Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6L IS USM vs. Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM

Started Apr 14, 2013 | Photos
Shop cameras & lenses ▾
Jmolan
Jmolan Forum Member • Posts: 98
Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6L IS USM vs. Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM

OK I know I need to reach 300mm. Shooting flying eagles and moving fishing boats. What would be your take on the difference....

I would want to use a 1.4x on the 70-200. Which would get me a 280 reach. Would I be closer to F-4 with the converter? Still be able to be faster with the converter than the 5.6 on the 300mm? I need it fast as I can as the birds can get blurred when trying to track them. Thanks so much. A couple examples of what I am trying to do. They were shot with a 70-300mm that I rented.

-- hide signature --

Keeping it real! Learning all I can!

ASR45
ASR45 Forum Pro • Posts: 35,246
Re: Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6L IS USM vs. Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM
1

I have the 70-300L IS USM lens, and could not be more happier its a great lens.  

-- hide signature --

Alan.
It is better to keep your mouth closed and let people think you are a fool than to open it and remove all doubt.
Mark Twain

 ASR45's gear list:ASR45's gear list
Canon PowerShot G16 Canon EF 100-400mm F4.5-5.6L IS II Canon PowerShot G12 Canon EOS-1D X Canon EOS 5D Mark III +7 more
Rick Knepper Forum Pro • Posts: 13,288
If I were shooting the subject matter you are
1

Jmolan wrote:

OK I know I need to reach 300mm. Shooting flying eagles and moving fishing boats. What would be your take on the difference....

I would want to use a 1.4x on the 70-200. Which would get me a 280 reach. Would I be closer to F-4 with the converter? Still be able to be faster with the converter than the 5.6 on the 300mm? I need it fast as I can as the birds can get blurred when trying to track them. Thanks so much. A couple examples of what I am trying to do. They were shot with a 70-300mm that I rented.

-- hide signature --

Keeping it real! Learning all I can!

and I was okay with zooms (which I have become over the last couple of years), I might give this rumor a few months to come to fruition.

http://www.canonrumors.com/2013/03/new-100-400-to-launch-with-eos-7d-mark-ii-cr2/

Not sure I understand your question. The 1.4x TC reduces your light by 1 stop and the 2x TC by 2 stops. Seems to me with a 1.4x TC on the 70-200, you would be at f5.6 with either lens @ maximum FL.

-- hide signature --

Rick Knepper, photographer, non-professional, shooting for pleasure, check my profile for gear list and philosophy.

 Rick Knepper's gear list:Rick Knepper's gear list
Pentax 645Z Canon EOS 5DS R +2 more
Pedro Moreira
Pedro Moreira Regular Member • Posts: 236
Re: If I were shooting the subject matter you are
1

1.4x TC on the 70-200 2.8 = f4   (1 stop)

2x    TC on the 70-200 28 = f5.6 (2 stops)

-- hide signature --
 Pedro Moreira's gear list:Pedro Moreira's gear list
Canon EOS 5D Mark III Canon EOS Rebel SL1 Sony a5100 Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8L II USM Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM +2 more
happysnapper64 Senior Member • Posts: 5,324
Re: Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6L IS USM vs. Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM
1

FWIW, I would go with the 70-300L. 1.4 on the 70-200f/2.8 gives you f/4 @ 280. You may get better IQ with the bare 300 on the 70-300. Regardless of it being f/5.6 @ 300, it's the SS that stops the motion blurr from the moving subjects, & as you are seemingly shooting outside in reasonably good light, & the fact that the 70-300L is a really great lens, I would go with it. A 2x on the 70-200 giving f/5.6? You would have to ask those who have compared IQ of that combo. Would the 70-300L be better cropped than the 70-200f/2.8 with 2xtc? not sure. Nice shots by the way.

-- hide signature --

lee uk.
There are old pilots, & there are bold pilots, but there are no old bold pilots.

 happysnapper64's gear list:happysnapper64's gear list
Canon EOS 5D Mark II Canon EOS 7D Canon EF-S 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM Canon EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro USM +9 more
Jmolan
Jmolan OP Forum Member • Posts: 98
Re: Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6L IS USM vs. Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM
1

That is just what my question was, and may be a little silly. The 2.8 70-200 with the converters VS. the 4-5.6 70-300 by it's self.

You can see how soaked this bird is, it is the conditions I have often to shoot.

I need to scan through a bunch of my favorite shots and see what focal length I am using most. I actually shoot in a lot of very grey stormy kind of weather in Alaska. Hence my desire for that low F stop. And I need the zoom, as I am restricted in my movements being on a boat most the time.

Anyone shooting the f/4 or f2.8 70-200mm IS with the extenders, and happy? I suspect the 1.4X is good, are the 2.0X also good?

-- hide signature --

Keeping it real! Learning all I can!

bhollis
bhollis Veteran Member • Posts: 3,191
Re: Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6L IS USM vs. Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM
1

Jmolan wrote:

OK I know I need to reach 300mm. Shooting flying eagles and moving fishing boats. What would be your take on the difference....

