I use the 200/2.8L and EF 2x, and have been pleasantly surprised with it.
Jason Lay wrote:
> >in regards to the 200 2.8L with a teleconverter, would I lose the ability to
> autofocus?
No, any Canon body will still AF at f5.6 (Unless you have one of those EF-Ms)
> Also, what is the image quality like with todays teleconverters?
> I have heard that the image quality is considerably less when you add a
> teleconverter to a lens.
It obviously can't get any better, but I can honestly say that it doesn't get
"considerably less". With care (tripod) and shooting at an effective aperture
of f8, I'm very pleased with the results. In fact I'm even happy with f5.6, but
DOF tends to be shallow.
> I like the idea of combining the 200 2.8L and a
> teleconverter because I would get the focal length of the 400 at a fraction
> of the cost, and I can still use the prime lens as a 200 if I so desire.
You should check, but I think the 200/2.8L and converter will cost about the
same as a 400/5.6L. But with the first option you also get a first-rate
200/2.8. If you can get a good deal on a used 200/2.8L (as I did), the numbers
will change. The 200's seem to be trade-in fodder when people move up to a
70-200/2.8L.
Geoff Doane
*
****
*******
***********************************************************
* For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see:
* http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm
***********************************************************
