 |
|
|
afterburner
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Mar 3, 2005
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Jul 4, 2005
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Really lighweight, high speed focus, white
|
|
Cons:
|
|
|
|
Went out on a limb and bought my first 2 canon L lenses together - the 70-200 F4 and 24-70 F2.8. The 70-200 is certainly sharper than my 24-70 and seems to spend most of its time on my camera. I LOVE THIS LENSE!! Even the F4 factor is not a concern as the quality at higher ISO's is excellent on my 20D. The light weight of this lense allows me to carry it around for hours on end without any arm/neck trouble. Looking for a lense in this focal length without having to starve yourself, then buy the 70-200 F4 - NOW!!!
|
|
 Jul 4, 2005
|
|
davidrwilliams
Offline
Buy and Sell: On
Registered: Nov 15, 2004
Location: Canada
Posts: 434
|
|
Review Date: Jul 3, 2005
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $550.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Great optics and build, light weight, portable, fast AF, compatible with Canon extenders, etc. etc.
|
|
Cons:
|
Nothing.
|
|
|
One of the best optical values in the Canon lineup. Excellent glass, very well built, in a light and convenient package that's about half the weight of either of the 2.8's.
Compared to the 200/2.8L that the 70-200/4L replaced, apart from slightly sharper edges and corners, the zoom was virtually the equal of the 200 with much better usability and flexibility.
My copy was slightly backfocusing on my 20D, but after a recalibration, it's AF is dead on at all focal lengths.
Highly recommended.
|
|
|
Jul 3, 2005
|
|
drain69
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jul 1, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Jul 1, 2005
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $580.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Great Construction. Light. Sharp Looking
|
|
Cons:
|
None
|
|
|
This was my first zoom lens. I am amazed at the clarity and great colors this lens produces. Awesome!!!
|
|
|
Jul 1, 2005
|
|
remasters10
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jul 27, 2003
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 46
|
|
Review Date: Jun 27, 2005
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Excellent sharpness wide open, beautiful colour rendition. Lightweight, great handling, very fast AF.
|
|
Cons:
|
Mine has picked up a little dust inside after a years use. An integral hood like the 300 F4L is would be great.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jun 27, 2005
|
|
afred
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Mar 19, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 710
|
|
Review Date: Jun 25, 2005
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $565.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
price, and range. fast and rather silent focusing motor.
|
|
Cons:
|
f/4, but it's not that much of a negative.
|
|
|
The 70-200 f/4 is a great lens, I tended using it on the 200 end mostly, but it works well for sports and portrature where you want a mixed amounts of shots. Fast and dead on focusing. This lens is vert light for being a 70-200. I commend canon for that, nice lens with a nice price.
|
|
|
Jun 25, 2005
|
|
stevenbernard
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Feb 9, 2005
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 353
|
|
Review Date: Jun 22, 2005
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $569.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Weight, price, sharpness, colour. Wha more can you ask for
|
|
Cons:
|
I want to say f4 but I might get a slap ;o)
|
|
|
I couldn't help laughing at the "slap" review. Only had this lense a short while but am blown away by it's sharpness. Photographed some goslings the other day and it captured their extremely fine down in perfect sharpness. All I can say is wow, and at the stupid price I paid for it, it is the most affordable L lense along with the 17-40. Don't thing tripod collar is an issue due to the lightness of the lense
|
|
|
Jun 22, 2005
|
|
Ernnez
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jun 17, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Jun 17, 2005
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Build, Price, Glass, Weight, Size, Case & Hood included
|
|
Cons:
|
Tripod collar price
|
|
|
This is my first L series lens. Just got it, tried it, LOVE IT!
The price is great for everyone looking to invest in quality lens. The clarity is great with a reasonable size.
The tripod collar is expensive, yet, if bundled with lens the cost wouldn't be as affordable up front. So light that no rush for it yet.
|
|
|
Jun 17, 2005
|
|
dilznik
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: May 9, 2003
Location: United States
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Jun 14, 2005
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $570.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharp, good glass, compact
|
|
Cons:
|
$114 for the tripod ring, lens hood makes it look like I'm a pilgrim hunting turkey.
|
|
|
First off, all of you clowns that are writing something like "F4 too slow" in the "cons" field should be slapped. It's not like it's not WRITTEN ON THE BOX. That's about as idiotic as saying "con- doesn't fit in my pocket."
That said, this lens does exactly what they say it'll do and it does it very well. Big long zoom? Check. High quality pictures? Check. f2.8? Nope. Because it's an f4! *slap* Fast focus? Check. Smooth zoom? Check. f2.8? Still not, it's still an f4, just like it says on the box! *slap*
|
|
|
Jun 14, 2005
|
|
bkhorii
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: May 16, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 116
|
|
Review Date: Jun 9, 2005
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $600.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharp, great color, light on the arm, light on the wallet
|
|
Cons:
|
Expensive tripod collar
|
|
|
I originally bought the 70-200 f/2.8 IS. Hefted it in the store, and thought "No problem." After 1-1/2 hours shooting little league handheld, I realized it was too heavy (OK, call me a wimp, but I want a lens my wife would be comfortable using as well).
