October 22, 2014, 05:55:02 PM

Author Topic: Thinking about this but wanting your thoughts....  (Read 4873 times)

sdsr

  • 5D Mark III
  • ******
  • Posts: 685
    • View Profile
Re: Thinking about this but wanting your thoughts....
« Reply #15 on: March 18, 2014, 02:50:02 PM »
Only you know whether you really need 2.8; if you don't, I would echo the recommendations for the 70-300L (probably the Canon lens I use the most) or 70-200 f4 IS L - both are far easier to carry around than the 70-200 2.8 II (the 70-200 f4 is lighter than the 70-300L, though not by a lot) and are mechanically and optically superb.  Or you may want to try the latest 55-250 before jumping in - the superiority of the Ls is much less obvious on APSC than FF.  (I have no idea, however, how any of these compare in terms of usefulness for video.)

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Thinking about this but wanting your thoughts....
« Reply #15 on: March 18, 2014, 02:50:02 PM »

Hector1970

  • Rebel SL1
  • ***
  • Posts: 97
    • View Profile
    • Flickr
Re: Thinking about this but wanting your thoughts....
« Reply #16 on: March 18, 2014, 03:14:32 PM »
Best of luck in your search for the right lens. The only thing I would say is I think the 70-200 II F2.8 is the best of all Canons zoom lens. It creates beautiful photograph. It locks on focus very fast. It's very adaptable to sport , portraits and even landscapes. Other than the cost you'd never regret buying it. I use the canon 1.4 and the Kenko 2x converters. Still good but maybe some of the magic disappears. Probably for what you are planning the existing 100-400 is good enough.

HawkinsStu

  • SX60 HS
  • **
  • Posts: 4
    • View Profile
Re: Thinking about this but wanting your thoughts....
« Reply #17 on: March 18, 2014, 05:32:39 PM »
First off, wow thank you all for your responses and suggestions.

Its interesting to see what's worth looking into and what peoples experiences are. I first read a couple of reviews about the 70-300L and was a little put off when they suggest its a "sunny weather" lens.

Hence why I was looking at the 70-200 2.8 ii with £210 cashback because most of the time in Britain its usually cloudy so wanted something pretty quick in questionable weather for the cross country riding that I could kinda use for wildlife if I wanted.

So just for clarification, if I went down the route of the 2.8ii would the autofocus would work with the 1.4x and 2x teleconverters because the lens itself wont be >F8?

Granted I expect the AF to be much slower and the IQ to be softer with the 2x. Just thinking the 1.4x would give me 448mm and the 2x could give me 640mm for those days where I was looking for birds. If I did go down the 2.8 ii I would go for the 1.4 teleconverter.

Cheers
Stu 


CarlTN

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 2227
    • View Profile
Re: Thinking about this but wanting your thoughts....
« Reply #18 on: March 18, 2014, 05:41:57 PM »
Hi There,

First time poster but been following for a little while now.

A little background, I've been an amateur photographer for a number of years now, first starting off with a 550d with the 18-55 and 55-250 kit lens which to me was a great starting point but then ended getting a 50mm 1.8 and 28 2.8 and getting good results when photographing my many fish tanks and reasonable results with cross country riding with the 55-250 in very good weather. Last year I ended up selling all the camera and the 2 kit lenses and purchasing the 70d and 18-135 STM lens. I mainly did this for the video and as a plus side, the photos were turning out better both on my primes for the fish and the 18-135 wasn't that bad at the sports side.

Now the thing I miss about my 1st setup was the reach of the 250 EF-S. The lens itself wasn't brilliant but I want to have something that range and the possibility of a little more reach if needed for wildlife. I was planning on going for the 100-400 replacement but this doesn't seem to be happening.... much to my announce.

So canon have kindly introduced a cashback offer for the 70-200 2.8 II with £210 off which got me thinking.

Not sure if I should go for this to use for everyday shouting (out and about/sports etc) giving me 112-320 on my 70d or do i wait for the 100-400 replacement?

