400 5.6 or 100-400 4.5-5.6 verses extender 2x II

Started Feb 23, 2008 | Discussions
eatstickyrice Regular Member • Posts: 169
400 5.6 or 100-400 4.5-5.6 verses extender 2x II

Hi, some time back it was suggested by a reputable source that the 100-400 f/4-5.6 started showing it's weaknesses with full frame high megapixel digital cameras. It was also suggested by the same respectable source that the 400 5.6 should not be forgotten. Since then I have noticed several threads about the 100-400 f/4-5.6 and people seem to still like this lens. I've been considering acquiring a longer reach lens like this (400ish), and wondered what opinions (I'm sure many) people have about these lenses, their current use and in contrast to one another. Also, I wonder if anyone has any experience with the 2x II on the 70-200 2.8 L IS USM verses either of these. I know there are already threads on this here, but I'm looking for current opinions and solid review links.

Thanks,
Rick

Michael G2
Michael G2 Senior Member • Posts: 1,169
Re: 400 5.6 or 100-400 4.5-5.6 verses extender 2x II

I tried the 70-200/2.8 but it was never long enough for my nature photography so I sold it. I also sold the 100-400 after trying three different lenses since none was sharp wide open at 400mm; I have now settled on the 400/5.6 + 500/4.

I think the 100-400 is widely appreciated because it is very versatile and acceptably sharp at f8. So it depends on your requirements.

I did try the 70-200 with the Canon 2X extender and it didn't do a bad job, considering I shot wide open:

Canon EOS 20D ,Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L USM 1/1600s f/5.6 at 400.0mm iso400

carlk Forum Pro • Posts: 15,940
Re: 400 5.6 or 100-400 4.5-5.6 verses extender 2x II

I don't think 70-200 with 2xTC can be even remotely close to IQ of the longer lenses bare. I did not even like the result from my 70-200 2.8IS with 1.4X TC. You should just forget about this idea unless your demand of IQ is very low.

 carlk's gear list:carlk's gear list
Canon EOS 50D Canon EOS 7D Nikon D800E Fujifilm X-E1 Canon EF 85mm F1.2L II USM +6 more
Karl Gnter Wnsch Forum Pro • Posts: 11,408
Re: 400 5.6 or 100-400 4.5-5.6 verses extender 2x II

eatstickyrice wrote:

Hi, some time back it was suggested by a reputable source that the
100-400 f/4-5.6 started showing it's weaknesses with full frame high
megapixel digital cameras. It was also suggested by the same
respectable source that the 400 5.6 should not be forgotten.

Yepp, that's what I learned the hard way (paying for both, passing on the zoom to my wife who is in need of the zoom flexibility until she can be coerced to use a prime too - then she'll get my 400 f/5.6L and I'll probably get the 500 f/4L)

Since then I have noticed several threads about the 100-400 f/4-5.6 and
people seem to still like this lens. I've been considering acquiring
a longer reach lens like this (400ish), and wondered what opinions
(I'm sure many) people have about these lenses, their current use and
in contrast to one another. Also, I wonder if anyone has any
experience with the 2x II on the 70-200 2.8 L IS USM verses either of
these.

Yepp, the 70-200+2x Extender combo can't touch even the lesser of the two lenses (the 100-400). Especially in terms of contrast it's not even close, sharpness is a tad worse, bokeh is equally disturbingly unnatural on both... The prime really shines here.
--
regards
Karl Günter Wünsch
Visit my gallery at
http://www.fotocommunity.de/pc/pc/mypics/461808

 Karl Gnter Wnsch's gear list:Karl Gnter Wnsch's gear list
Canon EOS 7D Mark II
rdspear Veteran Member • Posts: 4,609
Re: 400 5.6 or 100-400 4.5-5.6 verses extender 2x II

I have the 70-200/2.8 and tried it with the 2x - no go.

I ended up with the 100-400 over the 400 prime. It has IS, I can't give up the zoom capability, and the IQ was very close when I looked at them.

 rdspear's gear list:rdspear's gear list
Canon EOS 40D Canon EOS 7D Canon EF 50mm F1.8 II Canon EF 85mm F1.8 USM Canon EF-S 10-22mm F3.5-4.5 USM +19 more
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads