Upload & Sell: Off
| p.1 #1 · p.1 #1 · 70-200 f/4L + 1.4x tc or 100-400 f/4.5-5.6L || |
Hi all. I'm a hobbyist, and not a very good one at that. I could use some advice on my setup. I just upgraded my body to the T3i from a 350d. The lenses I have been using (for years - first on an Elan7 film body, then a 350d) are:
EF 28-105 f/3.5-4.5 - my walk-around lens
EF 50mm f/1.8 (mk1 with the metal mount) - my indoor and macro (with Kenko tubes) lens.
EF 70-200 f/4L - my sports and nature lens - purchased after I had the 350d body.
1.4x teleconverter (mk1) - purchased used, for when I need more reach on the 70-200.
Please note that none of those lenses have IS. I have never used this feature, and therefore have no idea how it will actually affect the results I get, given the way I shoot. I do understand what it does, and that it only helps with camera shake and cannot sharpen moving subjects.
So that's where I've been. Where I am headed now is: the recent upgrade to the T3i body has given me the inevitable case of "upgrade-itis". Today I took delivery on a new EF-S 15-85 f/3-5-5.6. I haven't even attached it yet because it's still coming to room temperature. But the favorable reviews and comparisons have me salivating over the sharp photos I'll be able to produce with this new setup...
With the wide-angle zoom out of the way, I'm now pondering the long end. The 100-400 f/4.5-5.6L IS has caught my eye. Looking at what folks here can do with this lens has me wondering if I wouldn't be better off with it instead of the 70-200 f/4 and 1.4x tc combo. First, the 100-400 has IS - but remember, I only understand this benefit on paper so I have my doubts, especially with this older implementation. It has more reach obviously, but is the IQ any better than the 70-200 with the tc attached? And is it any worse at 200mm compared with the 70-200mm at 200 *without* the tc attached? Also, I suppose the 100-400 would give me 560mm of reach with the 1.4x converter mounted which could be interesting in some circumstances. Of course I already own the 70-200 and extender combo, so cost and sheer momentum is the biggest issue. But with Canon discounting it until Feb 2 the cost factor is slightly reduced. Size and weight would be a big factor to consider as well. I have only held the 100-400mm briefly, and did not have a 70-200 f/4 nearby so didn't get any feel for the difference at all.
Any and all advice and experience with these products would be valued!