Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: Canon EF 70-200 or EF 100-400?  (Read 9187 times)

MikeMike

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 145
    • http://
Canon EF 70-200 or EF 100-400?
« on: February 10, 2007, 12:26:55 AM »

Im going for a new telephoto and my choices are either a 70-200 with a 1.4x or a 2x or get a 100-400. The way i see it is that if i get the 70-200 i'v got the f2.8 when i need it and then the multipliers when i need them for the reach, either way the 400 end is f/5.6 so the 70-200 seems to be a better choice?  advice anyone    
« Last Edit: February 10, 2007, 12:27:59 AM by MikeMike »
Logged

John Sheehy

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 838
Canon EF 70-200 or EF 100-400?
« Reply #1 on: February 10, 2007, 12:46:19 AM »

Quote
Im going for a new telephoto and my choices are either a 70-200 with a 1.4x or a 2x or get a 100-400. The way i see it is that if i get the 70-200 i'v got the f2.8 when i need it and then the multipliers when i need them for the reach, either way the 400 end is f/5.6 so the 70-200 seems to be a better choice?  advice anyone     
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=100128\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

The 200mm with a 2x TC is going to be much less sharp than the 400mm without one.  How important is the quality of your 400mm shots?  Auto-focusing, if you use it will also be better without the TC.
Logged

Paul Sumi

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1217
Canon EF 70-200 or EF 100-400?
« Reply #2 on: February 10, 2007, 12:51:37 AM »

francois

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8132
Canon EF 70-200 or EF 100-400?
« Reply #3 on: February 10, 2007, 04:52:12 AM »

As John and Paul said before it all depends on your most used focals. If you shoot in the 300mm to 400mm range only occasionally then the 70-200 is the one to choose.
I own both the 100-400 and 70-200 (now "only" the f/4 IS version), I always try to shoot with the 70-200 as its optical quality is above the 100-400 but I prefer the 100-400 to the 70-200 with extenders (although 70-200 + 1.4 is fine).
Another point to consider - depending on your budget -  is the price of a 70-200 + Extender 1.4x + Extender 2x can be quite high.
Logged
Francois

MikeMike

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 145
    • http://
Canon EF 70-200 or EF 100-400?
« Reply #4 on: February 10, 2007, 10:27:27 AM »

Thanks a lot guys. sharpness is important, always, especially when spending this much money so i guess for 100-400 would be a steal for the long end, but low light is also up there for me as i shoot a lot of sports in less than ideal situations. I think i'm probably gonna go with with 70-200 with a 1.4, but then again the the 2x is the same price  . man nothing is a simple choice these days is it?
Logged

stever

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1160
Canon EF 70-200 or EF 100-400?
« Reply #5 on: February 10, 2007, 10:52:48 AM »

you don't say what kind of body you're using

at 200mm, the 70-200 will be noticeably sharper on a full frame camera - but neither the 70-200 +1.4 and the 100-400 above 300 utilize the resolution available from a 5D - in fact, for equivalent angle of view i like the results of my 20D better with the 100-400

on a crop-frame camera the difference will probably not be noticeable as i think the 70-200 exceeds the capabilities of an 8mp sensor

i find that switching extenders is a nuisance

i'd suggest renting them both before deciding
Logged

MikeMike

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 145
    • http://
Canon EF 70-200 or EF 100-400?
« Reply #6 on: February 10, 2007, 12:12:50 PM »

Thanks Stever,  im using it on a 20d but im close to buying a 1d mark 2n pretty soon, unless they update it in the near month or two coming up. which raises some other questions. i was at the camera store the other day and all the prices on everything canon have droped, and the rumor sites are saying some new stuff is coming out. i think it might be a smart choice to wait a while   . Anybody agree?
Logged

francois

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8132
Canon EF 70-200 or EF 100-400?
« Reply #7 on: February 10, 2007, 12:21:18 PM »

Quote
Thanks Stever,  im using it on a 20d but im close to buying a 1d mark 2n pretty soon, unless they update it in the near month or two coming up. which raises some other questions. i was at the camera store the other day and all the prices on everything canon have droped, and the rumor sites are saying some new stuff is coming out. i think it might be a smart choice to wait a while   . Anybody agree?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=100199\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
PMA is in March (8 - 11) and chances are that Canon will have new stuff...
« Last Edit: February 10, 2007, 12:21:36 PM by francois »
Logged
Francois

DiaAzul

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 777
    • http://photo.tanzo.org/
Canon EF 70-200 or EF 100-400?
« Reply #8 on: February 10, 2007, 12:46:40 PM »

Quote
Thanks Stever,  im using it on a 20d but im close to buying a 1d mark 2n pretty soon, unless they update it in the near month or two coming up. which raises some other questions. i was at the camera store the other day and all the prices on everything canon have droped, and the rumor sites are saying some new stuff is coming out. i think it might be a smart choice to wait a while   . Anybody agree?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=100199\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Also bear in mind that as the lens as the maximum aperture reduces (i.e from f/2.8 to f/8) then the capabilities of the autofocus system degrade quite quickly. You will loose all the benefits of the 1d focussing system above f/5.6. If you are shooting sport you may need to switch to manual focus to ensure that you get sufficient quality images with the 100-400 or even the 70-200 with teleconverters.

