Which lens (or lenses)

[runnermikedmd]

<span style="font-family: 'Verdana','sans-serif'; color: black; font-size: 9pt;"]I mostly shoot landscapes, vacations, a little wildlifeand some relatively close sports with my 40D. Currently I am using a tokina 11-16, Canon 24-105, and Canon 70-200 f/4non-IS. Ive decided its time to part with my Canon 400 f/5.6 and my Tamron 17-50. My original thought was to pick up a canon 300mm f/4 IS, but now I am debating also selling the 70-200 and upgrading it to a 70-200 f/2.8 IS and getting a 1.4x TC to get close to that 300mm range that I would use every once in a while. Im not very concerned with weight and mostly want to make sure I am getting quality images.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"] I plan to some day go over to FF so I want to stay with quality glass, but am looking at keeping the budget in the range of $1300 if I keep my 70-200 or about $2K if I sell it. Any thoughts or other suggestions?<o></o>


<span style="font-family: 'Verdana','sans-serif'; color: black; font-size: 9pt;"]Thanks!

[jimgarvie]

From what you've said, I think getting the 70-200 F2.8L IS + 1.4X Extender is the right answer. I don't know what your typical output is but the lens should give you the sports coverage you're looking for and the combo will give you decent wildlife coverage as well.





I've personally gone the other way by selling my 70-200 F4L and acquiring the 200 F2.8L and, soon, the 135 F2.0L. But my stuff is perfect for those two primes plus my 85 F1.8. I'm assuming I'll miss the convenience of the zoom but the additional IQ, speed and bokeh from the primes is a better combination for the types of portraiture I do. However, if I get another zoom it will be the 70-200 F2.8L IS. Big, heavy but great IQ for a zoom.





Jim

[Daniel Browning]

If you only use the 300mm range every once and a while, and you're willing to accept lower image quality when you do, then the 70-200 f/2.8 IS is a great alternative to the 300mm f/4 IS. Sounds like the best choice for you. But most wildlife shooters need more range, even on a crop camera, so the 100-400 f/4.5-5.6 is an excellent alternative. Good luck.

[Keith B]

If you only use the 300mm range every once and a while, and you're willing to accept lower image quality when you do, then the 70-200 f/2.8 IS is a great alternative to the 300mm f/4 IS. Sounds like the best choice for you. But most wildlife shooters need more range, even on a crop camera, so the 100-400 f/4.5-5.6 is an excellent alternative. Good luck.

I agree. I was shooting at the beach today with my 100-400. I am amazed every time I pull this lens out at how sharp the images are.