Sent back the IS and got this little gem. Wow. Optics seem on par with its big brother, and it really is a joy to use. Just switched over from Nikon, and this lens was worth it. My $850 80-200 f/2.8 ED Nikkor can't even come close in terms of handling. USM and FTM with L glass for $600!!! Wow.
|
|
|
Jun 9, 2005
|
|
Dajon
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jun 8, 2005
Location: Canada
Posts: 6
|
|
Review Date: Jun 8, 2005
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $800.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
the perfect lens! sharp!/fast af/not too heavy/good price
|
|
Cons:
|
nothing!
|
|
|
I was a nikon user years back when this lens came out --when i saw this lens for the 1st time i thought "oh man-this lens could make me switch to Canon one day" --and when i got a chance to to sell my entire nikon kit last year i bought this 1st. It hasnt let me down either -i bought the tripod collar and use it when im shooting nature photography and i pop it off quickly when im doing handheld street photography. the lens hood it a bit big but reverses for storage. I bought a 67-62 stepdown ring and i use nikon 6T close up lens for great close-ups!
very sharp lens! and F4 aperture is fast enough for me (i find the 70-200f2.8 lenses to be too big)
|
|
|
Jun 8, 2005
|
|
M-E-P
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jun 6, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 939
|
|
Review Date: Jun 7, 2005
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $579.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
fast, sharp, sturdy.
|
|
Cons:
|
low light w/o flash is eh.
|
|
|
this is a great lens for the price. I recently upgraded to the 70-200 2.8 L because I shoot a lot of kids sports and this lens wasn't cutting it at the night games. If you can use aflash under low light conditions this is a great lens, if you are shooting in plenty of sunlight this is a great lens.
Ok, so this is a great lens!
PS. Mine will be on ebay shortly.
|
|
|
Jun 7, 2005
|
|
imeod
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: May 13, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 35
|
|
Review Date: Jun 6, 2005
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $579.00
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
Build, Picture Quality, Price
|
|
Cons:
|
Only a f4, a little long for me
|
|
|
This was my first L series lens and well, it got me hooked; I'm a L series snob now. The pictures were great and I liked using the lens, but I hated the speed of the small f4 aperture.
I loved this lens and everything I read said that this lens was the best. The only lenses better were the 2.8 and 2.8 IS. With that in mind, I waited until the right rebate and bought the IS version. They were right, it is a better lens. However, it is a lot heavier and bigger. It also costs three times as much; I'm an armature and still can't justify the cost.
The bottom line is that this lens is a bargain L-series lens and won't disappoint anyone looking for a great telephoto lens.
WARNING: THIS LENS MAY MAKE YOU AN L-SERIES SNOB!
|
|
|
Jun 6, 2005
|
|
divecj5
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Mar 2, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 258
|
|
Review Date: Jun 2, 2005
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $550.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
This is my first L glass and there is a big difference in my opinion between my previous lenses and the 70-200mm. I was amazed at the degree of clarity, color, and contrast the lens produced. It seems like it's built like a tank and I definitely plan on keeping this lens for a long time to come.
|
|
Cons:
|
No negatives to report since i must of gotten lucky and got a copy without backfocusing issues.
|
|
|
I feel if you're looking for your first L glass, which I was when I bought this lens, this is definitely the lens to get. You can't beat the price especially with the canon rebates.
|
|
|
Jun 2, 2005
|
|
fras
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Apr 25, 2005
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 1
|
|
Review Date: May 31, 2005
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
Comparatively light, sharp wide open, fast and accurate AF, nice build.
|
|
Cons:
|
Quite conspicuous with lense hood attached, backfocused at 70mm from new. There is a quiet clunk when AF locks, could be the distance scale - not sure.
|
|
|
This lense seems to be plagued with backfocus problems, specifically at shorter focal lengths. I tried 2 copies with the same problem before deciding to send it to Canon for calibration. It came back working perfectly but judging by the amount of people with the same issue there appears to be a serious QC problem at the factory. Be very weary of buying second hand, if it's out of warranty it will cost over $100(£50) to get Canon to calibrate. Don't be fooled by a focus chart as mine was spot on at 200mm but horribly out at 70mm.
Sometimes I do wish it was faster but there's no way I'm willing to lug around something like the Sigma 70-200 F2.8 (also tested), it's nearly double the weight. The Canon 200 2.8 prime is tempting me at the moment but I know I would miss the zoom, the F4 really does fill a hole that no other lense can give you.
Those things aside it really is an excellent lense, it feels good in my hand, everything is in the right place and as long as I do everything right the results are fantastic. Also works well with a cheap Tamron 1.4x TC, barely any noticeable image degredation center frame with slight sharpness/CA problems towards the edges(still very useable).
Overall highly recommended, you might have to be prepared to invest a little time to get it working correctly but the final product is worth it.
|
|
|
May 31, 2005
|
|
Jkruit
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: May 13, 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 127
|
|
Review Date: May 29, 2005
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $650.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Price, sharp, fast AF motor, relatively light, quality build.
|
|
Cons:
|
F4
|
|
|
I could not afford the f2.8 so I went with the F4. At times the F4 is a little slow, but the advantage is that compared to the F2.8, and the 2.8 is, the F4 is light and easy to carry all day. The usm motor is very silent and fast and the optics are supper sharp. This is a great lens for the money.
|
|
|
May 29, 2005
|
|
JohnJr
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jan 28, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 14
|
|
Review Date: May 24, 2005
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $569.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
quality construction.
|
|
Cons:
|
light but slightly long.
|
|
|
wow.
(no other words necessary)
|
|
|
May 24, 2005
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reviews
|
Views
|
Date of last review
|
|
379
|
788871
|
Apr 12, 2013
|
|
|
Recommended By
|
Average Price
|
|
93% of reviewers
|
$593.78
|
|
|
Build Quality Rating
|
Price Rating
|
Overall Rating
|
|
9.64
|
9.36
|
9.5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
