Help me choose a Canon telephototo lens

Khaos

I can't afford a Canon IS telephoto lens. If I could, I'd be having fun with the 400 2.8 L IS with and without the 1.4xII convertor.

So, my question is between two non IS L's.

The 300 4.0 and the 400 5.6

I want this for wildlife shots.

My question is that with the 300, I'll have that range at 4 wide open, and with the teleconvertor I can have it at 5.6 at 420 wide open.

I've read many positive things about the 1.4 convertor, so what really would keep me from going with the 300 I can use at 4 and then at 420 at 5.6 as opposed to buying the 400 at 5.6 and being limited to that length?

Please note that I have the 20D and the convertor on the 400 will not allow auto focus, which is somewhat a hinderence for BIF shots.:):

I currently own the 70-200 2.8 L IS, and I love that lens, but It just isn't long enough.

Thanks.

mercphoto

Khaos wrote:

I can't afford a Canon IS telephoto lens. If I could, I'd be having fun with the 400 2.8 L IS with and without the 1.4xII convertor.

So, my question is between two non IS L's.

The 300 4.0 and the 400 5.6

My question is that with the 300, I'll have that range at 4 wide open, and with the teleconvertor I can have it at 5.6 at 420 wide open.

I've read many positive things about the 1.4 convertor, so what really would keep me from going with the 300 I can use at 4 and then at 420 at 5.6 as opposed to buying the 400 at 5.6 and being limited to that length?

I currently own the 70-200 2.8 L IS, and I love that lens, but It just isn't long enough.

Have you thought of buying only the 400/5.6? If you put the 1.4 on your current zoom, that gives you a 280/4, which is awfully close to the 300/4 prime you are considering.

bfjr

Nothing at all
that's one of the options I've been looking at.

Andy

i don't know how, but daniella shoots with the 400 f/5.6 and a 1.4x converter (tamron? kenko?) and she get a.f. ...

anyhow, the 400 f/5.6 is a fine fine lens. go for it.

John Mueller

I think she tapes some of the pins on the tc.It tricks the cam.Or use a different brand.

tmlphoto

andy wrote:

i don't know how, but daniella shoots with the 400 f/5.6 and a 1.4x converter (tamron? kenko?) and she get a.f. ...

anyhow, the 400 f/5.6 is a fine fine lens. go for it.

I agree with Andy. Your going to want the 400 with the 1.4TC for any serious bird/nature shots IMHO. It's going to put you at f/8, but that should be OK with the good high ISO performance we are getting now. Your still way cheaper than the 500mm f/4 which is what serious bird guys use with and without the 1.4TC. Good luck in your quest.

Khaos

MHJS wrote:

I think she tapes some of the pins on the tc.It tricks the cam.Or use a different brand.

Yep, found it at FM, tape the three red pins to the right. I'll be looking for good prices on a used 400 5.6 then.

Thanks.

Steve Cavigliano

Khaos wrote:

Yep, found it at FM, tape the three red pins to the right. I'll be looking for good prices on a used 400 5.6 then.

Thanks.

Khaos,
You have to tape the Canon TC's (and I think maybe the Sigmas too), but the cheap Tamron doesn't report aperture back to the camera. It's basically a straight through connection. So the 400 F5.6, looks like a 560mm F5.6 lens to the camera, when using this TC. IOW, no taping required This is the TC that Daniella uses also. At 560mm's using the 10D/20D, gets you out to almost 900mm's

Steve

Khaos

Steve Cavigliano wrote:

Khaos,
You have to tape the Canon TC's (and I think maybe the Sigmas too), but the cheap Tamron doesn't report aperture back to the camera. It's basically a straight through connection. So the 400 F5.6, looks like a 560mm F5.6 lens to the camera, when using this TC. IOW, no taping required This is the TC that Daniella uses also. At 560mm's using the 10D/20D, gets you out to almost 900mm's

Steve

There's two Tamron 1.4x convertors, a SP version and a non SP version. Which one?