If you advise to go for the 70-200mm II then what's the compatibility with teleconverters between this and the 70d? Its a dark art that I simply don't understand and get confused about but I was wondering if that could be my solution to get some extra reach.

Cheers
Stu

You should consider the 70-300L.  I don't understand why you are only considering the 70-200 f/2.8, or waiting on the 100-400 replacement.  Neither is going to be ideal for your use scenario, but the 70-300L just might be.  Most everyone on CR thinks we all should use the 70-200 f/2.8 most of the time, but I disagree. 

dgatwood

  • 1D Mark IV
  • ******
  • Posts: 756
  • 300D, 400D, 6D
    • View Profile
Re: Thinking about this but wanting your thoughts....
« Reply #19 on: March 18, 2014, 06:07:28 PM »
You should consider the 70-300L.  I don't understand why you are only considering the 70-200 f/2.8, or waiting on the 100-400 replacement.  Neither is going to be ideal for your use scenario, but the 70-300L just might be.  Most everyone on CR thinks we all should use the 70-200 f/2.8 most of the time, but I disagree.

Hear, hear.  The 70-300L is a fine lens.  There are rare occasions when I'd kill for it to be f/2.8, but those mostly involve situations where I'm strapping on a 3x TC because 300 isn't long enough, so....  :D

Random Orbits

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1369
    • View Profile
Re: Thinking about this but wanting your thoughts....
« Reply #20 on: March 18, 2014, 09:22:13 PM »
If I could only have one, I'd choose the 70-200L II.  Bare lens, its AF is better than the 70-300L and 100-400L.  With a 1.4x, it's IQ is similar to the 70-300L and it's a stop faster (f/4 at 280mm vs. f/5.6 at 300mm) than the 100-300L.  Better for portraits, sports, etc.  Yes, it weighs more, costs more and is physically longer than the 70-300L (in locked position) but it is that good.

However, if you plan on using it outside and/or for travel, then the 70-300L is also very good choice.  It stores more compactly and is less awkward to handle than the 70-200L II + 1.4x, but losing at least a stop hurts when shooting sports/shows indoors.

If you can, try them both in a store and see if the weight/handling difference matters to you.  I use the 70-300L when visiting places like the zoos or for daytrips.  For everything else, the 70-200L II is the choice.

CarlTN

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 2227
    • View Profile
Re: Thinking about this but wanting your thoughts....
« Reply #21 on: March 19, 2014, 12:28:58 AM »
If I could only have one, I'd choose the 70-200L II.  Bare lens, its AF is better than the 70-300L and 100-400L.  With a 1.4x, it's IQ is similar to the 70-300L and it's a stop faster (f/4 at 280mm vs. f/5.6 at 300mm) than the 100-300L.  Better for portraits, sports, etc.  Yes, it weighs more, costs more and is physically longer than the 70-300L (in locked position) but it is that good.

However, if you plan on using it outside and/or for travel, then the 70-300L is also very good choice.  It stores more compactly and is less awkward to handle than the 70-200L II + 1.4x, but losing at least a stop hurts when shooting sports/shows indoors.

If you can, try them both in a store and see if the weight/handling difference matters to you.  I use the 70-300L when visiting places like the zoos or for daytrips.  For everything else, the 70-200L II is the choice.

