# Canon 70-200 L USM with 2x Extender



## germandude77 (Feb 22, 2009)

Hello Everyone 

I was just wondering what would be better. To get the 100-400 from Canon or to use the Canon 70-200 with an extender. I havent been able to test any of these lenses but I know that I would not stand the 100-400 push pull zoom. Most people say that using an extender makes IQ horrible. Also what about the Tamron or sigma 70-200. I will be using this for pictures in the Zoo and Portraits. I am using the Canon 40d. Feel free to put in photos!!


----------



## gsgary (Feb 22, 2009)

2X extenders don't work well on zoom lenses but work great on top quality primes, i was at a motorcycle event and a photographer friend of mine wanted to try my 300F2.8l i got to use his 100-400 and it was rubbish for fast moving sports but i believe it is good for wildlife i also tried a 2x on it and it was bad


----------



## davebmck (Feb 22, 2009)

As stated previously, teleconverters are best used with primes.  A lot of people have used a 1.4xTC with zoom lenses successfully, but you really need a high quality lens to use a 2xTC.

I have the Canon 100-400mm which I use primarily for wildlife and it is one of my favorite lens.  Don't worry about the push-pull zoom, you get used to that quickly.  BTW, you cannot use even a 1.4xTC with the 100-400.  It will not autofocus.


----------



## Prophet (Feb 22, 2009)

2x extenders won't work on f5.6 or slower lenses on crop bodies. 1.4x will work on F4. F8 doesn't allow enough light in for the autofocus system to work. It barely works on 1D 1.3x bodies. Supposedly only the center point will work for AF.

I got a (enroute) 200 f2.8 prime that I'm wanting to get extender for.

-JD-


----------



## uplander (Feb 22, 2009)

Canon's EF 70-200 f/2.8 actually works very well with both the 1.4 and 2x TC's, Its a pain in the a$$ swapping them quickly tho to get the shot sometimes. The 100-400 is a very nice wildlife lens and pretty decent sports lens when the light is good. BTW a Kenko Pro 300 DG 1.4x will work with the 100-400 but auto focus will be slow. The push/pull is not a problem.

I always like to recomend the 100-400 as a first wildlife lens. After learning to use this lens you will have a better idea of what you want to spend your money in the future. 

My expirience is that most people who buy the 100-400 tend to keep them even if they move up to expensive primes.

The 70-200 f/2.8 is a fantastic portrait lens.
There are 4 models of  the Canon 70-200, did not specify which one you were thinking of.


----------



## davebmck (Feb 22, 2009)

For Canon cropped sensor bodies you can not use *any* teleconverter on a lens with a max aperture of less than f/4.


----------



## davebmck (Feb 22, 2009)

uplander said:


> BTW a Kenko Pro 300 DG 1.4x will work with the 100-400 but auto focus will be slow. The push/pull is not a problem.


This may have worked for you, but I would not recommend it.  If the camera can detect that the aperture is less than f/4 it will not even try to AF.  I tried the Canon 1.4 with my 100-400 and even did the tape mod to keep the aperture from being communicated to the camera.  The lens would try to AF, but even in good light it mostly hunted and rarely would AF.  That's a good way to burn out your AF motor.


----------



## uplander (Feb 22, 2009)

davebmck said:


> This may have worked for you, but I would not recommend it. If the camera can detect that the aperture is less than f/4 it will not even try to AF. I tried the Canon 1.4 with my 100-400 and even did the tape mod to keep the aperture from being communicated to the camera. The lens would try to AF, but even in good light it mostly hunted and rarely would AF. That's a good way to burn out your AF motor.


 
Your knowledge is from using a canon tc. The kenko works without taping pins or any mods. In decent light the hunting is minimal. I wouldn't reccomend it in low light situations. IQ suffers too as with any TC.

I did this on both the 10D and 40D bodies.


----------



## DeadEye (Feb 22, 2009)

I have used that combo a lot. The 2x mk 1 TC will degrade the IQ a lot. I try to stop to f8 for a ok image.


----------



## davebmck (Feb 22, 2009)

uplander said:


> Your knowledge is from using a canon tc. The kenko works without taping pins or any mods. In decent light the hunting is minimal. I wouldn't reccomend it in low light situations. IQ suffers too as with any TC.
> 
> I did this on both the 10D and 40D bodies.