I would want to use a 1.4x on the 70-200. Which would get me a 280 reach. Would I be closer to F-4 with the converter? Still be able to be faster with the converter than the 5.6 on the 300mm? I need it fast as I can as the birds can get blurred when trying to track them. Thanks so much. A couple examples of what I am trying to do. They were shot with a 70-300mm that I rented.

For birds in flight, even eagles, I recommend you hold out for at least 400mm.  I use the 100-400L.  Another good option is the 400 f/5.6L prime.  Some folks also use the 70-200 f/2.8L II with a 2x TC.  There are also some third-party options.  And, as another poster mentiioned, you could hold out for the new 100-400L II (which although still only a rumor, I think is quite likely to come true in the near future).

harrygilbert Senior Member • Posts: 2,799
Re: Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6L IS USM vs. Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM
1

I have both, and find the 70-300L to be a fantastic lens -- and lighter than the 70-200L IS II. Both are great lenses, but I use the 70-200 in low light, and the 70-300 when I need a little more reach.

 harrygilbert's gear list:harrygilbert's gear list
Canon EOS 5D Canon EOS 50D Canon EOS-1D Mark IV Canon EOS-1D X Canon EF 15mm f/2.8 Fisheye +17 more
Jay A Senior Member • Posts: 1,506
Re: Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6L IS USM vs. Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM
1

I own both the 70-300L and the 70-200 F2.8 NON IS.

The 70-200 gives noticeable better sharpness but the 70-300 is no slouch and its sharpness is plenty good. I love this lens as it is smaller, lighter and I am much more likely to bring it with me unless I need the extra F-stop. The 70-300 also performs SLIGHTLY better at 300mm than the 70-200 does at 280mm with the 1.4 converter.

The 70-200 F2.8 with 1.4x converter will give you 280mm F4. The 70-300 at 300mm is a 5.6 lens.

Jmolan
Jmolan OP Forum Member • Posts: 98
Re: Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6L IS USM vs. Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM
1

bhollis wrote:

Jmolan wrote:

OK I know I need to reach 300mm. Shooting flying eagles and moving fishing boats. What would be your take on the difference....

I would want to use a 1.4x on the 70-200. Which would get me a 280 reach. Would I be closer to F-4 with the converter? Still be able to be faster with the converter than the 5.6 on the 300mm? I need it fast as I can as the birds can get blurred when trying to track them. Thanks so much. A couple examples of what I am trying to do. They were shot with a 70-300mm that I rented.

For birds in flight, even eagles, I recommend you hold out for at least 400mm.  I use the 100-400L.  Another good option is the 400 f/5.6L prime.  Some folks also use the 70-200 f/2.8L II with a 2x TC.  There are also some third-party options.  And, as another poster mentiioned, you could hold out for the new 100-400L II (which although still only a rumor, I think is quite likely to come true in the near future).

Great shots, I see they are all cranked out to 400mm. I have a unique situation I should mention. I am surrounded by Eagles, sometimes very close, and the flying is close by. I will show a few examples. A lot of my shots are under 200mm.

-- hide signature --

Keeping it real! Learning all I can!

Jmolan
Jmolan OP Forum Member • Posts: 98
Re: Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6L IS USM vs. Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM
1

-- hide signature --

Keeping it real! Learning all I can!

jckk Regular Member • Posts: 142
Re: Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6L IS USM vs. Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM
1

Jmolan wrote:

That is just what my question was, and may be a little silly. The 2.8 70-200 with the converters VS. the 4-5.6 70-300 by it's self.

You can see how soaked this bird is, it is the conditions I have often to shoot.

I need to scan through a bunch of my favorite shots and see what focal length I am using most. I actually shoot in a lot of very grey stormy kind of weather in Alaska. Hence my desire for that low F stop. And I need the zoom, as I am restricted in my movements being on a boat most the time.

Anyone shooting the f/4 or f2.8 70-200mm IS with the extenders, and happy? I suspect the 1.4X is good, are the 2.0X also good?

-- hide signature --

Keeping it real! Learning all I can!

I have the 70-200 f/2.8L II and the 70-300L and both are very sharp and produce the quality of images that people expect.  I haven't done any comparisons of test shots between the 70-200/1.4x and the 70-300, but the 70-200/1.4x is still very good.  If you get the 70-200, the consensus is that most 1.4x teleconverters are good and the Canon 2x III is probably the only 2x TC worth getting.  For 1.4x I have the basic Tamron, the Tamron SP Pro and the Kenko DGX Pro, and for 2x I have the Canon III.  When using the 2x TC the AF speed takes a big hit.  Reports are that the 70-300 can work with the Kenko DGX 1.4x, but it's probably dependent on the body and available light, so I wouldn't necessarily count on it working consistently.