The problem with using the 1.4x TC is that the 70-200 becomes a 100-280 f/4...limited a bit at each end, certainly not any sharper (and I say less sharp) than the bare 70-300L.  If he's using it on a crop camera like the 70D, it's really more like 140mm at the wide end.  I personally find that when I am using a zoom, I use it all over the range, and not just at the long end.  It's really just a pricey lens that is not all that useful as a walkaround, it's more of a status symbol.  You want to feel like you're a pro photo journalist, so you buy what they use.  But they aren't shooting wildlife or anything at an extreme distance.  Rather they are trying to get as close as they can, and when they can't get close enough, they can go out to 200mm.  It's really better for close range portraiture, than for wildlife, in my opinion.  Another plus for the 70-300L, is it is actually f/5 up to 220mm, so it's not that much slower than f/4.  It's also f/4 up to 100mm, and f/4.5 up to 150 or 160mm.  It autofocuses pretty fast, I doubt it is much slower, if any, than the 70-200 f/2.8 ii, with a 1.4x iii on it.  The 70-200 f/4 (non-IS) that I had for 4 years, autofocused a bit faster, but it wasn't a huge difference.  The body you're using it on makes more difference, regarding the AF speed.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Thinking about this but wanting your thoughts....
« Reply #21 on: March 19, 2014, 12:28:58 AM »

Random Orbits

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1369
    • View Profile
Re: Thinking about this but wanting your thoughts....
« Reply #22 on: March 19, 2014, 11:23:16 AM »
The problem with using the 1.4x TC is that the 70-200 becomes a 100-280 f/4...limited a bit at each end, certainly not any sharper (and I say less sharp) than the bare 70-300L.  If he's using it on a crop camera like the 70D, it's really more like 140mm at the wide end.  I personally find that when I am using a zoom, I use it all over the range, and not just at the long end.  It's really just a pricey lens that is not all that useful as a walkaround, it's more of a status symbol.  You want to feel like you're a pro photo journalist, so you buy what they use.  But they aren't shooting wildlife or anything at an extreme distance.  Rather they are trying to get as close as they can, and when they can't get close enough, they can go out to 200mm.  It's really better for close range portraiture, than for wildlife, in my opinion.  Another plus for the 70-300L, is it is actually f/5 up to 220mm, so it's not that much slower than f/4.  It's also f/4 up to 100mm, and f/4.5 up to 150 or 160mm.  It autofocuses pretty fast, I doubt it is much slower, if any, than the 70-200 f/2.8 ii, with a 1.4x iii on it.  The 70-200 f/4 (non-IS) that I had for 4 years, autofocused a bit faster, but it wasn't a huge difference.  The body you're using it on makes more difference, regarding the AF speed.

The 70-200L II can also take a 2x and still AF.  You can stick a Canon 1.4x III on the 70-300L but the OP won't be able to AF (f/8 on the 70D) and he won't be able to use much of the shorter range either because the rear element of the 70-300L interferes with the TC.  The kenko TC is an option, but then you can't AFMA else you might lock it up.  The 70-200L II is a lens of choice if weight and cost are not issues.  It's a superlative portrait lens and is easier to use indoors because it is f/2.8 and gets you to comparable IQ to the 70-300L near 300mm while being a stop faster, and can get you to 400mm with slightly worse IQ (albeit slower AF) than the 100-400.

I used both the 70-200L II and the 70-300L on a 7D, 5D II and a 5D III.  Servo AF is much better with the 70-200L II (same body).  The smaller max aperture of the 70-300L also causes it to fail to lock in one shot AF as well.  Tried taking a shot of a wet seal on bright sunny day, and the AF would not lock on the seal with the 70-300L.  Had to lock on something at the same distance instead.  The 70-200L II can use the more sensitive AF baselines, and it mattered in that case.

expatinasia

  • 1D Mark IV
  • ******
  • Posts: 945
    • View Profile
Re: Thinking about this but wanting your thoughts....
« Reply #23 on: March 19, 2014, 08:39:46 PM »
The 70-200L II can also take a 2x and still AF.  You can stick a Canon 1.4x III on the 70-300L but the OP won't be able to AF (f/8 on the 70D) and he won't be able to use much of the shorter range either because the rear element of the 70-300L interferes with the TC.  The kenko TC is an option, but then you can't AFMA else you might lock it up.

This is why I recommended the 70-200 L ii or the 300 f/4.0 IS. The latter gives you that little extra reach with a 1.4X without much loss of IQ and can even take a 2X.
1D X + backup + different L lenses etc.

