jared_kipe said:
Haha, fair enough. I could use a new car right about now....
It all comes down to the cash and usage obviously, but it seems you know what you're talking about so I'll follow suit on this one
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Need some telephoto lens help
- Thread starter ipacmm
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Haha, fair enough. I could use a new car right about now....
It all comes down to the cash and usage obviously, but it seems you know what you're talking about so I'll follow suit on this one
I don't have any first hand knowledge. Just reviews, and I've only seen that lens reviews once like I said.efoto said:Haha, fair enough. I could use a new car right about now....
It all comes down to the cash and usage obviously, but it seems you know what you're talking about so I'll follow suit on this one
I've been waiting forever for a Sigma 400mm f5.6 APO HSM to show up on ebay. That lens is so awesome. I'd buy it in a second if I could ever find it... and it didn't cost as much as a car. I don't know how much it will cost as its out of production and impossible to find, but I'm hoping not too many people are looking for it so it could run in the $300 range.
One more quick question before I place the order.
Is the EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS worth looking at or will the EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS still be the better buy?
Is the EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS worth looking at or will the EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS still be the better buy?
the 100-400mm is good if you can NEVER change lenses in one day.
Pros:
1.) One lens, big range
2.) Not *that* big/heavy
Cons:
1.) Very Soft between 270-400mm - you *must* stop down to acheive any clarity
2.) Push/pull sucks dust into lens big time.
In my opinion it's better to have a 70-200mm f/2.8L IS and then a 300mm f/4L + 1.4x teleconverter. You simply won't get the sharpness of a good lens when you go long with the 100-400mm. Stopping down to get the sharpness back is tough when you are starting off at f/4.5-5.6.
The 70-200mm retains its quality all the way up -- even using a 1.4x extender.
Pros:
1.) One lens, big range
2.) Not *that* big/heavy
Cons:
1.) Very Soft between 270-400mm - you *must* stop down to acheive any clarity
2.) Push/pull sucks dust into lens big time.
In my opinion it's better to have a 70-200mm f/2.8L IS and then a 300mm f/4L + 1.4x teleconverter. You simply won't get the sharpness of a good lens when you go long with the 100-400mm. Stopping down to get the sharpness back is tough when you are starting off at f/4.5-5.6.
The 70-200mm retains its quality all the way up -- even using a 1.4x extender.
Depends on what you want to do. In my case, I have a co-worker who owns the 70-200 f/2.8 IS, so I can borrow it whenever I want - hence my aiming at the 100-400. If I had to make the choice, I'd probably go with the 100-400, simply because the stuff I shoot tends to be long distance, in bright light.ipacmm said:
However, just because that's what I'm going to do doesn't mean it's right for you. The other option you have open to you is to get the 2x teleconverter and the 70-200; you won't lose out on speed (you lose two stops, so f/2.8 becomes f/5.6 - and that's the limit for autofocus, so you don't lose autofocus with this combination), and the image quality is only slightly worse than the 100-400, from what I've been told. In return, you have a lens that will cover the range from 70mm to 400mm, with a bit of fiddling.
Your call, and your money ... you are the only one who can really make the decision.
Just double checked ... looks like I was wrong. Apparently the difference is night and day if you're doing any cropping of the image.sjl said:
My apologies; the mistake was mine.
sjl said:
What do you mean it's the limit for autofocus? not losing autofocus....please explain.
