Home  
Site Partners: SpotterGuides Veloce Books  
Related Sites: Your Link Here  

Go Back   TenTenths Motorsport Forum > Racing Talk > Motorsport Art & Photography

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 10 Mar 2005, 07:28 (Ref:1248336)   #1
TuscanR
Racer
 
Join Date: May 2003
England
Hertfordshire
Posts: 148
TuscanR should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
Canon 100-400 L series+ x2 converter

Hi Guys I have been working myself into an early grave at the moment(two 24 hour shifts in one week!) in an effort to buy the Canon 100-400 L series Lens from Warehouse express and i was wondering what the canon users here thought of this piece of glass? If it's is worth a look, what about hooking it up to a x2 converter as us mere mortals seem to be pushed further and further back from the track each year. I have just purchased a 20D and thought that I had better invest in some decent kit to go with it. so would the converter kill the image quality???
Thanks in advance
Paul

PS sorry if this is a bit garbled I'm just finishing my night shift
TuscanR is offline  
__________________
" Just because a press release has a dancing donkey on the top of it doesn't mean you've got to believe it "
Ben Samuelson TVR.
Quote
Old 10 Mar 2005, 08:17 (Ref:1248357)   #2
TerryC
Racer
 
TerryC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
United Nations
Shakespeare's County
Posts: 440
TerryC should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
Can't help you with the lens but my friend who ordered a Minolta 7D recently from Warehouse Express was delighted with the promptness of their service.
TerryC is offline  
__________________
L'ENDURANCE, C'EST LE MANS!
Quote
Old 10 Mar 2005, 08:49 (Ref:1248374)   #3
gi_gav
Veteran
 
gi_gav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Scotland
Posts: 656
gi_gav should be qualifying in the top 10 on the gridgi_gav should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
I've only used the mark 1 version of the Canon 2x TC, on my 70-200 2.8 IS and I was not impressed at all with the results.

Sharpness is noticably worse and focusing speed & accuracy is shot to pieces. Bear in mind that you won't be able to autofocus at all with the combination of 100-400, 20D and 2x TC. I've attached a couple of 100% crops (beloved of photo geeks, but useful here!) to illustrate the difference.

Also, by most accounts the 70-200 is the sharper lens, so if it's poor on that then it could well be worse on the 100-400.

Bear in mind that I'm talking about the older version of the convertor and that the new one is apparently better...

It had better be because I'll probably be buying it before next week! I'm facing the same problem as Mike Hoyer - short lens and shooting at Silverstone next week, so I need something longer.

For your own use, I'd just stick with the 100-400 - it ought to be plenty long enough.
Attached Thumbnails
70 200 Crop.jpg   2x TC Crop.jpg  
gi_gav is offline  
Quote
Old 10 Mar 2005, 09:12 (Ref:1248381)   #4
neil_davidson2
TT Photo Of The Year Winner - 2009 & 2010
Veteran
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
England
Swindon, UK
Posts: 533
neil_davidson2 should be qualifying in the top 10 on the gridneil_davidson2 should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
I've been using the 100-400 for about 18 months now and have been getting decent results with it (as well as some not so decent results!) Although it's not as sharp as a prime lens I find the flexibility of the zoom useful.

I did try using it with a 1.4 teleconverter and the combination struggled. So as gi_gav suggests pick up the lens first - see how it works, and then decide if you want to spend the additional money on the TC.

I'm marshalling at Silverstone on the 19th so hopefully I'll bump into a few of you around the circuit somewhere.

Last edited by neil_davidson2; 10 Mar 2005 at 09:14.
neil_davidson2 is offline  
__________________
Don't shop hungry; Don't drive angry.
Quote
Old 10 Mar 2005, 10:16 (Ref:1248421)   #5
Groupc
Racer
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
England
Bedfordshire
Posts: 150
Groupc should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
I use a 10D (though I'm envious of your 20D...). I was advised by a pro not to use a zoom, and bought a 300 f4 L IS USM. It's a fabulous lens and I have no regrets at all. Also, a thought that ocurred to me whilst making my decision was how often I'd use this large (100-400) lens on anything under 400mm, not often. So the 300 won.

The other piece of advice I was given by the same guy was not to buy the x2 but the x1.4 as you only lose 1 stop. Again I took the advice and I am thrilled at the results it gives me - certainly magazine quality images, and I never use a monopod.

