Hi!

Currently I am using EOS30 with 28-135 IS lens. I am going to a wildlife national park soon and would like to have a longer lens for wildlife photography.

Heard that from various sources that EF 70-200 f/4 L Lens is worth buying and its optics is really good. Thus I am now consider to purchase one for myself. However, for wilflife photography, 200mm might not be good enough.

Thus my query for all you guys out there is whether Canon 1.4X T/C and 2X T/C works with EF 70-200 f/4 L? I went to a professinal camera shop and said that it can't fit in.....

Also heard that there are new Canon T/C, so which one should I get?

Will there be any problem when I use autofocus?

Thanks for all your responses in advance.

-- Kenneth Fan (fuhnan@yahoo.com), January 21, 2002

Answers

Yes, both teleconverters are compatible with this lens. Note that with the 2x, you will lose autofocus on this body; the 70-200 f/4L USM plus the 1.4x will retain autofocus, though AF will be a bit slower than it would with just the lens itself (this is intentional). In case you're wondering, neither teleconverter is compatible with the 28-135 - both teleconverters have protruding front elements, and only certain lenses (L-series primes of 135mm or longer; 70-200 lenses; 100-400) are designed to allow enough space for things to fit.

Canon says the new 1.4x had the same optics as the old one; the new 2x has better optics than the old one. Both of the new teleconverters have improved resistance to flare through improved blackening of the internior, and also feature rubber O-rings to improve sealing (this is primarily designed to match the rubber O-rings on certain new L-series telephotos, the 70-200/4 not being one of them, and on the EOS-1V and EOS-1D pro bodies).

If you're going to get a 1.4x, the old one is a better value - there'll be little practical difference between the two for you, and the old one should be cheaper. If you're going to get a 2x, the improved optics of the new one might be worth getting.

-- Steve Dunn (steved@ussinc.com), January 21, 2002.

I have had excellent results from my 70-200 F4L and 1.4X Canon TC (mk I). I would probably never bother putting a 2X on it though, as I have a 300 F4L IS also.

Get this lens, is the bottom line. If your film is up to it, an enlargement of a shot at 200mm with the L lens will probably be as good as a consumer lens at 300mm.

-- Isaac Sibson (isibson@hotmail.com), January 21, 2002.

I just want to know how Canon justify $115 for the tripod mounting ring for the 70-200 f4. Thats more than some lenses! I'm just kind of worried that it'll snap the front off my camera. :)

-- Marcus (Citizensmith@lanset.com), January 21, 2002.

If you have a larger, solid body (eg EOS 3, any EOS 1, EOS 5) you should have no problems mounting the body on a tripod with this lens. I would not try this with any plastic-mount body though. You will probably get better results with the tripod collar. If you don't wish to pay as much, and don't care about looks, the same tripod collar in black (to match 200 F2.8, 80-200F2.8) is available around $70-$80. There is no difference other than colour.

-- Isaac Sibson (isibson@hotmail.com), January 21, 2002.

The weight of this lens should be no problem with the EOS 30 - it's quite a lightweight lens by the standards of L-series telephotos, and the EOS 30 has a nice metal lens mount.

-- Steve Dunn (steved@ussinc.com), January 21, 2002.

Going from 135 to 200 is an improvement, but probably not long enough for wildlife photography. Perhaps you should consider a 300/4 lens? It would seem a better companion to your 28-135 and you can get this with IS too. I have the 70-200/4L and have decided it is the biggest lens I'll get. It is also the ideal companion to my 24-85. Bottom line... if you want a 70-200, the f/4 is an excellent lens and by all accounts -- incl. from Bob Atkins, who wrote me this -- it is a better approx. 300mm lens with the 1.4x converter than any consumer lens canon sells.

-- Richard Christie (gr.christie@auckland.ac.nz), January 21, 2002.

A professional camera shop told you the extenders wouldn't fit, huh? Not very "professional". Anyway, as has been noted, they do fit and I'm sure the results will be quite sharp. But a 280mm f/5.6 and a 400mm f/8 (long end zoom with 1.4x and 2x respectively) are not very fast lenses and you may be giving up a lot of aperture to get a zoom ed long focal length. Have you considered the 200 f/2.8? It's a very sharp lens, takes both the Canon extenders, is a full stop faster (more useful) and only about $100 more than the 70-200 f/4 zoom. Of course the extenders will cost as much as the lens. Since you're trying to outfit a "safari", consider a good third party teleconverter such as the Kenko/Tamron Pro models (same extender, different names). Some folks I respect who shoot wildlife photos for a living use these extenders and their results are pretty good.

-- Lee (Leemarthakiri@sport.rr.com), January 22, 2002.

Thanks for all your responses and I greatly appreciate it.

Right now, I am looking at 75-300mm IS.

My friend told me that I should consider this lens as it would give me 100mm more, IS and lastly, is cheaper.

I am totally lost now.....

-- Kenneth Fan (fuhnan@yahoo.com), January 24, 2002.

But it is nowhere near as good a lens in most other respects. It's slower, optical quality is WAY down on the 70-200 F4L, AF isn't up to the same standard, build quality is not in the same league either. And the 70-200 comes with its hood and a (admittedly fairly useless) pouch, whilst you will pay extra for the hood on the 75- 300. There isn't even the option of a tripod mount on the 75-300, and you may get IS, but not mode 2.

Between a fairly mediocre consumer 75-300 who's only saving grace is IS, and a very, very fine and universally acclaimed 70-200 F4....Well, I think the choice is fairly obvious, and my experience with the 70-200 leads me to believe I'm right. I replaced a consumer 70-300 (Sigma, APO version) with the Canon 70-200, and have no regrets whatsoever.

-- Isaac Sibson (isibson@hotmail.com), January 24, 2002.

I agree completely with Isaac Sibson. For long time I've used the 75- 300 (without IS) but replaced it by a combo of 70-200 F4L and 1.4x Extender. And the results have confirmed my choice. Although you get the IS - which is a very nice feature - you basically get the same as I've used for long time. And, you'll see that you will not use this lense above 200 mm, IS or not. Good luck!

-- Ulrik Frorup (Ulrik_Frorup@yahoo.com), February 04, 2002.