When you look at your shots to see what type of focal lengths you'll need, take a close look at the photos taken in poor light.  The difference between f/4 and f/5.6 is one stop, so if those shots were taken at f/5.6, they will have twice the shutter speed, half the ISO, or some combination of the two if taken at f/4.  Try to determine how much of a difference that one stop will make.  If ISO and therefore noise is the bigger consideration, maybe using noise reduction software will make up the difference at a much lower cost to you.

Also, how much do you need the wide end on your lens?  Using a 1.4x TC brings the 70-200 to 98mm on the wide end.  If that is still ok and you can also live with f/5.6, then also consider the 100-400 if the size is acceptable.

Canon started a new rebate for 4/14-4/27, so it should save you some money on whichever lens you get.  At B&H, the 70-300L is $1329, the 100-400L is not listed but $1499 at Adorama and Amazon, and the 70-200L is $2099.  There are rebates on the Canon 1.4x and 2x TC III also.  As usual, if you want the larger aperture, it's going to cost you...

James

bhollis
bhollis Veteran Member • Posts: 3,191
Re: Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6L IS USM vs. Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM
1

Jmolan wrote:

-- hide signature --

Keeping it real! Learning all I can!

Very nice!  Looks like 300mm is enough for you.  I live in Juneau, Alaska, and there are eagles all around here, but I still need at least 400mm, even on a 7D, and could use more.  How are your able to get so close?

Jmolan
Jmolan OP Forum Member • Posts: 98
Re: Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6L IS USM vs. Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM
1

We have the perfect set up a constant supply of fishing boats delivering. As you can see, this young lady was getting encouragement from me to keep getting closer. Sometimes it works, sometimes they fly off.

bhollis wrote:

Jmolan wrote:

-- hide signature --

Keeping it real! Learning all I can!

Very nice!  Looks like 300mm is enough for you.  I live in Juneau, Alaska, and there are eagles all around here, but I still need at least 400mm, even on a 7D, and could use more.  How are your able to get so close?

-- hide signature --

Keeping it real! Learning all I can!

flyfish1 Regular Member • Posts: 301
Re: Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6L IS USM vs. Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM
1

I bought the 70-300L a few weeks ago and absolutely love it.

kevindar
kevindar Veteran Member • Posts: 4,124
Re: Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6L IS USM vs. Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM
1

I own both.  If you already have the 70-200 2.8L ISII, then definitely go with the converter. the image quality with the TC is excellent, and certainly at f 5.6,  it is at least as good as the 70-300.  focus speed will be close.   what body are you using?

I would say the best birding zoom lens is the 100-400L.  you can never have enough reach.  in that price range that is your best choice. the 70-300L is a great lens, b/c it packs smaller and is lighter with great image quality.  the 70-200L with the TC wiill set you back about 900 more.  in return you get an excellent 2.8 lens.

 kevindar's gear list:kevindar's gear list
Canon EOS 5D Mark III Canon EF 85mm f/1.2L II USM Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II USM Sony a6000 +22 more
Deak Regular Member • Posts: 146
Re: Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6L IS USM vs. Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM

happysnapper64 wrote:

FWIW, I would go with the 70-300L. 1.4 on the 70-200f/2.8 gives you f/4 @ 280. You may get better IQ with the bare 300 on the 70-300. Regardless of it being f/5.6 @ 300, it's the SS that stops the motion blurr from the moving subjects, & as you are seemingly shooting outside in reasonably good light, & the fact that the 70-300L is a really great lens, I would go with it. A 2x on the 70-200 giving f/5.6? You would have to ask those who have compared IQ of that combo. Would the 70-300L be better cropped than the 70-200f/2.8 with 2xtc? not sure. Nice shots by the way.

-- hide signature --

lee uk.
There are old pilots, & there are bold pilots, but there are no old bold pilots.

Actually Lee the IS doesn't do anything to reduce motion blur from the subject (if that's what you meant), only motion of the camera.

-- hide signature --

Deak

 Deak's gear list:Deak's gear list
Canon PowerShot S100 Sony Alpha NEX-7 Canon EOS 5D Mark III Fujifilm X-T1 Sony a6000 +34 more
clearzoom Senior Member • Posts: 3,026
Re: Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6L IS USM vs. Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM

70-300L - I just rented this and really liking. I am reading this thread to see what TC choices for 70-300L and would I lose 1stop light, from f5.6 , comes down to f8. and I use T3i for now, in future intend to 7D

does it have AF at f8? with TC

I just see 1 choice in amazon "Kenko 1.4X PRO 300 Teleconverter DGX for Canon EOS Digital SLRs"

and it doesn't even say that it fits this Lens

 clearzoom's gear list:clearzoom's gear list
Sony Alpha NEX-6 Canon EOS 70D Sony a6000 Canon EF 70-200mm f/4.0L USM Tamron AF 28-75mm F/2.8 XR Di LD Aspherical (IF) +7 more
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads