| Sign in: |
| Members log in here with your user name and password to access the your admin page and other special features. |
|
|
|
|
|| SportsShooter.com: Member Message Board
Just like Nikon.. but possibly Better?
Jeff Stinson, Photographer, Student/Intern
|
Phil Hawkins, Photographer
 |
Fresno | ca | usa | Posted: 3:15 AM on 02.07.11 |
| ->> Looks good on paper, but what aperture restrictions are there when you engage the 1.4? Presently, when I use my 2x on my 2.8 70-200, my max aperture changes to 5.6. And the price? |
|
Randy Abrams, Photographer
|
Bath | NY | US | Posted: 5:56 AM on 02.07.11 |
| ->> I loved the flexibility of the Nikon version when I had one. Adding the built in TC is an interesting touch. Wonder if that will a sign of things to come? Then Nikon version is close to $7000 so I would imagine the Canon version would be close to that. |
|
Kevin Krows, Photographer
 |
Forsyth | IL | USA | Posted: 7:41 AM on 02.07.11 |
->> I think Canon is throwing a bone out to keep customers from moving to Nikon just to get at their 200-400. I also believe Canon needs to develop a 1D with cleaner high ISO files 6400+ in order to be competitive.
I don't expect to see a viable solution for several years but it's nice to know they are working on it. Maybe 2-3 years??? Heck, arn't we still waiting on the 2.8L 300 and 400 announced last fall?
I regularly use a 1.4TX on my 2.L 70-200IS with very good results up to ISO 3200 on my Canon 1D Mark III. Effective f4 127-364 considering the crop factor, TC,and stop loss.
The Nikon 200-400 is full frame on a D3 if I'm not mistaken (since it's not a DX lens). Correct me if I'm wrong.
By comparison, focal range isn't too far off on the high side and you get a little more room on the low side. IQ, however, I'm sure there is no comparison. Nikon would be a clear winner based on what SS members have reported.
Canon has their work cut out for them. It's not just the lens but a body that will work with it to produce the same or better images as a Nikon D3 + f4 200-400. If they can do that, I'll be a buyer. Something tells me I'll be waiting a few years. |
|
Michael Fischer, Photographer
|
Spencer | Ia | USA | Posted: 8:54 AM on 02.07.11 |
->> Kevin
It is a full frame camera and is a perfect fit for the D3 series camera bodies. I sold my 400 f2.8 to finance the purchase the 200-400mm. The high ISO capacity of the D3 makes the loss of one f stop almost a non issue. Exceptionally versatile lens for me. My 300mm f2.8 gets used a lot less as well. |
|
Tim Gangloff, Photographer
|
Knoxville | Tn | USA | Posted: 2:59 PM on 02.07.11 |
->> If it is as good as their 70-200 2.8 IS II in focus speed and accuracy, I'll be getting one.
Some will no doubt complain about the built-in converter. I don't mind it being built in just like I don't mind the IS being built in. Sure, I don't use IS all that often, but it's nice to know that if I do want it, it's there with a flick of a switch. Seems like the tele-converter is the same concept. It's there if you need it.
My only question is will I still need my 300 2.8 IS. With the 1d4, I can easily go up to ISO 6400 and I am pretty sure the next generation will go even higher, so f4 is no biggie.
Oh, and I thought the announcement said coming this year, 2011. Hope so! From the news release on DPReview:
"the EF 200-400mm f/4L IS USM EXTENDER 1.4x is scheduled for launch during 2011."
Of course, knowing Canon, that might be Dec 31, 2011. A few copies might be available earlier, but probably not until March 2012 will they be readily available, which is how the 1d4 rolled out if I recall. |
|
N. Scott Trimble, Photographer
|
Lake Oswego | OR | USA | Posted: 5:04 PM on 02.07.11 |
| ->> It's in development. I wouldn't expect it until the end of 2012, and that is if they can get their flourite under control. |
|
Peter Tarry, Photographer
|
croydon | Surrey | England | Posted: 6:20 PM on 02.07.11 |
| ->> just as long as its out in time for me to use at the olympics. |
|
Return to --> Message Board Main Index
|