CarlTN

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 2227
    • View Profile
Re: Thinking about this but wanting your thoughts....
« Reply #24 on: March 21, 2014, 04:25:35 AM »
The problem with using the 1.4x TC is that the 70-200 becomes a 100-280 f/4...limited a bit at each end, certainly not any sharper (and I say less sharp) than the bare 70-300L.  If he's using it on a crop camera like the 70D, it's really more like 140mm at the wide end.  I personally find that when I am using a zoom, I use it all over the range, and not just at the long end.  It's really just a pricey lens that is not all that useful as a walkaround, it's more of a status symbol.  You want to feel like you're a pro photo journalist, so you buy what they use.  But they aren't shooting wildlife or anything at an extreme distance.  Rather they are trying to get as close as they can, and when they can't get close enough, they can go out to 200mm.  It's really better for close range portraiture, than for wildlife, in my opinion.  Another plus for the 70-300L, is it is actually f/5 up to 220mm, so it's not that much slower than f/4.  It's also f/4 up to 100mm, and f/4.5 up to 150 or 160mm.  It autofocuses pretty fast, I doubt it is much slower, if any, than the 70-200 f/2.8 ii, with a 1.4x iii on it.  The 70-200 f/4 (non-IS) that I had for 4 years, autofocused a bit faster, but it wasn't a huge difference.  The body you're using it on makes more difference, regarding the AF speed.

The 70-200L II can also take a 2x and still AF.  You can stick a Canon 1.4x III on the 70-300L but the OP won't be able to AF (f/8 on the 70D) and he won't be able to use much of the shorter range either because the rear element of the 70-300L interferes with the TC.  The kenko TC is an option, but then you can't AFMA else you might lock it up.  The 70-200L II is a lens of choice if weight and cost are not issues.  It's a superlative portrait lens and is easier to use indoors because it is f/2.8 and gets you to comparable IQ to the 70-300L near 300mm while being a stop faster, and can get you to 400mm with slightly worse IQ (albeit slower AF) than the 100-400.

I used both the 70-200L II and the 70-300L on a 7D, 5D II and a 5D III.  Servo AF is much better with the 70-200L II (same body).  The smaller max aperture of the 70-300L also causes it to fail to lock in one shot AF as well.  Tried taking a shot of a wet seal on bright sunny day, and the AF would not lock on the seal with the 70-300L.  Had to lock on something at the same distance instead.  The 70-200L II can use the more sensitive AF baselines, and it mattered in that case.

True enough, but you now you are reverting to comparing the bare 70-200 to the bare 70-300...and that's not what we were initially discussing.  And the bare 70-200, still only gets you to 200mm.  As for using the 2x TC, even the version 3...that's a total waste of time, and no reason to buy a 70-200 f/2.8 ii, in my opinion.  My point was and is, the 70-200 is fine if you need the bare lens.  Less so if you put the 1.4x iii on it.  As for not getting focus lock with the 70-300L, that can vary with light and the subject, and distance.  I've found it doesn't lock very well if the distance is greater than say 200 feet at 300mm, especially in low light.  But as for using it at the wide end in low light...it will lock very fast, especially if subject distance is closer than 100 feet.  Sure f/2.8 has an advantage for low light, but then so does F/2.  I'd rather have a 200 f/2 for low light, than a 70-200 f/2.8.  I'd also rather have a 300 f/2.8 in place of all of these.  If you add the cost of all of them together (the 70-200, the 70-300, and the 200 f/2)...then the 300 f/2.8 ii is cheaper.  I still can't afford it, but if I could, I would buy it and not own the others...at least for a while.

CarlTN

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 2227
    • View Profile
Re: Thinking about this but wanting your thoughts....
« Reply #25 on: March 21, 2014, 04:26:54 AM »
The 70-200L II can also take a 2x and still AF.  You can stick a Canon 1.4x III on the 70-300L but the OP won't be able to AF (f/8 on the 70D) and he won't be able to use much of the shorter range either because the rear element of the 70-300L interferes with the TC.  The kenko TC is an option, but then you can't AFMA else you might lock it up.

This is why I recommended the 70-200 L ii or the 300 f/4.0 IS. The latter gives you that little extra reach with a 1.4X without much loss of IQ and can even take a 2X.

The 300 f/4L with 2x TC, is actually quite terrible looking.  It's also native f/8, so not able to be used on anything other than modded 5D3 or 1DX (at present anyway).

expatinasia

  • 1D Mark IV
  • ******
  • Posts: 945
    • View Profile
Re: Thinking about this but wanting your thoughts....
« Reply #26 on: March 21, 2014, 04:47:46 AM »
The 70-200L II can also take a 2x and still AF.  You can stick a Canon 1.4x III on the 70-300L but the OP won't be able to AF (f/8 on the 70D) and he won't be able to use much of the shorter range either because the rear element of the 70-300L interferes with the TC.  The kenko TC is an option, but then you can't AFMA else you might lock it up.

This is why I recommended the 70-200 L ii or the 300 f/4.0 IS. The latter gives you that little extra reach with a 1.4X without much loss of IQ and can even take a 2X.

The 300 f/4L with 2x TC, is actually quite terrible looking.  It's also native f/8, so not able to be used on anything other than modded 5D3 or 1DX (at present anyway).

The 5D Mark III does not need to be modified for it to AF at f/8.0 and AF at f/8.0 works on all 1 bodies. Here is a list:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canon_Extender_EF#List_of_EOS_bodies_that_can_AF_at_f.2F8

I agree that it is not an ideal 600 but 300 f/4.0 and 420 at f/5.6 is pretty good and excellent value for money. And it can still be used at 600 with a 2X TC if you want to.

In fact a guest last year posted two very interesting pictures in the lens gallery section. One was with the 300 f/2.8 IS ii with 2X TC and the other image of the same subject with the 300 f/4.0 IS with 2X TC. It is a perfect example of just how good that lens is, as it does suffer with the 2X but the images are still more than ok. Both images are 5616 x 3744 so you can see all the detail. You can see the images half way down the page here:

http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=2662.15

When you look at those two images, remember the f/4.0 costs US$ 1,300 -1,500 ish and the f/2.8 closer to US$7,000. There is absolutely no question that the 2.8 is the better lens, but for value for money it is hard to beat the f/4.

Incidentally I just looked at the exif data which is still there and the camera used was a 5D Mark II which is why he/she manually focussed I guess on the f/4.0.

It does not say which version of TC was used.
« Last Edit: March 21, 2014, 05:32:02 AM by expatinasia »
1D X + backup + different L lenses etc.

CarlTN

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 2227
    • View Profile
Re: Thinking about this but wanting your thoughts....
« Reply #27 on: March 21, 2014, 05:40:27 AM »
The 70-200L II can also take a 2x and still AF.  You can stick a Canon 1.4x III on the 70-300L but the OP won't be able to AF (f/8 on the 70D) and he won't be able to use much of the shorter range either because the rear element of the 70-300L interferes with the TC.  The kenko TC is an option, but then you can't AFMA else you might lock it up.

This is why I recommended the 70-200 L ii or the 300 f/4.0 IS. The latter gives you that little extra reach with a 1.4X without much loss of IQ and can even take a 2X.

The 300 f/4L with 2x TC, is actually quite terrible looking.  It's also native f/8, so not able to be used on anything other than modded 5D3 or 1DX (at present anyway).

The 5D Mark III does not need to be modified for it to AF at f/8.0 and AF at f/8.0 works on all 1 bodies. Here is a list:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canon_Extender_EF#List_of_EOS_bodies_that_can_AF_at_f.2F8

I agree that it is not an ideal 600 but 300 f/4.0 and 420 at f/5.6 is pretty good and excellent value for money. And it can still be used at 600 with a 2X TC if you want to.

