm. With the latter, of course, you gain another 100mm which is very valuable when it comes to bird photos.
Click to expand...

Thanks Comfortably, I think the 120-400 does have OS but ill have to check. I do realise that the Canon 100-400 would probably be better but at the current moment i dont know i could justify paying double the price . Ill take a look at the 150-500 too.
Gav
 
+1 for 100-400L, I love mine to bits as its absolutely pin sharp. They have come down in price a fair bit for late examples. Alternatively, I've seen great results from the Sigma 150-500 and can be snapped up used for about the same price as a 70-200L.

They also sell them in Tescos.
 
Last edited:
Hi Gavin, you could do a search for any of my pics in the bird section, 99.99% were taken with this combo. Hope this is of some help. The advice Roy has given you is very sound indeed and needs some serious consideration.
 
Last edited:
Posted this in my thread about hides, but seeing as the lens is getting a fair amount of discussion in here too, I'll post here too :D

My main wildlife lens at the moment is the 100-400L. I love it, but it seems impossible to camouflage effectively. I've looked all over for solutions that cover the whole thing, but most my searches seem to turn up neoprene wraps that are very expensive considering they leave the extending part bare....

Have any 100-400 owners come up with any decent solutions?
 
The 1.4x is OK but the 2x is a waste of time. Re the Sigmas - I was on a shoot with a friend in good light and he was very disappointed with it - continually hunting for focus. Save up for the Canon 400 or 100-400, I've owned both and found no difference between them - so I sold my 400 as I preferred the versatility the zoom gives.

These photos were shot with either the 400 or 100-400.
http://www.pbase.com/tirc/british_birds
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top