|
|
|
|
View Full Version : Which would you expect to be sharper between 200mm and 300mm: [not Steve] Trac 02-09-2007, 08:03 AM Canon 70-200 f/2.8L IS with 1.4x teleconverter or Canon 100-400 f/4-5.6L IS Likewise, between 300-400mm: 70-200 with the 2.0x teleconverter or 100-400 Petri 02-09-2007, 08:39 AM I have the 70-200 f/2.8 IS and my father has the 100-400. I did some quick tests sometime ago and the difference between the 70-200 with the 2x converter and the 100-400 was surprisingly small. I was expecting the 2x to be totally horrible. My 70-200 is very sharp and the 100-400 is a bit softer so with the 2x converter they were pretty close. I'd still pick the 1.4x over the 2.0 though. I have the older 2.0x converter but I have used it only once or twice. It does degrade the image quality noticeably. My choice would be the 70-200 with the 1.4x because I feel the 70-200 is a bit more practical (has more wide end) and is faster. Image quality is exceptional. My dad shoots mostly birds with the 100-400 and 1.4x so it's better for him. If you plan on shooting in the 200+ mm range most of the time, then the 100-400 might be better for you. PabloX 02-09-2007, 10:08 AM The 70-200 plus 2x won't be as sharp as the 100-400. secgeek 02-09-2007, 11:16 AM PabloX 02-09-2007, 11:45 AM I've tried big primes with a 2x. Not that great. Tanner 02-09-2007, 12:35 PM 70-200L with a 1.4x is slight sharper than a 100-400L but a 70-200L with a 2x, the 100-400L is sharper. [not Steve] Trac 02-09-2007, 01:19 PM In my experience, using the 100-400 to shoot wildlife and bringing it to sports games to shoot from the stands, I am almost always on the 300mm+ side of the focal length. I rarely shoot between 200-300mm. The times that I do, it's usually in zoos or something. secgeek 02-09-2007, 01:25 PM 100-400 at the 400 end @ F/5.6 is softer then the 200mm 2.8 @ 400 5.6 with the 2.x secgeek 02-09-2007, 01:41 PM PabloX 02-09-2007, 02:08 PM f5.6 zooms do tend to get soft at the long end. A 300/4 plus 1.4 would be a lot better than either. paul_858 02-09-2007, 07:15 PM [not Steve] Trac 02-10-2007, 10:35 AM I own the 100-400. My dad owns the 70-200 and the 1.4x. That's what is available to me. Obviously, primes will be significantly sharper when available. TGK 02-25-2007, 12:18 AM You might be surprised...The 70-200mm F/4 with 1.4x is as good as the 100-400mm...The 70-200mm with a 2x is a NoNo! The 2X is for primes, but I have had some luck with it and the 100-400mm.. Dark crappy day <img src="http://i17.photobucket.com/albums/b87/KTGMEASAP/2xtele.jpg"> |
|