70-200 2.8 IS w/extention VS 400 5.6

I'm torn between the two. My main needs are fast focusing for birding and action from a distance. I would like to see images from both to help me make a choice between these two fabulous lenses. I need the distance of a 400mm lens but really want to see how much I'd be sacrificing in image quality by choosing the 70-200 IS (with extention tubes) while gaining the zoom range and IS benefits.

I own the 70~200 2.8 IS and love it! I use it mainly for sport shots, but have achieved great bokeh with portraits. I use the full range of the lens so for me its great. Plus I have the 1.4X Extender if needed, though I don't use it much. Have you considered the 100~ 400 lens?

I own both...they are very different animals. The 400f/5.6L is razor sharp, has lightning fast focus and is light and handles great. The 70-200f/2.8L IS with 2x extenders is ok for those times you just need a 400mm fill in. It is all that sharp but th images are usable. The focus is kind of slow and may hunt in less than great light. It is a total brick in the hand weighing over a one pound more than the prime.

If you really want 400mm and the best in speed and image quality then get the prime. If it is something to be used now and then the 70-200 plus 2x extender will be ok.

If you need the flexibility of a zoom the take a long hard look at the 100-400IS. It is as sharp as the prime but it is close and will out do the 70-200f/2.8 plus 2x extender.
--
Bill
Taking It One Day At a Time



http://www.pbase.com/slowpokebill
'The fact that no one understands you doesn't mean you're an artist.' Unknown
'Every man dies; but, not every man lives' Braveheart
'Sometime the magic works. Sometimes it doesn't' Little Big Man

--
Bill
Taking It One Day At a Time



http://www.pbase.com/slowpokebill
'The fact that no one understands you doesn't mean you're an artist.' Unknown
'Every man dies; but, not every man lives' Braveheart
'Sometime the magic works. Sometimes it doesn't' Little Big Man

Excluding typos. LOL! I have the 70-200 f2.8L IS + Canon 2X TC MKII, 400mm f5.6L and 100-400L. The 70-200 + TC dosen't even come close to the 400mm prime or zoom. I prefer the 100-400L for the reach and versatility.
--
Click the link below to see a gallery of my photo's.
http://www.pbase.com/markswheels

Here's the thing . It's not in my budget to spend more than 2000 on lenses for the next year. So I can choose only one. I have met two photographers here in Florida and both have said the image qaulity and focusing speed, even when tracking flight, of the 400 prime is superior to the 100-400 so I've been leaning twoards the prime. In what I have read here in the forum the 70-200 is superior to the 100-400 (in opinions). In conclusion I don't know how I feel about a push/pull zoom compared to a ring. Thank you for your time in answering the post.

I have read so much, from 70-200 junkies that I really was convinced it had better image quality than the 100- 400. However since l have another two "lightning fast focus" opinions to add to the list I am strongly leaning to a 100-400 VS. 400 prime debate. How do you feel about the push/pull zoom? It's made me hesitate.

I'd love to see some pics.

I love the push/pull. So fast and easy to use.
--
Click the link below to see a gallery of my photo's.
http://www.pbase.com/markswheels

Here's a couple of my favorite's. Also, if you click on the link to my photogallery at the very bottom, the first 3 galleries were taken mostly with the 100-400L. Click in the thumb nail to enter the gallery, then click on a picture to bring up a larger version. I usually put which camera and lens was used in each picture.





--
Click the link below to see a gallery of my photo's.
http://www.pbase.com/markswheels

The 100-400L is my favorite lens and if you click on my profile, you'll see I have some nice lenses.
--
Click the link below to see a gallery of my photo's.
http://www.pbase.com/markswheels

Your images are wonderfull. Tact sharp!