70-200 w/TC vs. 100-400?

[Roxie2401]

After reading the reviews on the 70-200L f/2.8 IS USM and the 100-400L IS USM f/4.5-5.6 I'm curious as to which would be the better way to go, assuming I would also have to get either the 1.4 or 2x TC for the 70-200.

I have heard really great things about the f/2.8 L 70-200 but I need additional "reach."  The slower 100-400 would work, but in a more universal sense, which is the better solution?

Any pros or cons?

[Bob Atkins]

The EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM is faster from 70-200, but the EF 100-400/4.5-5.6L IS USM is sharper at 300 and 400mm where you'd have to put a TC on your 70-200/2.8. The 70-200/2.8 with a 2x is usable, but not impressive.

Basically if you mostly shoot in the 70-200 region, then get the 70-200/2.8, but if you mainly shoot in the 300-400 region, then you're better off with the 100-400. If you want yo go past 400mm, then the 100-400 is again better, It will take the Canon TCs, but it does get a little slow and you'll probably need to use manual focus. Still, you can go to 560mm and still get decent images.

Take a look at:

http://www.bobatkins.com/photography/reviews/ef_100_400_l_is_review.html

http://www.bobatkins.com/photography/reviews/canon_ef_70-200_f28L_IS.html

In those articles I show images taken with these lenses, including use of the 1.4x and 2x TCs

[Roxie2401]

Bob,

Just one more clarification - on the 100-400 with a TC, does it loose the auto-focus ability (40D, 5D MK11) and is strictly manual with the converter attached?  I think the auto-focus works on the 70-200, even with the TC?

Thanks

[Bob Atkins]

Correct. You can get AF with the canon 1.4x on the 100-400, but only with the 1D series cameras, not with any of the 5D models or the 30/40/50D or digital rebels.

There are some tricks (taping over some of the lens contact pins) which will force the lens to try to AF with a Canon 1.4x on those other cameras. Sometimes it may work, sometimes it may not. The lens will probably try to AF if you use a 3rd party 1.4x TC. Again, you may or may not get accurate AF.

[photosbybrian]

The only other caveat to this is that if you ever do need the extra 1-1/3 stop of speed, you have it with the 70-200. I've found in really bad lighting that it's better to shoot at the short end and crop vs boosting ISO (with the accompanying noise) to get a nicer finished product.

BRB

[Roxie2401]

Thanks.  I think the f/2.8 70-200 is the way to go.  I already have the 70-300 but its much slower (4-5.6) and as I learned, with the 70-200 the f stop is constant and doesn't change with the focal length.