The way I understand it, when you use a teleconverter you lose 1 stop with the 1.4x TC and 2 stops with the 2.0x TC. When using either of these TCs, once you go above f/5.6, you can only use manual focus. So, if you were to use the 2.0x TC, you would need a pretty fast lens to begin with (f/2.8).efoto said:
carletonmusic said:
This is pretty much the conclusion that I reached...I have the 2.8 IS with 1.4x I picked it up last fall in anticipation of two trips - one for birding in the Kiribati Line Islands (trip cancelled
last December), plus Tanzania (soon). Overall, I prioritized on two things:1. No push-pull to suck in dust in Africa
2. The ability to take the 1.4x off and get an f/2.8 lens for use in low light.
Longer term, I'll probably end up with a 300mm f/4, but I am at least trying to talk my wife into letting me get the 400mm f/4 DO IS
-hh
-hh said:Longer term, I'll probably end up with a 300mm f/4, but I am at least trying to talk my wife into letting me get the 400mm f/4 DO IS
-hh
In that case might might consider the 300L IS F2.8, about $1500 less and retains excellent image quality with a 1.4 TC. It is however a little larger and weighs more than the 400 DO.
efoto said:
Autofocus cameras require a lens that is at least f/5.6. Notice that no camera makers sells a lens that is slower then f/5.6 This is because it would not wiork with the autofocus system.
You know the f-stop is simply the diameter divided by the focal lenght. A teleconverter multiplies the focal lenght but of course it does nothing to the diameter of the lens.
Canon's non-pro bodies will only allow autofocus if the lens is f/5.6 or faster. The pro bodies (the EOS 1V and 3 according to Canon) will do it at f/8 on the center focusing point only. Any slower than f/5.6 (or f/8 on the center point on a pro body), and you have to focus manually. (NB: Canon doesn't mention the 1Ds or 5D bodies when talking about the f/8 limit, so I assume that it doesn't hold for them ... but don't take my word for it. Check if it's important to you.)efoto said:
As others have said, when you're throwing in a TC, you lose 1 stop (1.4x) or 2 stops (2x), so you need to consider how fast the lens you're extending is if you want to be able to use autofocus. f/2.8 or faster = 2x TC works for AF. Slower = manual focus only on a 2x TC.
Note that the f stop here refers to the lens wide open, when the camera does the actual focusing. The setting for the shot - what the lens is stopped down to when the shot is taken - is irrelevant for this discussion; autofocus takes place whilst the lens is wide open, before the shot is taken.
I'm not sure what your math indicates. 70-200mm with a 1.4x extender is 98-280mm...and so forth with the other lenses. Did I miss something?iHotu said:
Oh, I think I see: You mulitplied everything again x1.6. Again, keep in mind that it is not a "magnification" factor of 1.6, it is a "crop" factor. The center of the image is the same size as on a full frame camera, you just don't get the whole outside image. [Blue lines = full frame; Red lines = 1.6x crop factor]
iHotu said:
Looking at the very link you had in your post the 1.4x or the 2.0x will not work with the 50 or 17-40 lenses you listed. My understanding per the description of camera peeps at a local shop is that the Canon TC's have a section that enters the back of the lens which is why you can use Sigma TCs on Canon lenses but not Canon TCs on Sigma lenses. This was all told to me, I have no knowledge/use with this so I cannot confirm or deny but after seeing the TC's I do see what they are talking about.
My understanding is that the black trimmed section you see that sticks above the flat section of the outer casing is what is unique about the Canon TC's vs. other brands.
iHotu said:
Sounds like it, or perhaps third-party TCs, but anything like that being put on the lenses you are speaking of I'd try out in the store to make sure they fit and image quality is alright.
I think the 1.4x/2.0x Canon TC's only fit the "big-boy" white lenses, perhaps some longer/larger black ones as well (135 f2). That was my understanding pre-link you gave, seems to be backed up now.
If you're going to go with a TC get Kenko Pro's. They are right up there with Canon and Sigma TC's but don't have the protruding glass so you can use them with MOST lenses. I'd say all, but there is probably an exception, like maybe EF-S lenses. But why use a TC with an EFS lens?
-hh said:
Since you are now deciding on how many tee shirts you can bring, I didn't think either the 400 DO or 300L 2.8 IS would be going with you. : )
Even without a weight limit, I would not want to drag a monster lens around on vacation. The 70-200 would be my choice, something wide, and maybe a spare body or PS for backup?