 |
|
|
Michael-M
Offline
[ X ]
Registered: Apr 21, 2002
Location: United States
Posts: 2698
|
|
Review Date: Jun 17, 2003
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $600.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
very light when compared to the 2.8 version.
very sharp, maybe too sharp, but i'll live with it.
|
|
Cons:
|
it started my addiction to L glass.
|
|
|
shot with it this weekend at my first wedding, and i haven't had to sharpen any of the pictures.
printed right from the card and people were as happy as i am with the results.
|
|
 Jun 17, 2003
|
|
Storm
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: May 21, 2003
Location: United States
Posts: 99
|
|
Review Date: Jun 12, 2003
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $550.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharp. Fast focus. Makes for a great portrait lens. Great first "L" lens. Just as sharp as the IS/2.8 version.
|
|
Cons:
|
None. Don't really need the extra stop.
|
|
|
I would definitely recommend this lens. I initially thought I would need the IS version, but I have not yet found this to be true. This lens is light and very usable a f/4.
|
|
|
Jun 12, 2003
|
|
hugoso
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jul 18, 2002
Location: China
Posts: 291
|
|
Review Date: May 27, 2003
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $550.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharpest zoom in this range in all focal lengths. comparible to primes!
light weight and compact.
|
|
Cons:
|
No IS version.
|
|
|
Put a IS on it and this lens will be a true killer.
|
|
|
May 27, 2003
|
|
coolest
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: May 27, 2003
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 2
|
|
Review Date: May 27, 2003
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $600.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Good lens quality, good looking (except the hood), light weight, nice build, great image quality!!
|
|
Cons:
|
Super expensive tripod mount ring, stupid looking hood, no weather proof, strange size for filter...
|
|
|
his is such a great lens, image quality is as good as 70-200 F2.8 (after reviewing it and reading many other people's reviews, I really can't say which one is better than which one).
It is really cool to carry around and not feeling tired... (I use EOS 1V, that's 1.3KG already with PB-E2), has a good zoom range, and the weight that my hand can hold it steady (like aiming a gun on someone) for a long period of time.
The bad news is... after struggled for 3 months, I decided not to buy the tripod mount ring... it's pretty much 1/3 of the cost of this lens... what's the point? I might as well save the money and contribute to my lens collection in the future!!
Another bad news is... I hate that 67mm thread size... I tried to sell my B+W UV Filter, which is not bad at all, but... no one seems to use a lens with such a filter size... (even within Canon EF lens family, I can't find more than 2 lens that uses 67mm filter...)
But hey, after all, with such a cheap price, that squeeze you into the "L" club, yet it gives you top image quality amongst zoom lens, what a bargin!!
|
|
|
May 27, 2003
|
|
Unregistered
Offline
Location: New Zealand
|
|
Review Date: May 27, 2003
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Good lens quality, good looking (except the hood), light weight, nice build, great image quality!!
|
|
Cons:
|
Super expensive tripod mount ring, stupid looking hood, no weather proof, strange size for filter...
|
|
|
This is such a great lens, image quality is as good as 70-200 F2.8 (after reviewing it and reading many other people's reviews, I really can't say which one is better than which one).
It is really cool to carry around and not feeling tired... (I use EOS 1V, that's 1.3KG already with PB-E2), has a good zoom range, and the weight that my hand can hold it steady (like aiming a gun on someone) for a long period of time.
The bad news is... after struggled for 3 months, I decided not to buy the tripod mount ring... it's pretty much 1/3 of the cost of this lens... what's the point? I might as well save the money and contribute to my lens collection in the future!!
Another bad news is... I hate that 67mm thread size... I tried to sell my B+W UV Filter, which is not bad at all, but... no one seems to use a lens with such a filter size... (even within Canon EF lens family, I can't find more than 2 lens that uses 67mm filter...)
But hey, after all, with such a cheap price, that squeeze you into the "L" club, yet it gives you top image quality amongst zoom lens, what a bargin!!
|
|
|
May 27, 2003
|
|
Richard N
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Apr 3, 2003
Location: United States
Posts: 146
|
|
Review Date: Apr 21, 2003
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $590.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Lightweight, excellent picture quality, focus limiter, compatible w/ TCs
|
|
Cons:
|
No IS, expensive accessories
|
|
|
I agree w/ my fellow reviewers, it is probably the best value in the current Canon lens line-up. You can't make it any sharper. Also very good performance with 1.4x II TC (picture quality and AF speed). Very useful on my backpacking/trekking trips, given its weight and rugged build. HIGHLY RECOMMENDED.
|
|
|
Apr 21, 2003
|
|
deanchi
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Apr 14, 2003
Location: United States
Posts: 27
|
|
Review Date: Apr 14, 2003
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $550.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
light, sharp, price
|
|
Cons:
|
no o-ring on mount
|
|
|
Its light weight and smaller size allows me to carry it in most bags.