Once the tape mod is made to the Canon TC, both TC's should work pretty much the same.  Both will steal one stop of light.  I tried mine in full, mid-day sunlight and while I could get it to AF at the lower focal lengths, at 400mm it would rarely AF, even with the hood off.  Maybe it works better on the XXD bodies, but not too good on my XTi.  I wound up (reluctantly) returning mine.


----------



## Overread (Feb 22, 2009)

huh?
ok lets get a few things clear

firstly taping will not affect the light stealing abilities of teleconverters, the light reduction caused by a teleconverter is physical not electronic - thus you can tape all you want a 1.4 teleconverter will take 1 stop of light and a 2* teleconverter will take 2 stops of light.
Now if you tape your camera will (might) still let you open up your aperture to a wider setting than should be allowed, but the amount of light going in will still be the same. 
eg: 
70-200mm f2.8 lens + 1.4TC becomes a 98-240mm f4 lens
70-200mm f2.8 lens + 2*TC becomes a 140-400mm f5.6 lens
at f4 and f5.6 the apertures blades are fully open, but the teleconverter is blocking the light (1 or 2 stop depeding on TC) and thus the max aperture for the whole setup is different.

Now taping pins can work - but if you go over f5.6 on anything but a 1D body (canon) or whatever the nikon equivalent is - your af accuracy is significantly affected. It will only be any good in very bright weather - passed that it will hunt a lot (saw a 100-400mm with a 1.4 canon with taped pins today - it would AF  but the shooter was getting a lot of hunting on a cloudy day.)

Now as for the 70-200mm vs 100-400mm debate -- if you go for a 70-200mm and get a 1.4 teleconverter you will have a good lens for zoos - I use this combo myself and a zoom is very preferable in a zoo where your subjects vary in size and distance from you a lot (mice to elephants!). It is also a very fine portrate lens (so I am told).
However as a pure wildlife lens it IS lacking. a 2* telconverter can be used, but I only use mine in the best of lighting and even then performance is never perfect (you have to make sure that your subject fills much of the frame - you have very little space to allow for cropping or deadspace in a shot.) 
I consider it one half of a whole - the whole being a 300mm prime lens (f2.8 idealy, but f4 is a good choice and better for more peoples budgets)


----------



## table1349 (Feb 22, 2009)

germandude77 said:


> Hello Everyone
> 
> I was just wondering what would be better. To get the 100-400 from Canon or to use the Canon 70-200 with an extender. I havent been able to test any of these lenses but I know that I would not stand the 100-400 push pull zoom. Most people say that using an extender makes IQ horrible. Also what about the Tamron or sigma 70-200. I will be using this for pictures in the Zoo and Portraits. I am using the Canon 40d. Feel free to put in photos!!



The problem with questions like this is there is no real answer.  What you may find to be acceptable image quality I may not. (since I opted for a 300 f2.8L and a 400 f2.8L I guess I'm a bit picky on image quality) The only way to know if this will work for you is to go to a good photography shop with body in hand.  Try a 70-200 with a 2X on it.  Try the 100-400.  Go home, look at the photos and decide what is acceptable to you.


----------



## uplander (Feb 22, 2009)

gryphonslair99 said:


> The problem with questions like this is there is no real answer. What you may find to be acceptable image quality I may not. (since I opted for a 300 f2.8L and a 400 f2.8L I guess I'm a bit picky on image quality) The only way to know if this will work for you is to go to a good photography shop with body in hand. Try a 70-200 with a 2X on it. Try the 100-400. Go home, look at the photos and decide what is acceptable to you.


 
Great advice there!


----------



## CxThree (Feb 26, 2009)

I have the 40D and use the 70-200 F4L lens.  I have the 2x extender and can give you the following feedback.

It works and results in a softer image than some would like.  For the occasional time when I need the extra reach, it's great.  You will lose autofocus on the 40d and most other bodies until you hit the 5d types.  

Keep in mind that if you think about getting one and using it with multiple lenses, you need to be looking ad L series glass.  It does not work on non L lenses.


----------



## soylentgreen (Feb 27, 2009)

Depends which version of the 70-200. The f/2.8 L IS should come with the 1.4TC standard. IQ is pretty ridiculous with that combo. The 2X TC not so much though. Does get softer, but again, that is subjective to your taste. Luminous-landscapes did a comparison between the 100-400 and 70-200 w/ 2x TC if you wanna read up. If you are going to use it above 300mm for a lot of work, than get the 100-400.
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/lenses/400v400.shtml


----------

