EF 70-200mm f/4L IS USM with 1.4 converter or EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6L IS USM

[Jotho]

Planning for a motorbike travel through Vietnam in September I am going through lens options. I've done this and similar travel before but not since I became a more enthusiastic photographer. I will sell some of what I capture together with articles and hopefully some of them on their on merit but most will be for my own use. I moved to 5d MkIII a couple of months ago from 60D so I've lost some reach on what I have today. Except for the old stuff I have a 24-105L that I will bring and I might bring my 35L. I today realized that i have about 1500 USD to spend on extra equipment (apart from stuff I already planned to get like remote trigger, extra batteries etc) which means I started looking at a new zoom. So referring to the subject line, would anyone have any recommendations at which one to get between the 70-300L or the 70-200 f/4 L with 1.4 converter? I am looking at sceneries from mountain jungle where I would need some reach and candid street pictures in villages where people are not used to foreigners taking pictures. Thanks in advance for any input.

 

[Mt Spokane Photography]

A lens plus TC will be slower to focus and have any flaws magnified by the TC. The 70-300mm is going to be better than the 70-200 with TC.

 

[marekjoz]

This topic was somehow covered here:
http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=8130. This comparison might also somehow answer your question: http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=404&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=5&API=1&LensComp=738&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=4&APIComp=0

I don't have 70-300 so can't compare. I do have 70-200 f4 L IS with ext 1.4 II and without the ext it's great. With it's also very good, although loses some resolution, introduces some CA and AF works slower.

While you already have 24-105, and as I am aware of, beyond 135 you always rather only need more mm than exactly mm, you may be in a position, where 300 F4 could suit your needs? You need a zoom?

 

[Loswr]

I'd definitely choose the 70-300 L, for better IQ, greater convenience (mounting/unmounting a TC is a pain), and more compact size.

 

[Jotho]

Thanks for the very quick input. marekjoz, I have read that thread and that was pretty much why I put this question out here, I was about ready to go for the 70-300 but as I read this thread I thought that the 70-200 f/4 seems so good that it might be even better. But looking at the other responses I think 70-300 might be it for me, fast focus is important so it definitely is a factor. 'Native' is mostly better. Thanks a lot.

 

[wickidwombat]

Planning for a motorbike travel through Vietnam in September I am going through lens options. I've done this and similar travel before but not since I became a more enthusiastic photographer. I will sell some of what I capture together with articles and hopefully some of them on their on merit but most will be for my own use. I moved to 5d MkIII a couple of months ago from 60D so I've lost some reach on what I have today. Except for the old stuff I have a 24-105L that I will bring and I might bring my 35L. I today realized that i have about 1500 USD to spend on extra equipment (apart from stuff I already planned to get like remote trigger, extra batteries etc) which means I started looking at a new zoom. So referring to the subject line, would anyone have any recommendations at which one to get between the 70-300L or the 70-200 f/4 L with 1.4 converter? I am looking at sceneries from mountain jungle where I would need some reach and candid street pictures in villages where people are not used to foreigners taking pictures. Thanks in advance for any input.

I would go with 70-200 f2.8L non IS and a 1.4 tc
That's in the price range go with the kenk 1.4 tc to save some coin
Definately go with the 35L too