My next purchase will probably be a 70-200mm f2.8 L IS. This is a smaller lens and therefore mobility won't be such an issue as with the 100-400.
Groupc is offline  
Quote
Old 10 Mar 2005, 10:33 (Ref:1248428)   #6
Groupc
Racer
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
England
Bedfordshire
Posts: 150
Groupc should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
I found the photo I was looking for...

http://img220.exs.cx/my.php?loc=img2...ge=rosa5ll.jpg

I took this at Le Mans 2004, with the 300mm, without a convertor, THROUGH the fence. Good enough for me :-)
Groupc is offline  
Quote
Old 10 Mar 2005, 12:48 (Ref:1248501)   #7
TerryC
Racer
 
TerryC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
United Nations
Shakespeare's County
Posts: 440
TerryC should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
Impressive! Couldn't really tell the fence was there!
TerryC is offline  
__________________
L'ENDURANCE, C'EST LE MANS!
Quote
Old 10 Mar 2005, 14:19 (Ref:1248563)   #8
gi_gav
Veteran
 
gi_gav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Scotland
Posts: 656
gi_gav should be qualifying in the top 10 on the gridgi_gav should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
in case it's not clear in my post above, the left-hand image is a 100% crop of a shot with the 70-200. The right-hand one is 70-200 with 2x TC (mark 1).

Both are completely unsharpened.
gi_gav is offline  
Quote
Old 10 Mar 2005, 21:35 (Ref:1248987)   #9
TuscanR
Racer
 
Join Date: May 2003
England
Hertfordshire
Posts: 148
TuscanR should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
Thanks for your replies gents, so if you were in my shoes with about a grand to spend on a lens what would you buy?? (Bearing in mind this is a probably going to be a one off purchase) I would like to try and stay loyal to using Canon only products but if you have any other suggestions I'm all ears.
TuscanR is offline  
__________________
" Just because a press release has a dancing donkey on the top of it doesn't mean you've got to believe it "
Ben Samuelson TVR.
Quote
Old 10 Mar 2005, 22:24 (Ref:1249019)   #10
JamesC
Racer
 
Join Date: May 2004
United Kingdom
London, UK
Posts: 130
JamesC should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
70-210 f2.8L and a 1.4x teleconvertor...
JamesC is offline  
Quote
Old 11 Mar 2005, 23:09 (Ref:1249970)   #11
TuscanR
Racer
 
Join Date: May 2003
England
Hertfordshire
Posts: 148
TuscanR should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
I think I have now opened a huge can of proverbial worms and am more confused than ever I don't know what to do and I certainly cant carry on doing overtime as the season will start soon and I don't want to miss it. Why is the 70-200 F2.8 two to three hundred pounds more than the longer 100-400? Is it a second generation Lens or something, why oh why do I choose such expensive hobbies!
Please be patient with me if I am asking painfully obvious questions. I am reading Michael Langfords Basics of Photography and trying to teach myself the techniques and theories if only I didn't have a job with an odd shift pattern I would enrol in a night class in college
TuscanR is offline  
__________________
" Just because a press release has a dancing donkey on the top of it doesn't mean you've got to believe it "
Ben Samuelson TVR.
Quote
Old 11 Mar 2005, 23:14 (Ref:1249974)   #12
JamesC
Racer
 
Join Date: May 2004
United Kingdom
London, UK
Posts: 130
JamesC should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
It's £130 or so cheaper than the 70-200 2.8 IS

It would be cheaper because it's a variable aperature lens - f4.5-5.6... where as the 70-200 is a static f2.8 and therefore faster. Easy to make a zoom longer - but more expensive to make it faster as it uses more glass. As a lens gets longer - it gets more expensive to make it faster. When I say faster - I mean it lets more light in - though this will also be reflected by the focus speed - my 70-200 2.8 focuses like lightening!

If you don't want the IS then the 70-200 is a fair bit cheaper than the 100-400 at £770.

