Need an opinion on Canon 70-200mm 2.8 IS (Page 2): You might want to go a little farther and suggest what's the best TC for that lens as it's not necessarily the Canon.

RRS Loc: Not sure

imagemeister wrote:

I hope you are aware of the size and weight of the 2.8 version ! Because of the size and weight, you will want to be on a monopod and NOT hand holding it - even though it has IS ! You have a decent higher ISO body, so the advantage of the 2.8 is really questionable. The only reason that I would get a 2.8 version ( the II version of the 2.8) is to put a 2X behind it so as to have a 140-400 F5.6 ! - and then definitely be on a monopod.

You might want to go a little farther and suggest what's the best TC for that lens as it's not necessarily the Canon.

SharpShooter Loc: NorCal

RRS wrote:

You might want to go a little farther and suggest what's the best TC for that lens as it's not necessarily the Canon.

RRS, are any of the 3rd party extenders sharper than the canon mklll extenders?
A 2.8 lens with a 2x goes to 5.6, that's good enough for fast auto-focus, especially a mkll lens with a mklll extender.
I'd have a little trouble believing that the 3rd party extenders are better without a comprehensive emperical test.
Cheaper for sure, but better?
The mklll extender is OPTIMIZED in both optics and electronics to be matched to the new mkll lenses, that's a lot of R&D, for a very specific use.
Just saying. ;-)
SS

imagemeister Loc: mid east Florida

SharpShooter wrote:

RRS, are any of the 3rd party extenders sharper th... (show quote)

Sorry, I had to WORK today - so I will now try to answer the nay-sayers out there. SS - here - http://www.traumflieger.de/objektivtest/open_test/telekonverter/overview.php - is a TC test done in Germany on a Canon 70-200 F4 lens showing the Kenko beating out the Canons ! ( you may have to get the test translated to fully understand it)Conspicuous in it's absence is the Tamron - which I recommend ! Canon's TC's are optimized for PRIME lenses 300mm and longer and for those I do recommend CANON. Below is a shot with the 70-200 2.8 II with Tamron SP 2X at 400mm F8 on crop frame from monopod.

(Download)

imagemeister Loc: mid east Florida

windshoppe wrote:

I have used this lens successfully for years both with and without a 2x. Results have been excellent handheld as well as on a tripod. While I have monopods I've never found a reason to use them with this lens, as the IS is excellent and under most circumstances hand holding is not a problem even for this 70 year old of small stature.

I understand many people hand hold this beast and do pretty well or THINK they do well with it. Here is what I will say - When you are comfortable ( using a monopod or other aid properly) , you will do MORE photographing and your shot selections will be better ! and yes, I do also understand that for BIF's and very short bursts, that handholding is most advantageous-especially for younger men and those without disabilities.

RRS Loc: Not sure

imagemeister wrote:

I understand many people hand hold this beast and do pretty well or THINK they do well with it. Here is what I will say - When you are comfortable ( using a monopod or other aid properly) , you will do MORE photographing and your shot selections will be better ! and yes, I do also understand that for BIF's and very short bursts, that handholding is most advantageous-especially for younger men and those without disabilities.

Thanks for helping me out, you had to work and I was out shooting all day. To SS, the 1.4 and 2.0 Canon TC's III are great for what they are designed for but they were not made for the 70-200 f/2.8 II. The Canon series II seem to work better with that lens.

imagemeister Loc: mid east Florida

If you are paying 2K+ for this lens and it is fully capable of excellent results with a 2X, then why no get your money's worth out of it? Then you will not have to buy the 100-400, and if you are on a late model body, you can crop with equal results to the Sigmas and Tamron ! and you can focus and shoot at F5.6 on a non extending zoom. If you are adept and experienced, the 70-200 can be zoomed with one or two fingers.

Michael O' Loc: Midwest right now

mldavis2 wrote:

The Canon 70-200L f/2.8 is generally acknowledged ... (show quote)

The reason I use my 70 - 200 2.8 much much more than my 100 - 400 is the later is f/4.5 to f 5.6 ---- no where nearly the light gathering capability, thus no where nearly as flexible in use. My 600 beats the 100 - 400 toward the end of day, and in night work, or under lights at such as Soldier Field in Chicago.