Image quality is hard to tell apart from its f2.8 counterparts.
It's now one of my favorite portrait lenses.
Unbelievable value for the price!
|
|
|
Apr 14, 2003
|
|
mskad
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Sep 20, 2002
Location: United States
Posts: 115
|
|
Review Date: Apr 12, 2003
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $575.00
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
Performance "wide" open, construction, USM
|
|
Cons:
|
Inconvenient lens hood,
Expansive optional tripod mount ring
|
|
|
An excellent lens, build like a tank with outstanding (USM) AF performances. No need to stop with this lens (at least on my D60): sharp from f/4 to f/16, center to corners. Wonderful color rendition and contrast.
|
|
|
Apr 12, 2003
|
|
gurtch
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Sep 10, 2002
Location: United States
Posts: 496
|
|
Review Date: Apr 10, 2003
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Light Weight, Low Cost (relatively speaking), great performance.
|
|
Cons:
|
Haae not found any
|
|
|
I absolutly agree with the above comments. I am new to Canon equipment (I sold a bunch of Contax stuff-no viable digital body), and got this lens and Back Ordered the new 17~40 f4L. I use this lens when my wife and I go on long walks at the Jersey Shore and it's light weight and easy handling are wonderful. I just made a 10D ressed up 13"x19" and it is sharp, grain free, and contrasty........magnificent lens!
|
|
|
Apr 10, 2003
|
|
deevee
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Mar 12, 2002
Location: United States
Posts: 361
|
|
Review Date: Mar 30, 2003
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $550.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
light, sharp, inexpensive
|
|
Cons:
|
odd size filter
|
|
|
an excellent all around lens for film as well as digital...as sharp and contrasty as the f2.8 w/o the weight penalty...can be handheld, w/o need for a tripod socket...built solid like any L lens...nice bokeh for portraits...a must for landscape /hiking photography which is my main fotografy...but i've shot tennis with good results...only 1 <0 thing to say, the odd size filter requires u buy a new filter and filter adapter ...this is one lens in canon lineup that requires this odd size.
|
|
|
Mar 30, 2003
|
|
BigJoe
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Feb 13, 2002
Location: United States
Posts: 690
|
|
Review Date: Mar 30, 2003
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $600.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharp, Light, Excellent Build
|
|
Cons:
|
No IS
|
|
|
Canon's 70-200 f/4L is considered by many to be Canon's single best value in their lineup of lenses. I tend to agree. Here's why:
The 70-200 f/4L features optical quality among the best of any zoom Canon makes. It is contrasty, sharp, and has accurate color rendition. Also important to consider with any tele lens is the quality of its bokeh (out of focus rendition). With its 8-bladed aperture diaphram, this lens delivers buttery smooth out of focus background that will really enhance your shallow depth of field images.
Moving on to physical build, this lens is made to take a licking. It is the 50 f/1.8 II's antithesis. It features full metal body construction with a nice large rubber gnarled zoom ring and a smaller (but by no means "small") focus ring. Being the f/4 version of this lens, it is quite light to carry around, and also light enough that the camera's lens mount can support the weight alone without need for a tripod collar.
Full Time Manual focusing with a ring type USM AF drive is the order of the day here. Focusing is fast, silent and smooth. Need to focus manually? No problem- just turn the focus ring and you can override the AF, regardless of the AF/MF switch. Manual focusing is comfortable and smooth.
The only feature I can think of that would make this lens better is IS, but I doubt we will see that because it would take away from sales of the 70-200 f/2.8L IS. For the $580 price of this lens new, you can't find a better value in a high quality tele zoom. If you are looking for something in this range and don't need the extra light gathering power (or bulk) of the f/2.8 version, I HIGHLY RECOMMEND this lens.
|
|
|
Mar 30, 2003
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reviews
|
Views
|
Date of last review
|
|
379
|
786729
|
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
