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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Jun 18, 2005, 10:08 AM   #11
Member
 
limbiksys's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 78
Default

There are so many good options :?

I'm looking at the Canon 70-200 f4 again, because the price is great, and its light, quality seems unquestionable, and I can use my current filters on either of my lenses.

My question now, is what teleconvertors work best on this lens? Is it possible to use one other than a Canon, is the quality still as good?

In the end, I will probably end up getting a long distance lens when I can afford it, to pick up where this one leaves off (any suggestions?) and a 105mm macro, and a less than 28mm wide angle, and a new bag
limbiksys is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 26, 2005, 5:20 PM   #12
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 3
Default

I bought the Tokina 80-400mm for my 20D and am happy with it for now.¬* It doesn't have the resolution of more expensive lenses but works for some of my casual wildlife work.¬* The servo focus works well on following moving birds.¬* I'll stick on a full frame¬* image taken at 400mm.¬* Bob Gaunt
Attached Images
 
Robert Gaunt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 26, 2005, 5:38 PM   #13
Member
 
limbiksys's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 78
Default

Thanks, what ISO/fstop did you use on that shot?

limbiksys is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 27, 2005, 2:42 PM   #14
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 3
Default

The ISO was 400 - shutter speed 1/2000 sec and f stop 7.1¬* Focal length 400mm. It was a hand held shot with the osprey flying at me to shoo me away from their nest on a nearby light pole.
Robert Gaunt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 27, 2005, 5:25 PM   #15
Member
 
limbiksys's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 78
Default

Well, so far I am formulating my plans slowly...

I would love to have a single lens that could cover the 100-400mm range, but I'm still a little iffy on the Canon 4.5-5.6 EF-L IS USM. However, I still really like the looks and price of the 70-200 f4. That might get be by for now, then I can pick up a 1.4x tc when I need a little extra and the 300mm f4 Canon down the road. Altogether for around what I would pay for the Canon 100-400, with the benefit of ffl sharpness at the high end and the ability to purchase it in stages.
limbiksys is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 27, 2005, 9:38 PM   #16
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Dallas, Texas USA
Posts: 6,483
Default

I was using a 70-200 f4L and quickly grew tired of cropping my sport shots by 30-50% to get "close enough"- that will be your ultimate test as to whether you can live with the shorter zoom and having to take it off and mount an extender instead of just zooming past 200mm. Sold it and bought a 100-400L and have not regretted it one bit. It's not weather sealed like my 17-40 f4L, but it is built like a tank and, without the right bag and strap, is one heck of a heavy lens to tote around. Many don't like the push-pull design, but probably unlike most of those complainers I've been shooting with SLR's long enough and remember when that was about all that was available. It never seemed to be that bad back then or today. I can zoom with the 100-400 faster than I could with the 70-200 f4L. After about 8 months of pumping it in and out I've still had no issues with dust being sucked in and spoiling the sensor as so many have also talked about.

One thing about a 70-200 f4L and teleconverter you may not have even considered. At 320mm (200+1.4) and without image stabilization the viewfinder starts jumping all over the place- hand-holding becomes much harder, especially if you're not used to shooting at such magnifications. Unless you can keep your shutter speeds around 1/500 sec or faster, image blur due to your own movements will become more pronounced.
Greg Chappell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 27, 2005, 9:53 PM   #17
Member
 
limbiksys's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 78
Default

Thanks, I completley understand the "close enough" issue, as that is wat is causing most of my dilemma. However, after looking at the 300mm f4IS, and keeping in mind that I will have the 1.4x tc handy, my reach will grow proportinal to my pocketbook, and the 70-200 is within my reach right now. Besides, I always have the trusty tripod.
limbiksys is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 28, 2005, 7:29 AM   #18
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,547
Default

limbiksys wrote:
Quote:
... keeping in mind that I will have the 1.4x tc handy, my reach will grow proportinal to my pocketbook, and the 70-200 is within my reach right now. Besides, I always have the trusty tripod.
If you add the cost of the 70-200 f/4 L and the cost of the Canon 1.4xTC together -> You are also within the reach of the Sigma 100-300 f/4 EX

The difference is now you're @ a faster f/4 without the need for a TC!
NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 28, 2005, 7:15 PM   #19
Member
 
limbiksys's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 78
Default

A compelling argument indeed. :?

Especially when I figuring the cost of the 70-200, the 1.4x tc, and the 300mm prime in total, that could all be accomplished with the sigma + a sigma tc. Now its just a matter of patience, as I can get the 70-200 right away, and the tc in a few months, or get the 100-300 in a few months but not have to wait for 300mm.

I am starting to think I am going in circles that are slowly decreasing in size. I'm close, but I have not hit the mark yet. Even more within my reach would be the sigma 70-200 f2.8 + a 2x tc! Plus it would be much better indoors.

Wow, what a dilemma. :?
limbiksys is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 29, 2005, 10:31 AM   #20
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,547
Default

limbiksys wrote:
Quote:
Now its just a matter of patience, as I can get the 70-200 right away, and the tc in a few months...
You're not alone - this is a well trodden path :idea:

Many have gone this way: This is an excellent lens no doubt about it, the cheapest L too; However most realize soon thereafter that either they "need" the f2.8 and/or the lens is too short -> Almost everyone end up with another lens/upgrade... just check Ebay!
NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


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 11:06 AM.