What would you do? Canon L Series Dilemma

Mr. Fish

Mr. Fish

Messages
678
Name
Rob
Edit My Images
Yes
So what would you do?.. Basically, i shot quite a wide variety of things, mainly being motorsport, portraits (location and studio) and ive just got into weddings to lol! Im after something for the long end..and i think my options are as follows... 70-200 2.8 L Mk1 Non-IS (+ a 2x TC), 100-400L IS, or 400 5.6L .. some would be better for certain things more than others, but i cant work out what would be best lol!

what would you say?

Cheers
 
70-200/2.8L because "portraits" and "weddings". However I wouldn't put the 2x extender on it and expect anything exceptional.
 
Everything apart from the motor-sports screams 70-200, but as above, I'd be a bit wary of using an x2 on it.
 
KIPAX said:
quite impressive.. then you list the cheapest lens choices... get a 70-200 mkII f2.8 :)
Click to expand...

haha yes but im only young and photography isnt my full time job, and im on abit of a budget..money no object yea id have a 70-200 mkII 2.8L, 300 2.8L and 400 2.8L :lol: but i cant :(

Thanks for your input guys..didnt think the 70-200's were to bad with the canon 2x? Guessing this isnt the case then!
 
I've had a 2x on my 100-400L and although you are limited to manual focus the results aren't awful. Not good enough for wedding stuff or serious other stuff though. I only tried it on mine to see what happened when I took the moon. And guess what? It came out big! Depending on your other lenses the 100-400 is a cracker at motorsports.
 
modchild said:
I've had a 2x on my 100-400L and although you are limited to manual focus the results aren't awful. Not good enough for wedding stuff or serious other stuff though.
Click to expand...

What weddings are you going to that need a 200-800mm? :eek: :lol:
 
DemiLion said:
Everything apart from the motor-sports screams 70-200, but as above, I'd be a bit wary of using an x2 on it.
Click to expand...

Agree with this re TC

The 70-200 is a great lens for Motorsport - but it depends on where you are ! No good for silverstone, but I find most of the places around oulton park it's a good length. Went down to brands hatch the other week (1st time) and a lot of places the 70-200 was a good reach. As always, if you have the option of a longer lens, then it gives you more flexibility there, but you can manage with a 70-200.

Good luck ...
 
modchild said:
I've had a 2x on my 100-400L and although you are limited to manual focus the results aren't awful. Not good enough for wedding stuff or serious other stuff though. I only tried it on mine to see what happened when I took the moon. And guess what? It came out big! Depending on your other lenses the 100-400 is a cracker at motorsports.
Click to expand...

I thought the TC's worked with auto-focus on 1 series bodies, or is it a lens thing?

andyred said:
Agree with this re TC

The 70-200 is a great lens for Motorsport - but it depends on where you are ! No good for silverstone, but I find most of the places around oulton park it's a good length. Went down to brands hatch the other week (1st time) and a lot of places the 70-200 was a good reach. As always, if you have the option of a longer lens, then it gives you more flexibility there, but you can manage with a 70-200.

Good luck ...
Click to expand...

I was at snetterton the other week and used my mates 70-200, was ok, but i still would of liked something longer...

Thanks for your opinions everyone tho, think itll be down to the 70-200 or the 100-400, as the 400 prime would only really be good for sports, and nothing else..
 
Mr. Fish said:
Thanks for your opinions everyone tho, think itll be down to the 70-200 or the 100-400, as the 400 prime would only really be good for sports, and nothing else..
Click to expand...

How about something inbetween, i.e., the new(ish) 70-300 L ? Great lens.
 
Adam, I was referring to the quality with a 2x on, obviously not the wedding stuff. Just that the OP mentioned a lens for motorsport and using a 2x with it. Until NASA start performing weddings on the moon I wont be using my 2x with a 100-400. Lol.
 
Mr. Fish said:
I thought the TC's worked with auto-focus on 1 series bodies, or is it a lens thing?



I was at snetterton the other week and used my mates 70-200, was ok, but i still would of liked something longer...

Thanks for your opinions everyone tho, think itll be down to the 70-200 or the 100-400, as the 400 prime would only really be good for sports, and nothing else..
Click to expand...

A TC wont AF with the 100-400L as its a slow-ish lens. TCs are designed mainly to work with constant f/2.8 lenses as lenses AF wide open even when stopped down past their max aperture. Some constant f/4 lenses will AF with most TCs IIRC but not the 100-400 as its not a constant f/4 and moves to f/5.6 later in the zoom range.
 
Last edited:
Jim, you need to stop quoting facts about 1D/s series cameras when you haven't used them.

A 100-400mm is perfectly capable of centre point AF on a 1D/s with an x1.4 attached. Slowish to catch focus, yes, but not too bad.
 
DemiLion said:
Jim, you need to stop quoting facts about 1D/s series cameras when you haven't used them.

A 100-400mm is perfectly capable of centre point AF on a 1D/s with an x1.4 attached. Slowish to catch focus, yes, but not too bad.
Click to expand...

Ah my bad, forgot we were talking about the 1d here, I was speaking in general terms of course... :exit:
 
cheers again for the input guys..thanks for clearing up about the TC's also..knew they didnt autofocus on some bodies, but was pretty sure they did on 1-series..so thanks for that :)

Tempted to go and hire both for a day...think thats the only way im gonna decide!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top