What TC with 70-200L?

Kryptix

Kryptix

Suspended / Banned
Messages
1,730
Edit My Images
Yes
I want a TC for a bit of extra reach. Does the 2x give worse quality than the other one? I've heard of certain TC's working better with certain lenses... True or what?

I'm planning on upgrading to the f/2.8 IS very soon, will that make any difference to what I should be choosing now?
 
I use a canon 2x with the 70-200 is 2.8
At the long end, it can be a little soft
but mostly its recoverable
 
So what would that turn my lens into? 140-400mm?

What f number? I forgot how that's worked out...
 
Kryptix said:
So what would that turn my lens into? 140-400mm?

What f number? I forgot how that's worked out...
Click to expand...

Yep 140-400
and lose two stops
(f/5.6)
The 1.4 is supposed to be the better bet ( lose 1 stop) but not tried it so can't comment
 
Cobra said:

Yep 140-400
and lose two stops
(f/5.6)
The 1.4 is supposed to be the better bet ( lose 1 stop) but not tried it so can't comment
Click to expand...

And don't forget the crop sensor effect aswell :thumbs:
 
I borrowed a Sigma 1.4 EX DG APO converter from a fellow forum member last night. Attached to my 70-200 F4 IS, I noticed no measurable difference in sharpness across the whole zoom range. Very impressed with it, and would recommend it if looking for more reach. Plus a 1.4 converter will still allow your F4 zoom to autofocus until you decide to upgrade.
 
So a 2x TC won't allow my f/4 IS to AF? Will a 2x TC allow a f/2.8 IS to AF?
 
Kryptix said:
So a 2x TC won't allow my f/4 IS to AF? Will a 2x TC allow a f/2.8 IS to AF?
Click to expand...

Correct
and Yes

I used a 2x on my 70-200 F2.8 L IS and a lot of quality was lost. Yes, I was able to recover it for moderate print size but I would not want to have to rely on it.
 
So you'd advise me to go for the 1.4?
 
yes or a 100-400:)
 
1.4x works fine on the 70-200L!

I have used both the 2x gave a noticeable loss in quality, the 1.4x loses very very little :)
 
fletch5 said:
yes or a 100-400:)
Click to expand...
Probably both knowing me.

Would the 1.4 be the best option with the 100-400L as I do plan to get that in the near future...
 
the 1.4 would give better quality and faster shutter times.

instead of upgrading the 70-200 to a 2.8, why not get the 100-400 and you get the range covered?
 
Kryptix said:
Probably both knowing me.

Would the 1.4 be the best option with the 100-400L as I do plan to get that in the near future...
Click to expand...
LOL! 50D, 10-22, 24-105, 70-200 2.8, 100-400...

Is there anything you don't plan to get in the near future? :p :D
 
Kryptix said:
Probably both knowing me.

Would the 1.4 be the best option with the 100-400L as I do plan to get that in the near future...
Click to expand...

100-400 is F5.6 max aperture
Bolt a 1.4 on the end and you loose autofocus on your 50D
 
Vertigo1 said:
LOL! 50D, 10-22, 24-105, 70-200 2.8, 100-400...

Is there anything you don't plan to get in the near future? :p :D
Click to expand...
Quite a lot actually, but they tend to be the non-expensive stuff. :shake: Spent a fortune recently but I really just wanna get a decent bag together rather than wanting all the time.

RichardtheSane said:
100-400 is F5.6 max aperture
Bolt a 1.4 on the end and you loose autofocus on your 50D
Click to expand...
Gash. Might just get the 100-400L instead of the TC then...
 
I've got a 70-200L 2.8 IS and the 1.4x extender works great with it, very little loss of quality. Have heard the 2x loses a lot more (plus speed and AF at the top end.)
I'm now agonising over the choice between a 100-400 dust pump or a 400 prime.
Methinks the 100-400 would be more versatile...
Decisions, decisions.
 
I own both and on occasions use both at the same time, the 1.4 fits inside the 2 which in turn connects tot he 70-200 :D quality loss is acceptable for the length of lens.

but mostly use the 1.4 for that little extra reach at f4 its not bad.

but then if you have money to burn and can get the 100-400L go for it.
 
Cobra said:
I use a canon 2x with the 70-200 is 2.8
At the long end, it can be a little soft
but mostly its recoverable
Click to expand...

Likewise!

It can provide good results given enough light (just like the 100-400 really!)...I've got a 30x20 print from it and the quality is spot on! Focus is a little slow but again, only really in bad conditions. Once you know what it's capable of it's a useable set up.
 
Vertigo1 said:
LOL! 50D, 10-22, 24-105, 70-200 2.8, 100-400...

Is there anything you don't plan to get in the near future? :p :D
Click to expand...

I was thinking I want his lottery numbers :D

Handy hint with the 50D and the 100-400 and TC's. Put it in manual focus and use the live view and 10X zoom feature to focus (easier if it's a static image or you're prefocussing on a point).

100-400 is a great lens on the 50D. This was on Monday, horrible dark wet day
112686139.jpg

112686048.jpg
 
RichardtheSane said:
What do you need the 400mm for?
Click to expand...
Anything. I was shooting birds up the garden today and needed at least 400mm. I've been at tracks where 200mm isn't enough and so on.
 
i use the Kenko Pro 1.4x on my 70-200L with a 40D.

works flawlessly, like they were supposed to be mated together.

cheers,

gw
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top