Canon 70-200 f4.0L IS USM - Comments Please!

[FinelyCruising]

Hello Everyone --

 

I have been looking at the reports for this leans and I think I might be very close to making a purchase. I have the older Canon 70-210 from about 20 years ago that I have used alot in teh past and I am sure about this range on a re-purchase, I think the upgrade in overall sharpness and speed will be nice.

 

So much good information was exchanged here when I decided on the Sigma wide angle zoom over the Canon (and I still love it!!!) that I would enjoy hearing some comments if there is another lens out there that might beat this Canon I am now looking at.

 

Thanks in advance! :)

[fotocruiser]

Hello Everyone --

 

I have been looking at the reports for this leans and I think I might be very close to making a purchase. I have the older Canon 70-210 from about 20 years ago that I have used alot in teh past and I am sure about this range on a re-purchase, I think the upgrade in overall sharpness and speed will be nice.

 

So much good information was exchanged here when I decided on the Sigma wide angle zoom over the Canon (and I still love it!!!) that I would enjoy hearing some comments if there is another lens out there that might beat this Canon I am now looking at.

 

Thanks in advance! :)

 

I use the Canon 70-200mm IS L f2.8 and love it. If you can spring for the extra $$, I would go for that one instead. With that said, I have several photography buddies using the f4, and I have heard nothing but high praise for that lens as well.

[GolfHawaii]

I own the non-IS version and LOVE it. I have not had any low light issues while using this lens, so the f/4 has not been a problem. Sharp lens!! Maybe someday I will pick up the IS version.

 

I was able to get a used lens at such a good price that I couldn't pass on it.

[chipmaster]

Hello Everyone --

 

I have been looking at the reports for this leans and I think I might be very close to making a purchase. I have the older Canon 70-210 from about 20 years ago that I have used alot in teh past and I am sure about this range on a re-purchase, I think the upgrade in overall sharpness and speed will be nice.

 

So much good information was exchanged here when I decided on the Sigma wide angle zoom over the Canon (and I still love it!!!) that I would enjoy hearing some comments if there is another lens out there that might beat this Canon I am now looking at.

 

Thanks in advance! :)

 

 

I agree with the 2nd poster get the f2.8. I'd spring for the extra 700 bucks and 1.5 lbs to have f2.8 speed. It seems a pitty to invest in slow pro glass.

[shipmate5967]

I have that lens and love it! Very sharp crisp photos. I've used it to photograph the Carnival shows on the ship up in the balcony, without a flash and had excellent results. But I would highly recommend getting the IS version.

 

John

[mountainhouse]

I have the non-IS version. Sharp, sharp, sharp! There's always a trade off for me between capability and weight. I used to have the Nikon f/2.8 in this range. I now find this lighter Canon lens is with me for often.

[dmz]

I've got the 70-200 ƒ/4L IS. Excellent lens. You won't be disappointed.

 

As far as the ƒ/2.8 version goes, it's also an excellent lens. But it's significantly larger, heavier and more expensive. How badly do you need ƒ/2.8? Some argue that the ƒ/4 version has better image quality too.

 

good source for end-user reviews: http://www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/showproduct.php?product=304

[mountainhouse]

Some argue that the ƒ/4 version has better image quality too.

 

I hadn't heard that before, but it makes sense. I've got several L lenses, and it's a standout.

[FinelyCruising]

Hello -

 

Thank you all for the feedback. I ordered f4.0 IS and I am anxiously await its arrival on Friday. I have a nice land trip planned in two weeks and a TA in November, so it is not going to go to waste.

 

I too have read many reviews and it seemed almost a toss up between any of the three of the lenses. I took middle of the road lens. Not the under $1,000. Not the over $1,000. Just the at $1,000 version. Well sort of, or close enough with the current Canon rebate;)

 

You know what I need to do? I need to stop buying photography magazines because too many ideas get planted into my head.

 

Like what happened here with this lens this week.:D

 

Thanks again everyone. I'll let you know what I think soon.:)

[fotocruiser]

Hello -

 

Thank you all for the feedback. I ordered f4.0 IS and I am anxiously await its arrival on Friday. I have a nice land trip planned in two weeks and a TA in November, so it is not going to go to waste.

 

I too have read many reviews and it seemed almost a toss up between any of the three of the lenses. I took middle of the road lens. Not the under $1,000. Not the over $1,000. Just the at $1,000 version. Well sort of, or close enough with the current Canon rebate;)

 

You know what I need to do? I need to stop buying photography magazines because too many ideas get planted into my head.

 

Like what happened here with this lens this week.:D

 

Thanks again everyone. I'll let you know what I think soon.:)

 

We do expect a full review and sample photos. ;)

[pilotdane]

Congratulations. I have owned the 70-200 f4 IS and loved it! It is an incredible lens for the type of photography I do.

 

PS: The lens performs very well with the Canon 1.4 converter if you want more reach.

[FinelyCruising]

Well, its here! I have been outside playing with it and it behaves much differently than the 70-210 that I have been used to for so long. Particularly with light levels. The weight is a non-issue for me, its comfortable in that regard, and I look forward to getting out of the back yard and getting used to it further. :)

[dmz]

FinelyCruising, a couple tidbits:

 

- the focus limiter switch. this lens already focuses very quickly, but if you're shooting distant objects (further than 3m), you can tell the lens to never try to focus less than 3m. this speeds up focusing even more--great for shooting fast moving objects. (don't forget to change it back if you're trying to focus closer than 3m.)

 

- the image quality on this lens is great even starting at f4. no need to "stop it down" like you might do with other lenses.

[FinelyCruising]

Thank you dmz. I looked at the manual about the distance switch and with your explanation I might have it in terms I can absorb.

 

Right now I am finding this lens does not like shade, or a combination of bright and dark light in the same scene, at least not in a close shot. I was fine in the darker detail, but the bright, which might translate a highlight detail washout is something that I am going to have to consider.

 

I will try to use different settings for speed and perhaps change the ISO to see what starts to improve and settle the differences in the frame. Right now that's what I have to conquer in shaded shots. Color looks like it will be great, but not with highs and lows mixed. The old lens was much more forgiving. But I have the XTI, on a full frame it might be a different story entirely.

 

Bright open sunlight I will get to next week at the shore and see how that goes. And God love Cannon, I have a polarizer just for this lens since my other lenses are 77mm. And I really like using a polarizer. :cool:

 

Thanks for the tips!!! I need them.

[dmz]

On your XTI, I'd go with this:

- ISO 100

- Av mode, set at f/4

- metering: "evaluative" (the icon with two semi-circles surrounding a dot)

- make sure exposure compensation is set at "0"

 

On your 70-200:

- stabilizer ON

- stabilizer mode 1

- use the lens hood

 

Try that out. You should be good until the light gets really low. If you find your shots are blurry (because the shutter is too slow), just increase your ISO to 200 or 400.

 

edit: added "exposure compensation" note.

[trophy_23]

I have the 70-200 F4L IS and it is almost always my go to lens. It is mega sharp and crops in nicely!! Your going to love it!

[jff50]

I've got the 70-200 ƒ/4L IS. Excellent lens. You won't be disappointed.

 

As far as the ƒ/2.8 version goes, it's also an excellent lens. But it's significantly larger, heavier and more expensive. How badly do you need ƒ/2.8? Some argue that the ƒ/4 version has better image quality too.

 

good source for end-user reviews: http://www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/showproduct.php?product=304

I bought the f4.0 IS a couple of years ago and love it. I also looked at the 2.8 but decided to go with the 4.0 based on size/weight. As I recall the 2.8 without IS was about the same price as the 4.0 with IS. I also saw comments that the 4.0 has better image quality.