I have an opportunity to buy a f4 for a very nice price but the posts and replies here lately have convinced me it is not a good idea because the IS is so much better, or my 200mm would be best to use. Well, I have had to sell the 200mm due to expenses and am unable to make a decision on the f4 because of the above remarks.,and I sure can't afford the IS. What are some opinions, other than to refrain from buying anything:-)) I am receptive to any but snide remarks which accomplish nothing. Incidentally, right now I have a 17-50, 50/1.4 and Sigma 105.
Thanks,
Russell
I suppose I've missed the negative comments, but the 70-200mm f/4 L IS is a great lens -- one of the lenses I use most often lately. It does, of course, depend on the application. What are you shooting?
I've bought and sold that range many times. If I was going to try it again I would go after the F4 for around $450. IMO its a great value and great overall lens. However, I might not be the one to ask as I'm buying a 400 5.6 as I don't value IS on the shorter lenses.
Hey Russell. the 70-200 f4L is still a great lens/bang for the buck. It's an 8 yr. old
design but still a solid performer. The f4L IS version is the "latest and greatest" but
a hefty price comes with the optical improvements and 4 stop IS. If you're OK with
using a tripod for those times, I don't think you'd be disappointed with the IQ of the
non version.
Russell, trenchmonkey is right on the money here, the non-IS design may be old but its still a pretty rocking lens and value wise its hard to beat. Whether it'll be better for you than the 200mm prime depends on your usage. Do you need a zoom in that range?
I felt that a zoom would be much better last week at a trip to the zoo but I don't use a tripod, as Will suggested, and wonder about that aspect. As for subject matter, I take pictures of anything that gets in the way just about. I see beauty in all things so have no trouble finding a subject. Thanks
Russell Smith wrote:
I felt that a zoom would be much better last week at a trip to the zoo but I don't use a tripod, as Will suggested, and wonder about that aspect. As for subject matter, I take pictures of anything that gets in the way just about. I see beauty in all things so have no trouble finding a subject. Thanks
I believe that you would find the utility of the IS in this lens invaluable then, especially with the improved IQ, increased mobility it offers, and much higher percentage of keepers.
A gentleman alerted me on how to get this 70-200 IS for 900.00 shipped right now. As I am not sure exactly what is allowed to be posted here, I will be happy to provide you with the link and information that he gave me by PM if you would like to do likewise - it is from a reputable company. This negates quite a bit of the difference that price brings into the equation.
I have both F/4's. The IS version is terrific - probably Canon's best zoom. That said, the f/4 might have been the one that had that title just before the IS version - it is a great lens too.
In the past few months, I've started to realize that the 70-200/4L probably has a home (again) in my bag. The lens is very sharp and it's capable of producing great images. The lens is certainly comparable to the 200/2.8 - albeit a bit longer, a stop slower, off-white instead of black. The 70-200/4 also makes for the completion of a great trio: 17-40/4, 50/1.4, 70-200/4.
I have no experience with the 70-200/4 IS, but I trust trenchmonkey's words -- I'm sure the IS is stunning. But, as trenchmonkey suggests, the 70-200/4 is still a great buy. Indeed, given the introduction of the 70-200/4 IS, now seems like a great time to find a bargain on the 70-200/4 non-IS . I'm considering the IS, but I'll likely just go with another 70-200/4 non-IS.
Finally, I also really liked the close-focusing ability of the 70-200/4 (that's horse or cow/bull hair):
Nice one, Tom. Hang on to this for the Macro forum's July installment of "bob waar".
Russell's been pretty wired and strung out over this but I think he'll see your point.
f4 and no IS can be limiting, so you will probably be happy you paid extra. Though, I still wouldn't call the 70-200/4L an "old" design. Electronics are and sensors are still progressing quickly, but basic optics?
well, $450 you can't go wrong with it, if you don't like it sell it back to get the money back. I had the 70-200f4 in the past and enjoyed it very much. I could say the same thing about the 200f2.8.
Thanks to all. Tom I love that pic and if I thought it possible for me to capture the same quality with the f4 there would be no hesitation on my part as for buying.
Will, do you think I could use my monopod and shoot at 1/200 and higher to achieve good results?
1x FL would be a min. of 1/320th if you're steady on a 1.6 crop body. You should
fine with a monopod at 1/200th provided the subject is stationary and good technique
applied.
(Copy this entire link above, even though it doesn't appear to be together, it is.)
By registering you should qualify for another 10% off of 999.00 (including shipping). Your final price should be = 900.00.
Add the item (Canon 70-200 F4 IS) to your cart. then before you checkout, you'll see a place to enter coupons, promotions, rebates, click this and a box will pop up. By applying the code 'get10back' you get 100.00 additional off.
Let me know how it goes; they can of course at any time change the coupon code, but the procedure once registered should be exactly the same .
. I'm considering the IS, but I'll likely just go with another 70-200/4 non-IS.