70-200 2.8L or 100-400 4.5-5.6L IS

[kim_francis]

I seem to be stuck on a seesaw over this decision. I'd be upgrading from a 100-300 4.5-5.6 USM, for use with an Elan 7E. The advantage of the 70-200 is the larger aperture, but I really need the longer length so I'd be using a TC which would in effect negate that advantage, right? The advantage of the 100-400 is IS, but I'd be using it for sports and I use a monopod anyway, so maybe IS isn't such a big deal. And to muddy the waters even more, maybe I should consider a 200 2.8L with a TC? What about the old 300 2.8L non-IS? I could probably live without zoom, since I could keep my 100-300 on hand if need be.

[colin_miller3]

The 70-200mm becomes a 98-280mm f/4 with the 1.4X TC and a 140-440mm

f/5.6 with the 2x TC. I think you would be better off shooting the 70-

200 f/2.8. The zoom seems more practical unless you shoot nothing but

sports.

[randy_bienia]

There is no clear winner here. I have both lenses (70 -200 and 100-

400IS) I will say that I think my 70 - 200 with the Canon 2x

converter is sharper than the 100 - 400 but only by the smallest of

margins. Pick what u want. The advantages of the IS lense is that you

dont constaly have to go from one converter to another

[david_lee7]

The 100-400's IS is also useful when shooting from unstable platforms,

such as boats....

 

<p>

 

David

[howard_z]

There is a EOS lens survey at http://www.photozone.de/result2.htm

Surveys are not as accurate as tests,

but photodo.com doesn't have tests for the 70-200/f2.8 lens with 2xTC.

 

<p>

 

The 100-400 lens is sharper and has less distortions and less

vignetting than the 70-200 with 2xTC.

 

<p>

 

It looks like the question is how often that 2.8 f-stop will be

useful.

[howard_z]

Hmmm...

At photodo.com it says the 100-400 lens has more distortion than the

70-200 lens. This definitely does not agree with the survey.

 

<p>

 

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think a TC increases distortions.

(I've never used a TC)

 

<p>

 

The 17-35 lens has worse distortion, but not that much worse than the

100-400 according to photodo.com's distortion percentage.

 

<p>

 

17-35/2.8 distortion -4.43% to 1.13%

70-200/2.8 distortion -2.01% to -2.04%

100-400/4.5-5.7 distortion 0.41% to -3.83%

[howard_z3]

I found a review of the 100-400 lens.

http://www.outbackphoto.com/reviews/equipment/Canon_IS_100_400/Canon_I

S_100_400.html

 

<p>

 

The article says that when at 400mm/f5.6 the lens is unacceptably

soft, but that 400mm/f8 is sharp.

They make the lens sound like a 100-400/f8 lens rather than 100-

400/f4.5-5.6

[howard_z]

Too bad I can't just edit the last post.

 

<p>

 

Your question HAS been asked before - though at a different forum.

 

<p>

 

http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=000fbz

 

<p>

 

I don't know if linking to another message forum is considered bad

conduct.

[howard_z]

I don't own either of the two lenses, but I find the question very

interesting, as I'd like to purchase one of them.

 

<p>

 

Looking at photo.com, the 70-200/f.28 is sharpest at 135mm, and the

100-400/4.5-5.6IS is sharpest at 180mm. The weighted MTF shows the

70-200 lens as being a little sharper, but after you add a 2xTC

probably the 70-200 will be less sharp. Someone above has said that

he owns both lenses and doesn't see any difference - does that

comment apply to using the 2xTC with the 70-200 ?

 

<p>

 

At 400mm focal length, they both have the same 5.6 f-stop, and the

100-400's IS is a 2 stop advantage - only if you are going to be hand

holding the camera. On a tripod sounds like they will be very

similar.

 

<p>

 

OK, I figured out the perfect solution.

 

<p>

 

Wait for Canon to add IS to the 70-200/2.8.

Imagine 2.8 plus the 2 stop IS advantage - that's like having a 1.4

lens!

 

<p>

 

The 70-200/2.8IS lens with 2xTC will give you everything the 100-400

lens can offer, plus the 2.8 capability when not using the TC.

