hi everyone, i"ve been saving my pennies for ages now and i can nearly afford to get the 70-200mm f2.8 l is mk11 usm. i know how good the reviews are and how everyone raves about it.
the thing thats bugging me is the 100-400mm f4.5-5.6 l is mk11 usm is about £450 more expensive but double the reach which would be handy. so my question is, would fitting a 2.0 mk 111 extender to the 70-200mm giving it a 140-400mm effective range produce worse images than the 100-400mm lens? i know it would lose a couple of f/stops in doing so but it still wouldnt be slower than 5.6, also its cheaper to buy the lens and extender than the 100-400mm.
i"m going round in circles trying to make my mind up, anyone have experience of both lenses?
the thing thats bugging me is the 100-400mm f4.5-5.6 l is mk11 usm is about £450 more expensive but double the reach which would be handy. so my question is, would fitting a 2.0 mk 111 extender to the 70-200mm giving it a 140-400mm effective range produce worse images than the 100-400mm lens? i know it would lose a couple of f/stops in doing so but it still wouldnt be slower than 5.6, also its cheaper to buy the lens and extender than the 100-400mm.
i"m going round in circles trying to make my mind up, anyone have experience of both lenses?
Comment