70-300 IS --> 70-200 F4 IS + 1.4TC

FreeStream

FreeStream

FreeStream

Soldato
Joined
10 Apr 2004
Posts
13,498
I've been debating about this today since 200-300 mm didn't really change much of the FoV when I was shooting a hockey match.

What was annoying was the lack of AF speed above everything else, luckily thanks to the 40Ds kick ass AF and the AF-On button 90% of the shots were close to being spot on.

Now I was planning to go 100-400 but now im changing to 70-200 F4 IS + 300mm F4 IS + 1.4xTC...

Ok it costs nearly twice as much but the IQ will be much better :confused:

So do I sell my 70-300 and get a 70-200 F4 IS...

Decisions!!
 
I've used all of the lenses you've mentioned and I ended up going for a Sigma 120-300 F2.8. It has all of the versatility of the 100-400L but with better image quality and a 2 stop faster aperture. Add a 2x extender for a 600mm F5.6 lens :) The only downside is the weight (2.7kg) but I managed fine handholding it all day on Saturday. A monopod is probably worth getting though.

If you want to stick with Canon then go for the 100-400 unless you don’t mind having two bodies for the 70-200 and 300 and even then not having the 400mm reach.
 
cleanbluesky said:
I was in your position, but then I saw the light and decided to buy the entire set of L-grade lenses. It's the only way.
Click to expand...

sigmas 120-300 kicks the canons 100-400 all over the show ;), the only thing the canon has going for it is the IS and an extra 100mm, but a 1.4TC takes the sigma too 400mm F/4 ;)
 
wez130 said:
sigmas 120-300 kicks the canons 100-400 all over the show ;), the only thing the canon has going for it is the IS and an extra 100mm, but a 1.4TC takes the sigma too 400mm F/4 ;)
Click to expand...

The L lens is clearly a mark of distinction. If I buy a lens and I find that it doesn't have an L on the body, I usually donate it to Oxfam.
 
SDK^ said:
I've used all of the lenses you've mentioned and I ended up going for a Sigma 120-300 F2.8. It has all of the versatility of the 100-400L but with better image quality and a 2 stop faster aperture. Add a 2x extender for a 600mm F5.6 lens :) The only downside is the weight (2.7kg) but I managed fine handholding it all day on Saturday. A monopod is probably worth getting though.

If you want to stick with Canon then go for the 100-400 unless you don’t mind having two bodies for the 70-200 and 300 and even then not having the 400mm reach.
Click to expand...

The 120-300 is £1300 tho :/ which roughly give or take a £100 = 70-200, 300 F4 + 1.4...

120-300 has no IS and thats one thing I am not loosing now I've had two lenses with it! Plus the two 10-20s i've had have been rubbish so im not jumping up and down again to get a Sigma...

Thing is the 70-200 range is the two things I've used in two important events and its the sharpest zoom ever, its in the top section on photozone from wide open to F11!!!

Oh and CBS, go away.
 
A couple of years ago I wouldn't even dream of buying a Sigma lens or a telephoto without IS. But after coming to my senses (:)) I realised its photo quality that matters, not the lens you take it with.

IS is great for low light photography but F2.8 is leagues ahead !!
If your working outdoors then IS will rarely if ever be used - I had a 100-400 for four years and apart from testing I’m struggling to think of one occasions when I needed IS.

Concorde Rules said:
The 120-300 is £1300 tho :/ which roughly give or take a £100 = 70-200, 300 F4 + 1.4...
Click to expand...
Yup - It's two lenses in one with constant F2.8 - a no brainer !!
 
SDK^ said:
A couple of years ago I wouldn't even dream of buying a Sigma lens or a telephoto without IS. But after coming to my senses (:)) I realised its photo quality that matters, not the lens you take it with.

IS is great for low light photography but F2.8 is leagues ahead !!
If your working outdoors then IS will rarely if ever be used - I had a 100-400 for four years and apart from testing I’m struggling to think of one occasions when I needed IS.


Yup - It's two lenses in one with constant F2.8 - a no brainer !!
Click to expand...

Hmmm HMMMM, I do see where your coming from :( but there is a shot of a Lancaster I got at 1/50th at 300mm and thats the first Photo I've ever sold for a profit and there was no way I could have got that without IS, so thats why I still want IS.

Plus 55-120 is a big gap, looking at my Lightroom library, there are 1916 shots out of 23,000 in that range so I'd need to get a 70-200 anyway!

I wish I could get all of them but thats not going to happen!

70-200 + 400

Hmmm...

Edit: Ok now THAT has got me impressed! Even with a 1.4xTC...!!!!!!!

Ooooooooo I don't know!!! I'll need to save for 4 months for that :/
 
Last edited:
Concorde Rules said:
Hmmm HMMMM, I do see where your coming from :( but there is a shot of a Lancaster I got at 1/50th at 300mm and thats the first Photo I've ever sold for a profit and there was no way I could have got that without IS, so thats why I still want IS.
Click to expand...
Was that taken at 300mm F5.6 ??
300mm F2.8 would have given you a shutter speed of 1/200 - no need for IS :) (Unless you wanted to show prop blur)

For sure it's your choice but I recently (Jan/Feb this year) went through the same questions as you because I wanted to upgrade my 100-400 but couldn't afford a Canon 300mm F2.8 and the Sigma was perfect (1/3 of the price)
 
Last edited:
SDK^ said:
Was that taken at 300mm at F5.6 ??
300mm F2.8 would have given you a shutter speed of 1/200 :)
Click to expand...

No it was F8 and the reason I sold it was because it was in focus and panning but it had "action" and was the best shot they had ever seen.

This is it: http://www.thunder-keep.co.uk/galle...uly2007/content/bin/images/large/IMG_8524.jpg

The thing that worries me with that Sigma is the build quality. I will be getting this lens from HK from guys I bought my 40D and 17-55 from. The Canon will have a warranty in the UK when the Sigma won't. Again with the 1.4x TC, will I have to use a Sigma one so again im worried about BC :(

I want sharpness and better range, 600mm F5.6 is sweet aswell as 400 F4...

I really don't know :(
 
Concorde Rules said:
The thing that worries me with that Sigma is the build quality.
Click to expand...
I've only had the lens about a month so can't comment on long term build quality. The lens does feel very robust though, probably due to the weight. The lens hood attachment is a bit fiddly.

The IS on the 100-400 is quite fragile, mine broke after a year and other users have had the same happen.
 
SDK^ said:
I've only had the lens about a month so can't comment on long term build quality. The lens does feel very robust though, probably due to the weight. The lens hood attachment is a bit fiddly.

The IS on the 100-400 is quite fragile, mine broke after a year and other users have had the same happen.
Click to expand...


Looking at the product I can get the EX version for £1200 inc a International Warranty...

Is the AF as good as the 70-200?

And what do I fill the 55-120 space with :confused:
 
Concorde Rules said:
Is the AF as good as the 70-200?
Click to expand...
I haven't tested the two side-by-side but it's quicker than than the 100-400L

Respected Motorsport photog's on POTN (search for a user called Cadwell)who own a full line up of Canon L primes and zoom report the Sigma 120-300 to have the fastest AF of any zoom lens they own.

Cadwell Quote - http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showpost.php?p=4354320&postcount=5
My 120-300mm is 4 years old, has shot @70,000 frames and hasn't seen a Sigma service centre yet. Now, my 100-400L has so far fried it's IS mechanism taking out three circuit boards in the camera in the process and had three further visits to Canon Service... oh... and the Canon has done about 4,000 frames
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom