help me to chose again

[liviu_ailincai]

thank you for you all//to be more specific//i am using film and slides and i can buy only one tele zoom from these 2 models canon70-200L 2,8 no IS and 100-400L 4,5-5,6 with IS of course//i need it for various subjects ...not so specific...but a big tele is a must//so if in the entire world would be onle these 2 models of lenses wich one should be the better choice //i like very much 100-400 because i don,t need to use TC and has IS //but i am warried about image quality in 5,6 ,in 400 and about vigneting also//it is so bad i cannot test it here//on the other hand i now how wonderful lens is 70-200 but...too short///the 2x TC could be a solution? but no IS at all//please give a help and excuse me for beeng so insistent//thank you so much

[fernando lopez]

The 70-200L 2,8 is optically a tad better but it all depends on your needs. If you want more reach go for the 100-400. If image quality and lens speed are more important to you go for the 70-200. IS is a great tool!

[yakim_peled1]

<p> Why only these two?<br>

 

 

Which other lenses do you have?<br>

 

 

Will you be using a tripod? If so, what will be the expected percentage of shots with it?<br>

 

 

How often will you need the 200-400 range?<br>

 

 

Do you have a 2X TC or it's another thing to purchase?<br>

 

 

Have you searched?</p>

 

 

<p>Happy shooting, <br>

Yakim.</p>

[edward_h]

This is the second time today you've asked the same question.

[liviu_ailincai]

i am using a tokina 20-35 2,8//a tamron 28-75 2,8//canon 100 macro 2,8 and canon 75-300 usm III 4-5,6//i don.t have yet a TC

[pto189]

>>... but a big tele is a must...<<<p>

100-400 4.5-5.6 IS. If I have money to buy the 70-200 2.8L + 1.4X or 2X TC, I wouldn't hesitate to save a little more for the 70-200 IS. If you need a big IS tele with super quality, buy 300 f/4L IS + 1.4X TC. You'll have the quality od a prime lens, 2 focal lengths 300 and 420, and IS. I've found that at the long end, zoom isn't as important as far reach.

[serguei_fenev]

I would agree with Philip.

[robert_nancarrow]

Liviu, if you are happy with the performance of the Tamron 28-75 then you will be pleased with either lens, they both meet or beat the Tamron. I have the tamron and both the 70-200 IS and the 100-400 and I'm about to sell the 70-200 due to the overlap in length and that I love using the 100-400, huge range and great, sharp pictures, the slower lens is a drawback but I can't justify keeping the 70-200 just for the extra stop and 1/2 in speed. My tests indicate that the 100-400 is every bit as sharp as the 70-200, and sharper if you utilize both wide open. The 70-200 needs a bit more Unsharp Mask when used at 2.8-4.0. Since you indicate that 200mm may be too short just skip the costly step of getting the 70-200 and then having to get something longer, get the 100-400. Bob.

[andrew robertson]

The 70-200 f/2.8L is big in size, but not all that long in terms of reach. I'm pretty happy

with my 300 f/4L IS, and often add a 1.4x TC to it.