 |
|
|
malla1962
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Mar 25, 2005
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 2
|
|
Review Date: Feb 28, 2009
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Weight, sharpnes,IS,contrast and weather sealing.
|
|
Cons:
|
price
|
|
|
I needed to cut some weight from my bag for travel so got this lens
to save me taking my 2.8Lis on long flights. I am not a great lover of zooms but sometimes I need to use them, When canon made this zoom they got it right, and I like everything about it, some people have commented about the lack a tripod ring but I don't think it neads one, lets face it the 24-70L hos no tripod mount and weighs
a lump more.
|
|
 Feb 28, 2009
|
|
veroman
Offline
Image Upload: On
Registered: Aug 19, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 3519
|
|
Review Date: Feb 26, 2009
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharpness
Clarity
Ease of handling
Image Stabilization
|
|
Cons:
|
None
|
|
|
I will only add the following to what others have said about the remarkable 70-200 f/4L IS:
There is a certainly clarity to the images that isn't quite matched by any of my other Canon lenses. It's as if someone stripped away a slight haze that has existed between my 1Ds II and some of my images.
This lens delivers truly stellar performance. If f/4 is fast enough for you, then have no doubt about the 70-200 f/4L IS.
|
|
|
Feb 26, 2009
|
|
ajitpalsingh
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jan 27, 2009
Location: India
Posts: 0
|
|
|
Feb 2, 2009
|
|
willis
Offline
Buy and Sell: On
Registered: Jul 23, 2005
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 457
|
|
Review Date: Jan 26, 2009
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharper than most primes across whole zoom range, lightweight, excellent build.
|
|
Cons:
|
f4, no tripod collar included.
|
|
|
No complaints about this one, it's as good as everyone says.
|
|
|
Jan 26, 2009
|
|
Hitendra
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Feb 16, 2007
Location: India
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Jan 26, 2009
|
Recommend? |
Price paid: $1,160.00
|
|
Pros:
|
Exceptional in all respect, a perfect 10! Its like having multiple primes in one package!! Can be successfully use as macro lens.
|
|
Cons:
|
Canon don’t have 67mm Close-Up lens for this zoom, you have no choice but to use Extension tubes (inherent light loss) for macro work. Tripod collar should have been included.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jan 26, 2009
|
|
ComairCRJ700
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Mar 14, 2008
Location: United States
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Dec 22, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,100.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharp, Light weight, IS well-performing, great travel lens for telephoto needs.
|
|
Cons:
|
Tripod collar not included and is a little pricey.
|
|
|
This lens is very sharp across the focal range and all apertures and is only aided by the effective IS system. Being f/4.0 limited the bokeh and OOF rendering can be somewhat harsh at times. Excellent for travel and cityscape photography. The tripod collar is not included and is a little overpriced at $149.99. A word of warning - the IS needs a few seconds to settle down as it were once activated.... a quick depress of the shutter may lead to out-of-focus shots if the IS is still stabilizing. Highly recommended - wish Canon would update the 70-200 f/2.8 IS with the upgraded optics and IS along the lines of this lens.
|
|
|
Dec 22, 2008
|
|
robbrowett
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Feb 22, 2008
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Dec 5, 2008
|
Recommend? |
Price paid: Not Indicated
|
|
Pros:
|
Love it. See previous review.
|
|
Cons:
|
|
|
So, I've been using this lens for about 12 months now and love it! Sharp, light and excellent quality.
Check out some examples at http://www.robbrowett.net/gallery/home/Default.aspx?action=gallery
Works wonderfully with 1.4x extender.
|
|
|
Dec 5, 2008
|
|
oajlu
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Nov 19, 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 170
|
|
Review Date: Nov 20, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
very sharp, fast focus, excellent build, IS
|
|
Cons:
|
a little bit expensive, but still accepetable.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nov 20, 2008
|
|
otherworld
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Oct 21, 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Oct 27, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
weight, sharp, IS, build, IQ... its all there and more
|
|
Cons:
|
no mount ring, but considering the quality vs. the price i cant say im really that disappointed.
|
|
|
Had originally picked up the 24-70 f/2.8 (copy: UW0912), brought it home and immediately took some snaps. Then popped my 18-55 kit lens back on and took similar shots... which had the better IQ? The kit lens.
Given the level of my excitement when I brought it home and seeing the kit lens out perform the 24-70 2.8, most would be pretty pissed. Glad it happened to me... it provided a moment of pause to reconsider which lens to pick up and which would better complement kit --the 24-70 or 70-200. I knew there were QA problems with the 70, but ultimately decided it wasnt the right lens to build my Canon gear with regardless of the flaw and that I can do without the 24-70 f/2.8, unless an IS version is released...