 

<p>

 

Note that the 70-200/2.8 is really a 70-193/2.8 and

the 100-400/f4.5-5.6 IS is really a 102-381/4.5-5.6 IS

 

<p>

 

Then the 70-193/2.8 IS with 2xTC will become 140-386/5.6, and with

the IS should be just as useful as the 102/381/4.5-5.6 IS. When you

need focal lengths below 140 OR when you need a faster lens, you will

need to remove the TC - which will give you the 2.8 capability with

IS from 70 to 193 with superior sharpness. Hmm, handholding 200mm

will require a 1/60second shutter speed- sounds good. Handholding

70mm will require 1/30second - has anybody used mirror lockup while

handholding?

 

<p>

 

The only question is how long we must wait until Canon makes and

sells the 70-200/2.8 with IS added. Will Canon eventually add IS to

all lenses? Anybody read any web page rumors about when?

[hung_james_wasson]

In answer to the very last post (an 70-200 f/2.8 w/ IS) -- maybe it

isn't so far away!?! As I was also contemplating the delema of 100-

400 IS vs 70-200 for use on an Elan 7E, I searched the CanonUSA

website in vain for ANY reference to the 70-200 f/2.8L USM. Nada,

zip, zelch! I only found a link when I went to Canon-Europa.

 

<p>

 

It seems to me that a revamp of the awsome 70-200 f/2.8 must be in

the works (although IS capability might be dreaming too far)!

[hung_james_wasson]

They did it! Canon USA has announced a September release date for the

all new EF 70-200 f/2.8 L IS USM! The lense has better weather seals,

improved IS system allowing 3-stops handholding, faster focusing &

more! No word on the announcement if the IS is two stage with

panning -- but it's got to have it! MSRP is $3,000 US, and it will

not replace the non-IS version of the lens.

 

<p>

 

Wow! I don't believe it! I've been to 3 different Pro stores since my

last post -- every one of them stated that Canon had no plans to add

IS to such a hot pro lens. Heh, heh...I guess Canon was keeping it a

surprise for everyone!

 

<p>

 

The link to the official Canon USA annoucement is here:

http://www.usa.canon.com/press/080101.html

 

<p>

 

My answer has been solved. I will save up every penny for the 70-200

f/2.8 IS & Canon TC's!

[hung_james_wasson]

Quick update: I checked with several mail order companies & local pro

retail stores -- no word yet on actual shipment arrivals or retail

pricing.

 

<p>

 

B&H Photo & Pro Photo Supply (Portland, OR) suggest calling back in 4

weeks

CameraWorld (Portland, OR) & CameraWorld.com suggest call back in 2

weeks, and the sales rep even hazarded a guess that the new lens

would be at least $300 more than the non IS version (for what that's

worth). :)

[anthony_wong2]

You should get the 70-200/2.8L IS lens. It should hit the stores in

September, and its worth waiting for. The IS lens has 2-stage Image

Stabilization mode just like the 100-400 IS, and if you use a 2X TC

you will get 140-400/5.6 with the IS and AF still fully functional.

So, a 70-200/2.8L IS plus a 2X TC will give you 2 lenses in one. The

70-200/2.8L IS also has a more rounded aperture from 2.8 to 5.6

thanks to new aperture blade design, to give you a softer and better

effect with portraiture. Get the 70-200 IS plus 2x TC, you won't

regret it.

[asif_lakhanpal1]

You haven't mentioned which 2x extender you'll get. I have the 2x and

use it with the 70-200/2.8 and find the resulting 400/5.6 image

quality unacceptable. Look at the new 2x extender mark II which has

better optics by all accounts.

 

<p>

 

Also, you did't mention focusing speed. With the 100-400IS the

focusing will be *fast*. With the 70-200 + 2x the focus will be

*slow*. I know, because I use that combination all the time. The new

IS version of the lens and the new 2x II extender will not be able to

speed up the focus to anywhere near the 100-400IS's speed of lock on.

Also, for AI servo tracking, forget it. I don't know how good the AF

on the Elan is, I use a EOS-3 and a D-30. The EOS3 is much quicker

than the D30.