Thanks so much for your great breakdown of the pros and cons of EF extenders on the 200 1.8. I think it may be more of a nice bonus than counting on perfect IQ. I am quite sure that the 300 2.8 IS is an amazing lens and I would love to have one someday, but it is very remote that I would get the chance in the next 3-5 years. The 70-200 IS is a great lens (I am sure the mark II is better), but I just can't see it getting to the top of my lens want list due to my easy access to borrow one and the fact that F2.8 remains just barely too slow for the venues I usually shoot in.
saneproduction wrote:
Thanks for the extra input Peter! I have the EF Extender 1.4x Mark II. Do you think the step up to the mark III would be worth it in this case?
I am going to list my 17 TS-E later tonight. May sell my 35L as well so I have enough to get a good 200 f1.8, I almost always reach for the 50L instead anyway.
I also wonder, do you really need the hood? What is my drawback for bying the $3k adorama lens with no hood, cap and box and just getting a different cap? I almost never use hoods on any of my lenses. I will use a card or my hand in an emergency. No room in my backpack.
Mike, the hood on 200 f/1.8 is very important for the following three reasons:
(1) Protects a large and difficult/expensive to replace front element.
(2) Ensures you get the best IQ possible.
(3) Improves the lens resale value significantly. Those hoods are very hard to come by, and I've seen them priced $400-$500 in excellent condition.
However, there are alternatives hoods, also on occasion an old cheaper hood surfaces with KEH etc. Burningheart might also have a spare 200 f/1.8 hood which he may be willing to sell. Check with him too.
I will also send you a PM on pricing now.
As far as shutter speed is concerned I shoot most BIF at 1/1250 to 1/2000. If light is low, I will drop that to 1/800 sec.
saneproduction wrote:
I also wonder, do you really need the hood? What is my drawback for bying the $3k adorama lens with no hood...
Mike
PetKal wrote:
...However, there are alternatives hoods, also on occasion an old cheaper hood surfaces with KEH etc.
As far as alternative hoods go...there are these from AquaTech. I've never used these but these but they seem to be well made and at about $150, are much less expensive than the Canon OEM hoods (and nicer looking than the DIY 'plumbing pipe' version)
bobbytan wrote:
Forget the 200/1.8L. Aside from the fact that it will be a PITA to repair/service this lens, it's very big and very heavy. I would advise that you get the 70-200L II instead. The zoom will come in handy, and the 4-stop IS would allow you to shoot in low light. And this lens is as sharp as any 200L and it works really well with the 1.4x TC.
I have to comment on this...
Sir, you must drop or switch whatever you are smoking. Really.
You said to "forget the 200 f/1.8" and "replace it with 70-200IS"
I am quite sure that the 300 2.8 IS is an amazing lens and I would love to have one someday, but it is very remote that I would get the chance in the next 3-5 years. The 70-200 IS is a great lens (I am sure the mark II is better), but I just can't see it getting to the top of my lens want list due to my easy access to borrow one and the fact that F2.8 remains just barely too slow for the venues I usually shoot in.