# Compare 70-300 vs. 70-200 with 1.4 iii



## woollybear (Apr 7, 2012)

All other issues aside, how would you describe the IQ difference between these two setups (used mostly at the long end)?

Barely noticeable with pixel peeping? 

Noticeable only on a large print or severe cropping? 

I can see it, but its not bad? 

It's there but worth the $1000 difference? 

I'm an idiot for thinking I could get away with the extender?


----------



## neuroanatomist (Apr 7, 2012)

Which 70-300 - L or non-L? Which 70-200? There are five of them.... Hard to answer your question without the relevant details.


----------



## Marsu42 (Apr 7, 2012)

woollybear said:


> I'm an idiot for thinking I could get away with the extender?



Well, at least putting a Canon extender on the 70-300L doesn't qualify as "clever" since it doesn't work and breaks your gear :-o ... in this case, get the Kenko one.


----------



## woollybear (Apr 7, 2012)

Oopsy...meant to say 70-300L 4-5.6 and 70-200L 2.8 ii and a 50D


----------



## Marsu42 (Apr 7, 2012)

woollybear said:


> Oopsy...meant to say 70-300L 4-5.6 and 70-200L 2.8 ii and a 50D



At roughly 300mm, they seem to be about the same to me - thus I got the 70-300L which is shorter, weights less, needs no tc switching and esp. costs considerably less. But if you generally shoot at 70-200, need 2.8 speed and af and money is no issue get the 70-200L...

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=738&Camera=453&Sample=1&FLI=4&API=1&LensComp=687&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=4&APIComp=3


----------



## woollybear (Apr 7, 2012)

Kinda what I meant by all other issues aside...

How about the IQ?


----------



## neuroanatomist (Apr 7, 2012)

IQ is pretty much a wash in real-world terms. 

Keep in mind one of those 'aside' issues that's not frequently discussed is that a TC slows down AF speed, by 50% with a 1.4x (and 75% with a 2x).


----------



## woollybear (Apr 7, 2012)

> IQ is pretty much a wash in real-world terms.
> 
> Keep in mind one of those 'aside' issues that's not frequently discussed is that a TC slows down AF speed, by 50% with a 1.4x (and 75% with a 2x).



Thanks, that's the info I was looking for. So plan on pre-focus for sports (a bicycle race in 2 weeks)? ...and then wait for the mythical 100-400L replacement!!


----------



## Marsu42 (Apr 7, 2012)

woollybear said:


> How about the IQ?



You did look at the link I posted? That would have answered your question...



woollybear said:


> ...and then wait for the mythical 100-400L replacement!!



... which will double the price of the current version if Canon's strategy persists. If it arrives at all since Canon got the 200-400 in the queue and would like to sell the f2.8 primes, too.


----------



## woollybear (Apr 7, 2012)

> You did look at the link I posted? That would have answered your question...



Yea, I looked at the link. They looked pretty close to me but having only experience with a couple of different lenses I'm never quite sure how to interpret it. I think half the time I use it to rationalize what I want to do, instead of using it to decide what I should do!!



> ... which will double the price of the current version if Canon's strategy persists. If it arrives at all since Canon got the 200-400 in the queue and would like to sell the f2.8 primes, too.



...as to the 200-400, the 4 or 5 zeros in the price kinda cures me of doing what I want. If the mythical 100-400 replacement is priced at Oil Sheik levels I figure the older model will still be out there.


----------



## Marsu42 (Apr 7, 2012)

woollybear said:


> They looked pretty close to me but having only experience with a couple of different lenses I'm never quite sure how to interpret it.



Not being infected yet by some general artificial preference (L-lenses, full frame bodies) helps a lot around here: If the pictures look the same, they are the same...


----------



## woollybear (Apr 7, 2012)

> Not being infected yet by some general artificial preference (L-lenses, full frame bodies) helps a lot around here: If the pictures look the same, they are the same...



Hah!! A disease I'm highly suseptable to...but, duly noted!!


----------

