At 19:21 27.11.00 -0800, you wrote:
>Greetings,
>
> I am seriously looking at acquiring the EF 135 2.0L for shooting indoor
>sports. With the 1.4x extender, the lens is a 2.8 at 189mm and with the 2x,
>the lens is a 4.0 at 270mm. How does this lens with the 1.4x compare, as
>far as sharpness is concerned, to the 200 2.8L at 2.8? I know that the 2x
>usually doesn't produce as fine of results. How closely would it compare to
>the 300 4L?
I originally had a 200/2.8L and have now a 300/4LIS along with a 135/2L.
I've never tested the 135L+1.4x with the 200L but I did once take some
shots to compare the 135L+2x with the 300/4LIS. The test was in no way very
in depth or very scientific. I just shot the same subject with both
combinations and had a look at the prints and the negatives afterwards.
To make it short: The 300 wins wide open but not by much. As for the rest
I'd say any difference is marginal. The 300 might always be a bit better in
contrast but concerning sharpness the 135L+2x shows no weakness.
I found the 135/2L and the 2x converter to be an ideal combo. A lot smaller
and also a bit lighter than the 300/4LIS it certainly makes your
photographic life easier when you need some reach in the field.
Mail me if you have more questions. I can dig up those prints and have a
look at them again.
Regards,
-Hubert
*
****
*******
***********************************************************
* For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see:
* http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm
***********************************************************
