DSLRUsers.com

I'm wondering what the outcome of the following comparison would be.
A 70-200mm VR + TC-17eII versus the 80-400mm VR.
The 70-200mm VR + TC-17eII is significantly more expensive than the
80-400mm VR.
The 70-200mm VR + TC-17eII doesn't have the reach of the 80-400mm VR.
The 70-200mm VR on its own is faster.
The TC-17eII takes away 1.5 stops; what does this turn a f2.8 lens into ?

Any additional information is appreciated.

Cheers
CD

christiand wrote:I'm wondering what the outcome of the following comparison would be.
A 70-200mm VR + TC-17eII versus the 80-400mm VR.
The 70-200mm VR + TC-17eII is significantly more expensive than the
80-400mm VR.
The 70-200mm VR + TC-17eII doesn't have the reach of the 80-400mm VR.
The 70-200mm VR on its own is faster.
The TC-17eII takes away 1.5 stops; what does this turn a f2.8 lens into ?

Any additional information is appreciated.

Cheers
CD

Christiand,
The 70-200VR with TC-17 is still beat the 80-400VR miles away in sharpness and AF (Fasssssssssst) througout it range!
The 70-200VR with TC-17 is in difference league with the 80-400VR, more glass elements on the 70-200 than 80-400VR and it's AF-S the 80-400VR is only AF-D
Yes with the TC-17 the 70-200VR gives you 340mm, short of 60mm but handholding easy and sharpness sames as VR and AF-s still function.
The 80-400VR is not better after the range of between 330 or 350, but it's useable.
The TC-17 will give you around f4.

70-200 + 1.7TC = f/4.8 constant. Unlike the 80-400 which tends to be optimal at stopped down apertures of f/8-f/11, the 70-200 shot wide open suffers no lack of contrast or other ill image quality deficits (IMHO), which is favourable if wide open use predominates your style. Chromatic abberation on the 70-200 is totally non existent, even when you forcefully shoot to induce it (wide aperture, OOF, heavily backlit subject). The 80-400 is optically excellent, but still shows CA when you induce it (NB: in any case, CA is able to be fixed in PP; but to me is an indication of optical quality esp of element coatings). I found the 80-400 front bokeh to tending towards doughnut shaped. The 70-200 is excellent for bokeh and incredibly sharp. It also has AF-S - very fast and silent focusing with manual override at all times.

70-200 & TC combo is definitely heavier and longer than the 80-400, and perhaps the combo would end up costing twice as much as well (very significant price diff IMO).

Birddog114 and Onyx,

thank you so much for the responses.
For a moment I was wondering if I had bought the wrong lens for
my purposes.
But I am re-insured that I did the right thing, thanks to you.

Cheers
CD

Christian

If your need more have a look at this thread where I put the 80-400 VR through its paces.

Cheers