Took the 24-70 back to the store and they confirmed the it was off. Picked up the 70-200 f/4 IS and the "Classic Plastic" (50 f/1.8) as its replacement without spending any more. Couldnt be happier --though funny how the $1300 lens and the $100 both provide a similar sense of joy.
|
|
|
Oct 27, 2008
|
|
fabianfoo
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jul 18, 2005
Location: Australia
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Oct 25, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Excellent sharpness, light-weight, good contrast, very effective image stabilisation.
|
|
Cons:
|
None.
|
|
This is my favourite Canon lens and probably Canon's best overall zoom lens. It remains the reason why switching to Nikon is not a real option for me. The best and most versatile portrait lens out there.
I love it because:
- it is sharp and light
- it is versatile (70-200mm covers a wide composition range on both crop and full-frame DSLRs)
- it focuses very quickly
- the image stabilisation is superb (I get usable shots at 1/50sec at 200mm).
Bokeh is not as smooth and creamy as the f2.8 version (I used to own that as well) but you're also paying nearly double the price and carrying double the weight for the f2.8 version.
The low-light, action-stopping advantage of the f2.8 version shrinks with every new generation of DSLR - images are now usable at ISO 6400, who knows where we'll be in 2 years, ISO 25,600?
My advice - don't worry about the extra f-stop and save yourself some cash and neck strain - get this f4 IS version instead.
Some photos (paired with a 5D by the way):
http://www.flickr.com/photos/fabian-f/tags/70200f4l/
|
|
|
Oct 25, 2008
|
|
Breach
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Apr 7, 2005
Location: Bulgaria
Posts: 3
|
|
Review Date: Oct 2, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,100.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharp! L Quality. Reasonable price.
|
|
Cons:
|
f/4, but hey, does that really count?
|
|
|
I was really torn between f/4 IS and f/2.8 IS... Finally I got f/4. For low light situations I'm sticking to primes. This is probably the sharpest zoom Canon has. Its sharpness is off the charts, definitely puts a lot of primes to shame. This lens is definitely sharper than my 17-55 f/2.8 IS and 85mm f/1.8 and I'm positive it's sharper than 70-200 2.8 IS at equivalent FL/apertures. I have read that at MFD some people were getting softness at f/4 in different extreme ranges. My copy is very slightly softer at f/4 70mm at MFD. Really only visible at 100% and a lot of pixel peeping. Compared to 2.8 IS this lens is light. Build quality is very good. If you're at a dilemma whether to get 70-200 f/4 IS or non-IS, get the IS version, definitely pays off, really no matter what your shooting style is. 2.8 vs. f4 dilemma is hard. If you are a reporter, shoot primarily inside no flash or shoot stage performances, by all means get the 2.8 one. Everyone else should get this one. For outdoor portraits I find myself reaching for the zoom rather than the 1.8 prime, DoF and all... Enough said.
|
|
|
Oct 2, 2008
|
|
Dawei Ye
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Sep 14, 2007
Location: Australia
Posts: 3562
|
|
Review Date: Sep 26, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharpness (Generally), Overall LACK of aberrations (CA, Distortion, Vignetting), IS effectiveness
|
|
Cons:
|
MFD problems at long end, Non petal shaped hood (nitpick)
|
|
Date Code: UV0203
Price: $1629 AUD (now much cheaper)
Purchase Date: November 07
I have had a mixed history with this lens, and whilst I don't want to retell my life story I've discussed some issues about this lens that I've come across in my personal experience.
Let me say up front that all things considered this lens is crazy sharp. This lens is as sharp as the 85L and 50 f/1.8 II stopped down. There's no point trying to split these 3 lenses in sharpness...they are all crazy sharp (though I think the 85L gets the nod for crispness).
When I first got this lens, I had major softness issues with it on my 400D. Part of the softness was due to the MFD problem I describe below, but it was more than that..my 400D just didn't like this lens.
Then I got a 40D and wow! Day and night difference. On a 40D this lens is sharp, sharp, sharp. Since calibration, my 400D likes this lens better too so maybe it was a focus issue  but psychologically I still perfer the 40D for this lens.
On the issue of sharpness, I'm a pixel peeper who presses the "View at 100%" button on every photo I take. I can tell you that my lens, even when examined at 100% crop DOES NOT IMPROVE when stopping down. It is as sharp at f/8 as it is at f/5.6 as it is at f/4. I can't be bothered testing this at all focal lengths but in my quick tests I stand by this. I do not hesitate to use this lens at f/4 for sharpess reasons (I hesitate for dof reasons)
I hear some say that it isn't as good at 70mm especially wide open. To be honest I don't use it at 70mm much but at the times I have, I haven't noticed anything particularly bad at 70mm. Photozone says this lens is best at 135
Sports? I'm not sports photographer but on the one occasion I did try AI Servo at a Lacrosse game on my 40D, when I did my bit properly in keeping the focus point on the target, the in focus rate was in the 80%+ region, and those that locked on were tack sharp. When I say tack sharp, I mean that 100% crops are tack sharp.
