Just wondering if anyone has experience with both combinations? I am interested in the optical performance.

-- Jonathan Lo (j.lo@ieee.org), March 15, 2002

Answers

A similar question occurs with the Canon lenses, as to whether the 100-400 IS is better than the 70-200 F2.8L IS + 2X TC. Luminous Landscape did a test, which showed that the 100-400 was noticeably better at 400 then the 70-200+2X TC. Since the Canon 100-400 and 70- 200 are optically comparable with their nikon equivalents you ask about, a similar result can be expected, although (no flames for this please) the french magazine Chasseur d'Images rates the Canon 2X TC rather more highly than the TC20E (the canon (mk II) gets 3/5 for performance and 2/5 for value for money, with the TC20E receiving 2/5 and 1/5 respectively). IF these results are accurate (and I don't stand by them, because I simply do not know), that suggests the 80-200+TC20E combo will lag considerably behing the 80- 400.

The real question is which part of the range is most important to you? The 80-200 will provide the best performance below 200mm, and the 80-400 will be better above 200mm than any 80-200+TC combo.

-- Isaac Sibson (isibson@hotmail.com), March 16, 2002.