donder10
Posts: 6945
Joined: Sun Oct 21, 2001 5:29 am

Canon 70-200 F2.8 +2x Vs 100-400

Thu Dec 01, 2005 7:42 am

Hi,
considering a purchase for the Canon 100-400 in the medium future but I want to find out how it compares to the Canon 70-200 2.8 when it has the 2x extender added to it(making it F5.6 I believe?).Obviously the 70-200 will outperform the 100-400 upto 200mm when the extender is not used,but how much sharpness is lost when the extender is added and how does this compare to the 100-400 in the 200-400mm range?
Thanks a lot,D10.
 
David L
Posts: 8553
Joined: Tue May 18, 1999 2:26 am

RE: Canon 70-200 F2.8 +2x Vs 100-400

Fri Dec 02, 2005 1:10 am

Quoting Donder10 (Thread starter):
I want to find out how it compares to the Canon 70-200 2.8

Isn't that discontinued? Is it still available?
 
aviopic
Posts: 2423
Joined: Sat Mar 13, 2004 7:52 pm

RE: Canon 70-200 F2.8 +2x Vs 100-400

Fri Dec 02, 2005 4:50 am

Guess this is what you are looking for  Wink
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/lenses/400v400.shtml


Have fun,
Willem
The truth lives in one’s mind, it doesn’t really exist
 
AdamWright
Posts: 602
Joined: Fri Nov 05, 2004 2:58 pm

RE: Canon 70-200 F2.8 +2x Vs 100-400

Fri Dec 02, 2005 8:09 am

I've used both.. and I experienced better results from the 100-400.. than from the 70-200 2.8 NON-IS (with the 2x and without)

-Adam
 
Dehowie
Posts: 1069
Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2004 8:41 am

RE: Canon 70-200 F2.8 +2x Vs 100-400

Fri Dec 02, 2005 7:42 pm

This one has been discussed a few times.
One of the larger websited has a direct image to image comparison and the 100-400 is a pretty clear winner when compared against the 70-200 with the TC.
Without the TC its a different story but its only 200mm long.
Darren
2EOS1DX,EF14.2.8LII,17TS,85/1.2,16-35L,24-70LII,24L,70-200F2.8LII,100-400,300/400/500/800L
 
spencer
Posts: 1518
Joined: Sun Apr 25, 2004 8:30 pm

RE: Canon 70-200 F2.8 +2x Vs 100-400

Sat Dec 03, 2005 5:40 pm

Alex, check your PM.
Spencer.
EOS1D4, 7D, 30D, 100-400/4.5-5.6 L IS USM, 70-200/2.8 L IS2 USM, 17-40 f4 L USM, 24-105 f4 L IS USM, 85 f1.8 USM
 
donder10
Posts: 6945
Joined: Sun Oct 21, 2001 5:29 am

RE: Canon 70-200 F2.8 +2x Vs 100-400

Sat Dec 03, 2005 11:18 pm

Thanks for the info,guys.I'm leaning towards the 70-200 with the 1.4 due to the added flexibility it would offer me for some spots I use a lot where 100mm would be pretty difficult to use.


Spencer,
nothing's come through yet.Did you use the link in my profile?
Alex
 
gmonney
Posts: 2076
Joined: Fri Jan 12, 2001 2:59 pm

RE: Canon 70-200 F2.8 +2x Vs 100-400

Fri Dec 09, 2005 11:38 am

Alex,

I am thinking about the same thing, I know that the 70-200 with the 2x isn't as good as the 100-400 but if you think about it, we have 70-200 at 2.8... I am going to be getting the 1.4x converter... I think thats the way to go if shooting long range. I will eventually get the 100-400 and no the 2x converter

Grant
Drive it like you stole it!
 
pumaknight
Posts: 227
Joined: Fri Jun 11, 2004 3:23 am

RE: Canon 70-200 F2.8 +2x Vs 100-400

Fri Dec 09, 2005 8:48 pm

I have just made the decision to switch to the 70-200 f2.8 with 2x. Am selling my 100-400 on ebay.

Primarily, I am switching to benefit from the f2.8 that the 70-200 gives me. I had the chance to back to back testing in the shop and to be honest, if you get a good 70-200, the difference is so marginal, there is no real difference when viewing the images at normal size. It is only when you crop in very close that you see any difference. But that is a really tight crop, as seen on the site referenced above.

For photos on this site I would think you would be hard pushed to see the difference.

Hope this helps.
Michael H
NO URLS in signature
 
Q330
Posts: 1425
Joined: Sat Dec 13, 2003 5:30 pm

RE: Canon 70-200 F2.8 +2x Vs 100-400

Fri Dec 09, 2005 9:26 pm

I've always gotten good results from the 70-200 w/ 1.4x and I'd definitely recommend this combination. Of course, the lens by itself is excellent, and the 1.4x gives you a bit of extra reach when you need it.

However, I'm always reluctant to use the 2x as it produces very soft results. It would sometimes be nice to have a 100-400 but I don't think it outweighs the benefits of the 70-200.

-Q
Long live the A330!

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: bombayduck, sbworcs and 1 guest

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos