Hey everyone, I currently have a 70-200 F4L USM and shoot a lot of water polo from around the pool as well as surf shots from shore. I am wondering if I should invest in 1.4 or 2.0 extender or should step up and get one of the above lenses and if so which one would you all suggest? I shoot a 6D currently. Thanks. RG
70-200 2.8 is ii vs new 100-400
- Thread starter Rcgrote10
- Start date
Rcgrote10 said:
With a 2.0 extender you'd be at f8, so probably your camera body (which is it?) won't af at all - or bhave less af points available. With an 1.4 extender you'd still feel the loss off speed for fast action.
General advice is to get a lens for its native range and only use a tc now and then. So unless you're very determined on having f2.8 at 200mm. the new 100-400L2 is certainly a great choice.
Upvote
0
Since you have a 70-200 you should be able to answer both speed and reach challenges. I find the 70-200 has plenty of "reach" for water polo, especially if I can change my position near the pool if required. Yet some of the
pools are not well lighted so the f2.8 version is particularly helpful. If you don't have that consideration, good for you. In terms of surfing - don't often experience surfing at night so lens speed isn't an issue. All of Canon lenses work well in daylight, but some are better than others in weather sealing and salt air. I haven't had a chance with the new 100-400, but the old one works quite well from the shore. If the new lens really has noticeably better IS, then
it may be a better choice for shooting surfing and sailing from a small boat. you may also want to consider the
70-300L with a new 7DII as an excellent combination for your preferred sports.
pools are not well lighted so the f2.8 version is particularly helpful. If you don't have that consideration, good for you. In terms of surfing - don't often experience surfing at night so lens speed isn't an issue. All of Canon lenses work well in daylight, but some are better than others in weather sealing and salt air. I haven't had a chance with the new 100-400, but the old one works quite well from the shore. If the new lens really has noticeably better IS, then
it may be a better choice for shooting surfing and sailing from a small boat. you may also want to consider the
70-300L with a new 7DII as an excellent combination for your preferred sports.
Upvote
0
dickgrafixstop said:
I think that photo predates the 70-200 and the 100-400. I'll bet it was shot on sheet film too.
Upvote
0
There has been thread, after thread, after thread on this topic. There is even a current one, started on 20 Nov: 70-200 or 100-400 conundrum..... http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=23768.0
No one has to read any thread, and it their choice to ignore the obvious, but sometimes you feel people should consult the topics list first before repeating the well covered topics.
No one has to read any thread, and it their choice to ignore the obvious, but sometimes you feel people should consult the topics list first before repeating the well covered topics.
Upvote
0
AlanF said:
With this kind of attitude, you'll get frantic around here
... best practice is never to use the search box and start a "17-40L vs 16-35L" thread every full hour.Most important, if you've got a question cross-post it to every photog forum on the internet, let lots of people try to give advice, and never get back to it ... which reminds me I didn't want to reply to 1st poster's posts anymore :-\ ... which doesn't mean this op won't respond, ymmv.
Upvote
0
Similar threads
