06-21-2011, 10:56 PM
(This post was last modified: 06-21-2011, 11:01 PM by Brightcolours.)
Both the 70-200mm f2.8 L IS USM II and 70-300mm f4-5.6 L IS USM are well sealed.
The 70-300mm is the lighter and cheaper option, but only reaches 300mm, obviously.
The 70-200mm f2.8 has the edge there, with the new 2x extender III it still is nicely sharp and will give you 400mm at f5.6, like you have with the 100-400mm.
With the 2x extender, the AF will be slowed down by the camera to about half the speed. I know the lens is very speedy in AF, not sure how big the speed hit will feel like in practice.
Any chance of trying out a 70-20mm f2.8 IS MK II + 2x TCIII extender to test the AF speed? Of course, a TC II would do the job too, to test the speed.
I'd go for the 70-300 for its weight <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/wink.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='
' />... you probably should go for the 140-400mm f5.6 L IS USM II.. <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='
' />
The 70-300mm is the lighter and cheaper option, but only reaches 300mm, obviously.
The 70-200mm f2.8 has the edge there, with the new 2x extender III it still is nicely sharp and will give you 400mm at f5.6, like you have with the 100-400mm.
With the 2x extender, the AF will be slowed down by the camera to about half the speed. I know the lens is very speedy in AF, not sure how big the speed hit will feel like in practice.
Any chance of trying out a 70-20mm f2.8 IS MK II + 2x TCIII extender to test the AF speed? Of course, a TC II would do the job too, to test the speed.
I'd go for the 70-300 for its weight <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/wink.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='
' />... you probably should go for the 140-400mm f5.6 L IS USM II.. <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' />