You are probably right to wait a month or two to see what canon does - you may have to wait several months for the cameras themselves to arrive in shops though. There is always the possibility that Canon upgrades the focusing system as part of a new camera package.
Logged
David Plummer    http://photo.tanzo.org/

stever

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1160
Canon EF 70-200 or EF 100-400?
« Reply #9 on: February 10, 2007, 12:54:14 PM »

for your purposes it sounds like the 70-200 is the way to go, the 100-400 is not at it's best wide open and not the fastest autofocusing

with a 1.4 extender and the 1.6 or 1.3 crop factor you should get very good results from the 70-200 with good autofocus speed

i went back and looked at Michael's 70-200 +1.4x test and was quite surprised how bad it looked on the D30, i would expect to see that difference on a FF, but not a 1.6 crop

the 70-200 is probably about last on Canon's list for up-grading and hopefully the 100-400 is towards the top (after the wide angles), but it still sounds like the 70-200 will be your choice

wouldn't hurt to wait on the 1d - it has been around for quite a while now, with only the refresh to 2n
Logged

elkhornsun

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 58
Canon EF 70-200 or EF 100-400?
« Reply #10 on: March 19, 2007, 05:57:05 AM »

The 70-200mm f2.8 becomes a 70-200mm f5.6 lens with the 2x teleconverter and one that will focus too slowly to be of any use for sports.

The 1.4x is usable. The Nikon 1.7x is about as much magnification as is practical for both autofocus and IS/VR function.

So it is really about the 70-200mm as a 100-280mm f4 lens with the 1.4x teleconverter attached or the 100-400mm f4 IS lens. At 200mm or less the 70-200mm is faster. Above 200mm the 100-400mm f4 lens will provide the same speed and more magnification.

Bruce
Logged

CatOne

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 452
    • http://blloyd.smugmug.com
Canon EF 70-200 or EF 100-400?
« Reply #11 on: March 19, 2007, 12:15:40 PM »

The 70-200 f2.8L IS is a *fantastic* lens.  IMO it's one of the best zooms that Canon makes.  It is very sharp, and it has an excellent bokeh.

However, as others have pointed out in reviews, the 2x TC isn't that good.  It decreases light by a LOT (2 stops), and it decreases sharpness.  I have a 1.4x and 2x TC, having purchased the 2x for the Antarctica trip because I wanted more reach -- and shots I took with the 2x revealed it's not so great.

So it's a mixed bag... I think you have to prioritize.  If you want to favor the shorter focal lengths and get the best overall lens and occasionally go longer, go for the 70-200 with the TC.  If you spend more time shooting the long end (perhaps you like birds) then go with the 100-400.  If you can give up a bit of reach, the 70-200 with the 1.4 TC may be a decent compromise.  The 1.4x is substantially sharper than the 2x -- it is entirely usable and auto-focus doesn't slow as much as it does with the 2x.

I could really care less about birds so personally I would strongly favor the 70-200.  If I really wanted to go out and shoot wildlife or whatever I would probably rent a 500 f4 for the occasion... given I could probably get it for $50 for a weekend from the local shop.

Giedo

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 193
Canon EF 70-200 or EF 100-400?
« Reply #12 on: March 23, 2007, 07:30:58 AM »

another option for about the same amount of $:
70-200 f4 IS & 300 f4 + 1.4 TC

I used this combination with great results. A fixed lens combines better with the TC's. Actually this year I rented a 300 f2.8. This lens is the sharpest I've ever seen. Even in combination with the 1.4 TC it surpasses the best zooms.
Logged
Giedo

MikeMike

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 145
    • http://
Canon EF 70-200 or EF 100-400?
« Reply #13 on: March 23, 2007, 09:03:22 AM »

Thank you so much everybody,

This had truly been very helpfull. Maby now i could make a good choice, unless Canon comes out with something new in the area, then im back to square one again, but i guess thats part of being a photographer isn't it? lol.

So if anybody else has anything they'd like to add i would deffinitly love to hear and and thank you again to everyone who's replied.

Mike
Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Up