70-200f/4 IS L + 1.4tc or 70-300 f/4-5.6 IS L?

Started Jan 22, 2013 | Discussions thread
crazybadger Senior Member • Posts: 1,391
Re: 70-200f/4 IS L + 1.4tc or 70-300 f/4-5.6 IS L?

Donald Duck wrote:

Dags wrote:

Donald Duck wrote:

crazybadger wrote:

If you regularly go to 300 and need/want a zoom then the 70-300L is the best option. You gain an extra 100mm and lose nothing on IQ below 200.

Actually, you do. The 70-200/4 IS is sharper at f/4 than the 70-300 at f/5.6 at 200mm, and you lose a whole stop. The loss of IQ of the 70-200 at 280mm is much smaller.

Actually you dont. I owned both & saw no difference in IQ. I read plenty of reviews before swapping my 70-200 f4 IS for 70-300L. The concensus seemed to be that the only focal length where the 70-200 was slightly sharper was 135mm, I seem to recall the concensus was that the 70-300L was slightly sharper than 70-200 at 70 & at 200mm [...]

Not what I see on TDP with 2 different copies of the 70-300.There is no a single FL from 70 to 200 at which the 70-300 would not be worse, and sometimes, unacceptably so.

But this is irrelevant to me because a loss of 1 stop is huge. I cannot remember the last time I stopped it down from f/4.

But that's the whole point DD.

While TDP is a useful source, it isn't perfect and its results on the 70-300L run counter to what actual users report. Practically every single person I have seen who has actually used the two lenses agree with what Dags is saying.

I'm not saying the 70-200f4IS  isn't a great lens. And if the 1 stop difference is a major issue for you then fine...totally understand that can be a deal breaker in some cases and would justify someone going with the 70-200. A very worthwhile point to bring up in a discussion. But why on earth do people just parrot tdp (or dxo scores as mentioned ealier) as if it was their personal experience. You love the 70-200, the 1 stop is a big issue to you, fine. Why not leave it there? Why comment on equipement you've never used? Maybe I should go over to some of the other threads/forums and start giving my opinion of equipement I have never used? Having read a few reviews and being able to site a few scores should entitle me to speak with as much authority as someone who has used the equipement in question no? Heck, why even bother with 90% of the threads on this forum? We could just refer everyone to the dxo and tdp reviews and say case closed?

When people post here looking for advice they are looking to get a as wide a consensus as possible. A feel from actual users. If half the people posting are just parroting the same information (or misinformation) from a single source and not being clear where that is coming from, then how is that helping? It isn't a consensus of actual users they are getting, rather just a survey of which review sites are most popular and most qouted.

 crazybadger's gear list:crazybadger's gear list
Canon EOS 6D Canon EOS 7D Mark II Canon EF 400mm f/5.6L USM Canon EF-S 17-85mm f/4-5.6 IS USM Canon MP-E 65mm f/2.5 1-5x Macro +3 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
MOD schmegg
MOD schmegg
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow