Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Canon Lenses

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Dec 24, 2006, 7:47 AM   #1
Junior Member
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 2

I spend most of my time shooting with my 24-70 2.8 L and get excellent results. When I occasioinally need a little extra reach, the 70-200 L (2.8 IS) works extremely well also.

I'm wondering if selling the 70-200 and just getting, instead, the 100-400 L would be a wise choice. It would be nice to have just one lens that goes from approximately where the 24-70 ends and is a workable wildlife or sporting event choice as well.

There are confilcting reviews with some saying the 70-200 is the BEST, and, others, saying that the 100-400 L is even better than the 70-200.

What I'd like to have is a single zoom that works well without giving up the quality of the 70-200.

Has anyone decided to sell their 70-200 2.8 L IS in favor of the 100-400 L?

I would look foward to hearing any advice or suggestions.


-- M
morkus is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Dec 24, 2006, 8:53 AM   #2
Senior Member
NHL's Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,567

Only you can answer this

This two lenses serve two entire different purposes - What do you need (or shoot)?

NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 24, 2006, 9:47 AM   #3
Super Moderator
Mark1616's Avatar
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 7,451

Personally I would put a 2x telecon on it when you need the range. I have the Sigma 70-200 f2.8 and 1.4 and 2x telecons and the package works well. From the results I have seen/spec sheets the 100-400 is not the best lens on the market.
Mark1616 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 24, 2006, 10:53 AM   #4
Senior Member
AlpineMan's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 357

Indoors, I use the 70-200 IS...like at my sister's wedding, where no flash was allowed in church. I use the 100-400 IS outdoors when I need more reach. The 100-400 gets mixed reviews, but I like my copy just fine.
AlpineMan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 24, 2006, 3:20 PM   #5
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 8,529

I'm with NHL - they are 2 completely different lenses for entirely different purposes. Which one is right for you depends on what you shoot.

100-400 will outshine the 70-200 with a 2x TC

100-400 is fairly light for a 400mm lens

very good wildlife lens

useless indoors or in low light

70-200 2.8 is sharp (although the IS version is not as sharp as the non-IS)

It's 2.8 so can be used in low light where the 100-400 cannot.

If you are constantly finding your 70-200 to be short and wish for something longer then the 100-400 may be a better choice. But if you're happy with the 200mm focal length, the 100-400 won't outperform the 70-200 in the under 200mm range - as long as there is good light. In poor light, my 100-400 hunts.
JohnG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 24, 2006, 5:27 PM   #6
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 171

Agreed on the separate uses point.

On the use of TC's - I personally find better results stacking 2 of the 1.4 TC's for the same multiplier vs. using the 2.0 versions which produces less impressive results. Besides, having 2 1.4 TC's is more flexible.
flint350 is offline   Reply With Quote

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 7:36 AM.