New lens not sure what to go for

[SW 686]

I am looking at getting a new lens it will be mostly for wildlife these are the 3 I have in mind.
I am just wondering what you think would be the best, will using the converters slow them down too much
and what sort of image quality drop will they be compared the 400mm.

Canon 400mm F5.6L USM (no IS) £889.99
Canon 300mm F4L IS USM with the 1.4x converter MKIII (420mm with IS) £939.99 + £309.99 = £1249.98
Canon 200mm F2.8L USM MKII with the 2x converter MKIII (400mm no IS) £539.00 + £319.00 = £858.00

I got all the prices from DigitalRev just to make it fair.

400mm 11.5ft minimum focus
300mm 4.9ft minimum focus
200mm 4.9ft minimum focus

need any more info just ask

 

[postcardcv]

If you want IS and excellent close focus (which is great for butterflies and the likes) go for the 300. If faster focusing and reach is the main aim then go for the 400 (probably slightly edges it on IQ. Too). Personally I would not recommend using the 200 and 2x as either other option will out perform it.

 

[modchild]

I was using a 70-200 f2.8L IS MkII and a 2x MkIII converter a while ago on a trip to a wildlife park and got some great shots. I had it on a 70D and it was the first real test for it as it was only a few days old at the time.

I was using a 5D3 with Sigma 150-500 OS on the other side of my harness and TBH the photos from both were excellent. Here's one from the trip with the 70-200 and converter on the 70D, it's one of my favourites from the day despite shooting lions, tigers, leopards etc.

It's taken at f8, ISO100 and 1/400sec at 400mm and it's straight from the camera apart from being cropped.

[/url][/IMG]