In fact a guest last year posted two very interesting pictures in the lens gallery section. One was with the 300 f/2.8 IS ii with 2X TC and the other image of the same subject with the 300 f/4.0 IS with 2X TC. It is a perfect example of just how good that lens is, as it does suffer with the 2X but the images are still more than ok. Both images are 5616 x 3744 so you can see all the detail. You can see the images half way down the page here:

http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=2662.15

When you look at those two images, remember the f/4.0 costs US$ 1,300 -1,500 ish and the f/2.8 closer to US$7,000. There is absolutely no question that the 2.8 is the better lens, but for value for money it is hard to beat the f/4.

Incidentally I just looked at the exif data which is still there and the camera used was a 5D Mark II which is why he/she manually focussed I guess on the f/4.0.

It does not say which version of TC was used.

I've rented the 300 f/4L, and posted images of it with the 2x ii extender, shot with a 1D4.  So it's not like I don't have experience with it.  My cousin also bought one and uses it with a 1.4x on his 1DX.  It was usable in a pinch, but very terrible looking outside the middle 10% of the image, with the 2x ii.  I realize the extender iii is better, but not remotely enough to argue in favor of its use on this lens, in my opinion.  I mean, the 2x extender iii, on the 300 f/2.8 ii, is only BARELY better than the new Tamron 150-600, at 600mm, if it is closed to f/8.  So if you want to argue economics, just buy a Tamron.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Thinking about this but wanting your thoughts....
« Reply #27 on: March 21, 2014, 05:40:27 AM »

expatinasia

  • 1D Mark IV
  • ******
  • Posts: 945
    • View Profile
Re: Thinking about this but wanting your thoughts....
« Reply #28 on: March 21, 2014, 06:18:48 AM »
I've rented the 300 f/4L, and posted images of it with the 2x ii extender, shot with a 1D4.  So it's not like I don't have experience with it.  My cousin also bought one and uses it with a 1.4x on his 1DX.  It was usable in a pinch, but very terrible looking outside the middle 10% of the image, with the 2x ii.  I realize the extender iii is better, but not remotely enough to argue in favor of its use on this lens, in my opinion.  I mean, the 2x extender iii, on the 300 f/2.8 ii, is only BARELY better than the new Tamron 150-600, at 600mm, if it is closed to f/8.  So if you want to argue economics, just buy a Tamron.

I think my point was more about the lens being a good 300 at f/4.0 and 420 at f/5.6. I do not think people buy that lens thinking too much about 600, the main reason is the 300 and 420 at a reasonable price. At those lengths it is a very good lens for the money, and I would prefer it to the 70-300L. It has its pros and cons, one pro is Canon TCs will work with the 300 but not (properly at all lengths) with the 70-300, another is that little bit of extra light.
1D X + backup + different L lenses etc.

saveyourmoment

  • Power Shot G7X
  • **
  • Posts: 10
    • View Profile
Re: Thinking about this but wanting your thoughts....
« Reply #29 on: March 21, 2014, 07:22:54 AM »
i had have got the same "problem". At the end, i didn't want to wait, i wanted to shoot, so i got the 70-200II 2.8 and i got the tc 1.4T III and the 2xIII.
now i have an incredible lense in the range of 70-200 for great portraits and great sportpics. when i want a little more reach, i use the 1.4TC so the image quality isn't that much difference, but i got the 80mm moe reach(and f4). And when i have to get in really close, i use the 2xIII to get the 400mm(at5.6). The quality of the 400mm pics are about the same as the ones of the 100-400. of course not as sharp as primes or the 70-200 without tc, but really usable!

look inside this thread(at the end): http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=4624.msg283481#msg283481

all using on a 5diii
« Last Edit: March 21, 2014, 07:27:10 AM by saveyourmoment »

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Thinking about this but wanting your thoughts....
« Reply #29 on: March 21, 2014, 07:22:54 AM »