Last edited by JamesC; 11 Mar 2005 at 23:16.
JamesC is offline  
Quote
Old 11 Mar 2005, 23:32 (Ref:1249979)   #13
TuscanR
Racer
 
Join Date: May 2003
England
Hertfordshire
Posts: 148
TuscanR should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
Thanks for clearing that one up for me James much appreciated, I think your suggestion is looking the favourite at the moment I will just have to save up for the 1.4 converter and get that in the summer.
By the way great photo Group C
TuscanR is offline  
__________________
" Just because a press release has a dancing donkey on the top of it doesn't mean you've got to believe it "
Ben Samuelson TVR.
Quote
Old 14 Mar 2005, 12:59 (Ref:1251558)   #14
Groupc
Racer
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
England
Bedfordshire
Posts: 150
Groupc should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
Kind of you to comment. The same pro who's advice I quoted above also told me to buy the best I can possibly afford.

More overtime then !
Groupc is offline  
Quote
Old 14 Mar 2005, 19:57 (Ref:1251912)   #15
kdr
Veteran
 
kdr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 2,741
kdr should be qualifying in the top 5 on the gridkdr should be qualifying in the top 5 on the grid
as someone said i think in this thread or one similar...if you buy something like 70-200 you'll spend most of the time with it set to 200, the rest of the time you'll be wishing it was a bit longer. 300mm(f.4 if need be, 2.8 better) plus 1x4 converter would be what i would aim for. the first thing you need when shooting cars is as much length as you can get...not 70mm...imho of course. ask any pro shooting cars what they would aim for first...i know the budget issues....but that has to be your benchmark.

Last edited by kdr; 14 Mar 2005 at 19:58.
kdr is offline  
__________________
I want you to drive flat out
Quote
Old 18 Mar 2005, 06:12 (Ref:1254958)   #16
Lenzman
Rookie
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
New Zealand
Taupo. NZ
Posts: 4
Lenzman should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
I use the 7-200L USM 2.8 with a 2x converter. I works great, fast focus and sharp. The IS is not as sharp. IS is of use if you are taking a lot of slow or stationary subjects. When panning for instance you will not need the IS.
Lenzman is offline  
Quote
Old 20 Mar 2005, 08:14 (Ref:1256518)   #17
TuscanR
Racer
 
Join Date: May 2003
England
Hertfordshire
Posts: 148
TuscanR should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
Hi guys, well after doing 72 hours overtime this month and my gorlfriend finding out just how much these lens cost I have had to come to my senses and stick to buying the 100-400 but with the 1.4 converter as recommended by you. I had just found the 400 f2.8 aswell, but with Mrs TuscanR going nuts with me spending a grand on a lens I think I might be single if I spent five and a half!! Once again thanks you for your informed and considered opinions. If you see someone looking a bit out of there depth but with a huge grin on his face at the circuits, it will probabally be me.

Cheers guys hope to see you out there soon
TuscanR is offline  
__________________
" Just because a press release has a dancing donkey on the top of it doesn't mean you've got to believe it "
Ben Samuelson TVR.
Quote
Old 23 Mar 2005, 13:13 (Ref:1259751)   #18
APS
Rookie
 
APS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
United Kingdom
Cheshire
Posts: 23
APS should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
I personally wouldnt use the 100-400 with any kind of converter , the reason being whatever the conv ... 1.4x or 2.0x equates to the minimum F capability of the lens ... for example the standard is f5.6 so multiply that by either 1.4 or 2.0 then that is the minimum you can work to , also with the 2.0x the images WILL become very soft .

If its distance you are looking for perhaps youd be better off going for a prime lens say 300 f2.8 Sigma or the like ! that way youll be working with either 300(420 with the 1.4 and 600 with 2x ) and F4 along with f5.6 , the cost will jump but there are many deals you can get if you have a good old look around

hope this helps ... regards
APS is offline  
Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Canon 20D Peter Mallett Motorsport Art & Photography 13 30 Jan 2006 06:21
Canon Lenses for Canon 350d? Michael Wyles Motorsport Art & Photography 14 18 Jul 2005 17:50
Where Teleplus Kenko 2X NAF Converter (UK) TerryC Motorsport Art & Photography 11 23 Aug 2004 09:55


All times are GMT. The time now is 12:47.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Original Website Copyright © 1998-2003 Craig Antil. All Rights Reserved.
Ten-Tenths Motorsport Forums Copyright © 2004-2021 Royalridge Computing. All Rights Reserved.
Ten-Tenths Motorsport Forums Copyright © 2021-2022 Grant MacDonald. All Rights Reserved.