Third Party 400 f/5.6 or 2x TC for Canon 70-200 f/2.8 L

What's likely to have better image quality at 400mm: a third party

prime or Canon 70-200 f/2.8 (no IS) plus 2x extender? There's not a

huge price difference between a decent 2x TC and a used Tokina or

Sigma 400mm.

 

The Canon 70-200 f/2.8 is my only lens. I have a 1.4x TC and 1.6

crop factor camera, but I think I'll need more reach for field

sports and wildlife. I've read the posts favoring Canon's 100-400,

but I can't afford it.

I'd get a used 2x TC (mark I). Should be cheaper, more convenient and the quality should be acceptable, if not great.

I suspect that in most circumstances there won't be a lot of difference in image quality

between your two options. The 2X converter + 70-200 is more portable and more

versatile, so I'd agree with Bob. Ulterior motive: I have a Mark 1 Canon 2X that I'd be

willing to sell; contact me privately if interested...

I agree, buy Mark's 2x. The other alternative would be a used Canon EF 400mm f5.6 L. Good luck.

Be carefull with the Sigma 400 5,6 (APO Macro NON HSM) as it is reported not to work on DSLR from the 10D on. The lens quality itself is very good for the money

I can't believe no one is talking about how the 2x makes the 70-200 look soft as all heck. I cannot get a good sharp image all the way out at 200 with the 2x convertor. If you want to buy mine (which is in mint condition) to try it I'm happy to sell it to you for the 250 I paid for it. As a matter of fact if your 1.4 is a mkII and is in mint condition I'll trade you across the board.

 

If it were up to me, I'd save some money if you can for the 100-400.