Compare 70-300 vs. 70-200 with 1.4 iii

[woollybear]

All other issues aside, how would you describe the IQ difference between these two setups (used mostly at the long end)?

Barely noticeable with pixel peeping?

Noticeable only on a large print or severe cropping?

I can see it, but its not bad?

It's there but worth the $1000 difference?

I'm an idiot for thinking I could get away with the extender?

 

[Loswr]

Which 70-300 - L or non-L? Which 70-200? There are five of them.... Hard to answer your question without the relevant details.

 

[Marsu42]

I'm an idiot for thinking I could get away with the extender?

Well, at least putting a Canon extender on the 70-300L doesn't qualify as "clever" since it doesn't work and breaks your gear :-o ... in this case, get the Kenko one.

 

[woollybear]

Oopsy...meant to say 70-300L 4-5.6 and 70-200L 2.8 ii and a 50D

 

[Marsu42]

Oopsy...meant to say 70-300L 4-5.6 and 70-200L 2.8 ii and a 50D

At roughly 300mm, they seem to be about the same to me - thus I got the 70-300L which is shorter, weights less, needs no tc switching and esp. costs considerably less. But if you generally shoot at 70-200, need 2.8 speed and af and money is no issue get the 70-200L...

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=738&Camera=453&Sample=1&FLI=4&API=1&LensComp=687&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=4&APIComp=3

 

[woollybear]

Kinda what I meant by all other issues aside...

How about the IQ?

 

[Loswr]

IQ is pretty much a wash in real-world terms.

Keep in mind one of those 'aside' issues that's not frequently discussed is that a TC slows down AF speed, by 50% with a 1.4x (and 75% with a 2x).

 

[woollybear]

IQ is pretty much a wash in real-world terms.

Keep in mind one of those 'aside' issues that's not frequently discussed is that a TC slows down AF speed, by 50% with a 1.4x (and 75% with a 2x).

Thanks, that's the info I was looking for. So plan on pre-focus for sports (a bicycle race in 2 weeks)? ...and then wait for the mythical 100-400L replacement!!

 

[Marsu42]

How about the IQ?

You did look at the link I posted? That would have answered your question...

...and then wait for the mythical 100-400L replacement!!

... which will double the price of the current version if Canon's strategy persists. If it arrives at all since Canon got the 200-400 in the queue and would like to sell the f2.8 primes, too.

 

[woollybear]

You did look at the link I posted? That would have answered your question...

Yea, I looked at the link. They looked pretty close to me but having only experience with a couple of different lenses I'm never quite sure how to interpret it. I think half the time I use it to rationalize what I want to do, instead of using it to decide what I should do!!

... which will double the price of the current version if Canon's strategy persists. If it arrives at all since Canon got the 200-400 in the queue and would like to sell the f2.8 primes, too.

...as to the 200-400, the 4 or 5 zeros in the price kinda cures me of doing what I want. If the mythical 100-400 replacement is priced at Oil Sheik levels I figure the older model will still be out there.

 

[Marsu42]

They looked pretty close to me but having only experience with a couple of different lenses I'm never quite sure how to interpret it.

Not being infected yet by some general artificial preference (L-lenses, full frame bodies) helps a lot around here: If the pictures look the same, they are the same...

 

[woollybear]

Not being infected yet by some general artificial preference (L-lenses, full frame bodies) helps a lot around here: If the pictures look the same, they are the same...

Hah!! A disease I'm highly suseptable to...but, duly noted!!