Canon 70-200 2.8 IS or Canon 100-400 IS ?

[rodney_merrell]

I am ready to take the leap to digital. I am ordering a D20 this

week and I want to purchase my first L lens. I am trying to decide

between the 70-200 2.8 IS and the 100-400 IS. I know that they meet

two different needs but is there anyone out there who has used both

or owned both who can advise me in my first purchase? Thanks in

advance.

[yakim_peled1]

Have you searched the archives? It's a FAQ.

 

Happy shooting ,

Yakim.

[ian_hobday]

These lenses are totally different beasts.

 

What do you want to use it for? Do you need 400mm? Don't forget that your field of view (FOV) is 1.6x narrower than on a 35mm camera. So the 200mm will have the same FOV as a 320mm film. If you get the 1.4x extender you can get a FOV of 448mm on your D20.

 

Of course with the 400 you can get a lot longer with the 1.4x and the 1.6x FOV.

 

The answer to your question is therefore another question: What do you want to do with the lens?

 

Ian

 

http://hobday.net/photos

[steve_dunn2]

<p>Ditto on the totally different beasts comment.</p>

 

<p>I considered the 100-400 but bought a 300/4 IS and a 1.4x TC for my film body. When I go digital, the 300 will be too long for my uses, so I'll have to replace it, and the replacement will be the 70-200 IS (keeping the 1.4x), which gives me basically the same range I had before, but faster, and with the advantage of being able to zoom to shorter focal lengths.</p>

 

<p>What are you going to be shooting? Will an effective 320mm focal length be enough, or do you need the 160-640 range? Is lens speed important to you?</p>

[phil_sugar]

I own both of these lenses and they are both first rate. When I want to shoot indoors, portraits, and just general scenery/travel photos the 70-200 2.8 L is the right choice. When I am shooting wild life, especially birds, the 100-400 is better. One thing to keep in mind, when shooting film it is pretty easy to clean the mirror and insides with a camel hair brush or canned air. BUT, cleaning a digital sensor is a whole new ball game, meaning you have to keep the sensor clean and the quickest way to get it dirty is to do a lot of lens changing out in the field. Taking a 1.4x or 2.0x extender on and off in order to quickly change the focal length of the lens could be a real disaster out of doors. If you are not shooting wildlife, etc., but just family etc. I think you will get better images with the 70-200.

[bob_bell]

the 70-200/2.8 IS is one of those must have lenses because you can do so many things with it from portraits to telephoto using a 1.4x or 2x. I think the thing that you need to figure out is if need the 70-100 side or the 300-400 side more as the 100-400 has an advantage at 400mm.

[jim_larson1]

Geez. Everyone recommends the 70-200/2.8.

 

I just think that sucker is too heavy. Get the /4L instead.

[yakim_peled1]

Get the 85/1.8 + 200/2.8 instead..... :-)

 

Happy shooting ,

Yakim.