09-19-2011, 04:21 AM
[quote name='Brightcolours' timestamp='1316364385' post='11641']
Hmmm? The 100-300mm f4-5.6 is not all that comparable... It has a longer reach than the standard 70-200mm f4, and 2/3rds to 1 1/3 of a stop slower. With an 1.4x TC on the 70-200mm f4 you still do not have the same tele reach, but at least the apertures are comparable. A 2x TC will lose you AF with the 70-200mm f4.
[/quote]
70-200 on a crop camera with a 1.4 TC will be 400mm or so, which should be enough for me. I will not use this for birds or wildlife, but for looking at new creative possibilities in general use, esp, landscape.
I have a 100-300 with me for some time, but i don't own it. I know its a decent lens, but was wondering about the 70-200 being better than this....
I have not been able to master this lens <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='
' /> Too long...
Hmmm? The 100-300mm f4-5.6 is not all that comparable... It has a longer reach than the standard 70-200mm f4, and 2/3rds to 1 1/3 of a stop slower. With an 1.4x TC on the 70-200mm f4 you still do not have the same tele reach, but at least the apertures are comparable. A 2x TC will lose you AF with the 70-200mm f4.
[/quote]
70-200 on a crop camera with a 1.4 TC will be 400mm or so, which should be enough for me. I will not use this for birds or wildlife, but for looking at new creative possibilities in general use, esp, landscape.
I have a 100-300 with me for some time, but i don't own it. I know its a decent lens, but was wondering about the 70-200 being better than this....
I have not been able to master this lens <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='
' /> Too long...