Home
I rented one last year for a baseball tournament and liked it very much. I'm thinking about picking one up primarily for baseball and wildlife pics but they're not cheap so I'd like to hear from others with experience on the pros/cons. My second thought would be to pick up the Canon 2x III Extender to use with my 70-200 which might get in the same range for a lot less $$.....
I've used the 2x mkIII on a 70-200 mk II and I feel like I lost speed and precision on the auto focus shooting outdoor sports (soccer). Keeper ratio went down significantly. Could have been a byproduct of the longer reach though. I have the MkI version of the 100-400. In good light I shoot it handheld, and it delivers. I've heard the mk II is even better (and isn't a "dust bazooka").
You rented one for a baseball torney last year and liked it very much? What's the deal? If I did that and liked the lens and could afford it, I'd buy it!
Can't speak to the II's, but Cookie has used a "I" for several years and it's been wonderful. Putting an extender, even a 1.4, on any lens is pretty much a waste. One always drops F-stops and a bit of crispness. One is getting a lot of lens for the money and the newer II's are really not that expensive. Step to a prime 500mm and one is getting into serious bucks. Most reviews rave about the II's quick focusing as well.

The only benefit to the telescoping "I" is one has a slightly longer platform at the high end that offers more stability for hand held shots. Cookie can easily do handheld stuff in the field at 400mm. With her prime 500mm, there's little chance of success. The 100-400 is near ideal for field sports. Courtside indoors, it may be a bit much.

Also, if one is using a crop sensor, he effectively has a 160 to 640mm unit in his hands. That's a lot of glass for the price.

If Cookie did not already have the "I", I'd most certainly spring for the "II."

A sample from her "I" on a EOS 50D. When one can count whiskers, it's pretty good glass, and this is about an 89% reduction for use in this forum.
[Linked Image]
Originally Posted by DonFischer
You rented one for a baseball torney last year and liked it very much? What's the deal? If I did that and liked the lens and could afford it, I'd buy it!


If I went with the new 100-400, I would need to sell my 70-200....can't justify 4k in lenses when I'm not a pro, I just enjoy shooting pics of my kids and their teams.
Originally Posted by 1minute

A sample from her "I" on a EOS 50D. When one can count whiskers, it's pretty good glass, and this is about an 89% reduction for use in this forum.
[Linked Image]


That's a great pic (as usual)! Cookie has been a big inspiration for my photography along with several other posters here BTW..... smile
Quote
I would need to sell my 70-200


Don't do that, as it's a better lens for court sports. Nothing does it all, and one may eventually find oneself running around with two cameras. Find something else to cut from life like maybe toilet paper, Starbucks coffee, or the second girl friend.

Have a good one,
Nebraska,
I had some thoughts on options for you;
1) Rent or borrow the extender to try before you buy. Make sure it's a MkIII. You might find it works for your purposes.
2) Rent the long lens when you need it.
3) This one is a stretch...but the Sigma 120-300 f2.8 sorta covers the range of both lenses (yeah, you lose the long on one and the short on the other). It's a beast (big and heavy). I've shot it handheld with a 1D and I won't be doing that anytime soon again. It's also pricey. But I think it's less than a 70-200 f2.8 + 100-400. The sport version has a very fast autofocus and is sharp. ...again rent to try before you buy.
I've had great experiences with Lensrentals.com for renting long glass. If you don't think you'll be needing a 400mm lens very often, renting can make alot of sense. Also nice to "try before you buy."
Thanks for the responses. To 1Minute's comments, I think I will keep the 70-200 because it really is a stellar lens and I'll do like you guys say and rent one until I've saved enough on TP and coffee to buy a second lens!

FWIW, here's some court pics I took with my 70-200 when I hit the state BB tournament about a week ago.....(too bad we lost frown )

[Linked Image]

[Linked Image]

[Linked Image]
Good work there!
Dems nice shots! You need to keep that 70-200! I like how you've figured out the color management too!

I bet the next question you'll be asking if how to set up a photo sale site, so you can earn money to fund that long lens!
Originally Posted by ChrisF
Dems nice shots! You need to keep that 70-200! I like how you've figured out the color management too!

I bet the next question you'll be asking if how to set up a photo sale site, so you can earn money to fund that long lens!


It would sure be nice to at least pay off the equipment....LOL!!
A
Great hoops shots.
As always Camera Land will always do whatever we can on any products you are interested in
Call me at 516-217-1000 or email me at [email protected]

Thanks
I have the 100-400 II and its a great lens. I shoot it with a 7d mark II apsc sensor camera with 1.6 crop.

I would also look at the sigma contemporary 150-600.

The canon is a great, great lens. That plus a 24-70 and you are done.
© 24hourcampfire