Luminous Landscape Forum
Equipment & Techniques => Cameras, Lenses and Shooting gear => Topic started by: Marsupilami on November 18, 2007, 05:28:29 am
-
Hello !
As my wife and I plan a trip to Namibia an old problem occurs again: That of a second tele lens, so that she can also work indipendently. For animals I use the 40 D and a 100-400 IS. For her there is now only a 70-200 / 4 available, a little short in most cases. as I do not like to have too heavy equipment (flying could be a problem with all that gear) and do not like to have lenses double I thought of getting the Sigma 100-300 / 4 plus 1,4 converter or getting the Canon 70-200 / 2,8 IS USM plus 1,4 and 2x Converter. But does the canon work with the 2x converter (AF speed ?) and how is the quality of that combo. Any other suggestions ?
Thanks !
Christian
-
One of the two canon 70-300s?
-
400/5.6 is light but you lose the versatility of the zoom. But if you combine this with the 70-200/4 then you have versatility and reasonable weight- and better quality than the 70-200 with a convertor.
Have you considered renting a lens for the trip?
-
unfortunately, the 100-400 remains the best zoom alternative to get to 640 equivalent with a crop-frame camera
quality wise the 70-200 f2.8 with 2X is not too far behind and will focus about the same as the 100-400
the 70-200 f4 will probably work with the 2X and pins taped (like the 100-400 with 1.4X) but unfortunately will probably focus like the 100-400 + 2X -- anybody tried this?
the 70-300 lenses are not sharp at the long end to begin with - with some examples being better than others - with a converter both focus and quality get pretty bad. I've used the 70-300 DO as a backup for wildlife and found it not to be long enough even with a crop-frame camera and the sharpness disappointing compared to the 100-400. my sister and a friend used my old 75-300IS in Africa on crop-frame cameras and under good conditions were able to get images of medium to large animals that could be printed up to 9x14, whereas i can consistently print 13x19s from the 100-400 and crops of smallish birds and animals 8x12.
my 300 f4 IS with a 1.4X is slightly sharper than the 100-400, but so much less convenient that i rarely use it - on safari you'd have to have a 70-200 or 300 on a second body - extra weight and complication.
-
the 400 is a good lens, but i really wouldn't recommend a non-IS lens with small aperture - and again, i've found that too many opportunities happen on safari before you can switch lenses (not to mention the dust issue)
-
I just returned from 3 wks in Zambia with my new 40d. My most used combo was the 300 F/4.0 L IS with the 1.4 tc. the 40d focused really well, much better than my EOS 3's ever did, even in low light (spotlight on animals a fair distance away, no flash).
I also had a 70-200mm f/4.0 L IS that I used with and without a tc. It's a great mid-range lens, focuses really fast, and its IS is really effective. I don't have a backup digital SLR as yet (used a P&S for grab shots and walking around in public),, plus there were occasions when the wildlife was so close I needed to use a shorter lens. So I did do some lens changing but would guess around 75% of my photos were with the 300/tc combo and was quite happy with it. The sensor cleaning system really works. The only dust spots I ever saw on an mage were early on when I left the camera on for a long period of time, so the device didn't activate.
-
I purchased a 70-300 DO for our trip to Africa last year. My wife used it on a 30D and I thought of it as back up for my 100-400 if a problem came up. When we got back to the USA it became part of my light weight travel kit. Seem to be a very good lens IMHO.