My only disappointment is its well documented poor performance at the long end at MFD. For some reason my copy of the lens, as well as many other copies, is terrible at the 200mm end, at the MFD, especially when wide open. (Some users claim to have no problems with this regard though, but many believe this is a design compromise).
It would have been great to use this IS lens for flower shots etc. when walking around instead of having to cart around a Macro Lens.
As for IS, let me just say that if you are considering the 70-200 f/4L non IS version, DON'T! Get this one with IS. You WILL regret not having IS. I would not get a non IS version of any lens if I could help it, or if my primary interests were fast action sports or if I exclusively used a tripod or monopod and wanted to save some money on the lens.
But do I hear you saying the 70-200 f/4L is a better value?
I disagree. Where is the value of the 70-200 f/4L when you have to get a monopod or tripod to use it in lower light. With the state of the art IS unit on this lens I can handhold at 1/15 at 200mm. With the non IS version that is a near impossibility. A 4 stop advantage is absolutely real.
In summary: Will I ever sell this lens? No. Would I rebuy it if I had my time over again? Yes.
|
|
|
Sep 26, 2008
|
|
Ralph Conway
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jul 31, 2008
Location: Germany
Posts: 3611
|
|
Review Date: Sep 4, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Perfect! The best lens I ever had. Sharp like hell. IS is fantastic. And its weight is a great advantage when you walk around 8 hours a day with your cam. Excellent price, too
|
|
Cons:
|
That Canon wants to charge me an additional 15% for a simple (piece of shit) tripod ring is an unbelieveable shame. Thats why I did not rate the price at 10 only.
|
|
|
I wanted to purchase its small brother just when it came out. I did a test and got a perfect sharp image open and using IS at 1/20th.
Than it was mine. I added the additional 350 with kissing hands.
I shot a couple of times with the 1 stop higher big brother IS. Fine, too. But this lens is better. Its weight is half less, the missing stop in low light is fixred by the great IS in 80% (except fast moving objects only. But what I can not fix with a 20th is seldom caught much better with a 40th).
Today when bodys reach the point offering affordable ISO 1600 this Lens belongs to ALL my needs. Build/and handling is perfect.
IQ is fantastic. the sharpness over the whole area is a dream. That lens saved me several hundrets in primes 85/100/200 2.8!
Its worth any cent. The only point of critic is that canon sells the tripod ring (one do not really need - the lens is made for shooting handheld - but some people use tripods) seperate (else as with 70-200 2.8). At a horible bargain of 130,-- (near 15%). That is a shame for an add on that surely does not cost more than 3-5 in production. Instead they might have kept the lether bag that I never needed. The included lenshood looks like a flower pot and could have been shaped mor betaifull, I gess.
|
|
|
Sep 4, 2008
|
|
Peter Kirk
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Sep 25, 2004
Location: Australia
Posts: 303
|
|
Review Date: Aug 5, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,200.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
sharp as, lightweight, IS
|
|
Cons:
|
$$
|
|
|
you get what you pay for here.
Excellent lens, a must have lens if quality is your driving force.
shaper and light than its 2.8 big brother.
|
|
|
Aug 5, 2008
|
|
JustForFun
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jul 23, 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Jul 23, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,050.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Build Quality, Compact, Fast AF, Sharp, Good Contrast, 2-mode IS (4 stops)
|
|
Cons:
|
A bit expensive as compared to the non-IS version
|
|
|
One of my favourite zoom L lens at this moment. Sharp, Good Contrast, Fast AF, 2 mode IS and good build quality. Makes you feel that you have spend every dollar well but the pocket still hurts.
If there was a bad side to it, I don't really like the humming sound of the IS. Some call it assuring, I call it annoying. Anyhow, humming does not neccessarily means its working.
Looking through the viewfinder is a far better means to confirm that the IS is working. To do this, switch the IS off, point your AF spot on a specific spot on the image and then turn it On again. The IS locks on and you can see the small erratic movements of camera shake slowing down.
|
|
|
Jul 23, 2008
|
|
godfreyz
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Feb 3, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 963
|
|
Review Date: Jul 22, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,025.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Very sharp, great colrs and an excellent IS.
|
|
Cons:
|
None
|
|
|
Hard to write enough superlatives for this lens. Very sharp, incredible colors, fast focus, and very lightweight. I also have the the 70-200 F4L non IS lens. I believe that this lens is sharper if that is possible. The IS puts this great lens over thetop. Highly recommend this lens to anyone.
|
|
|
Jul 22, 2008
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reviews
|
Views
|
Date of last review
|
|
221
|
409599
|
Apr 18, 2013
|
|
|
Recommended By
|
Average Price
|
|
90% of reviewers
|
$1,080.03
|
|
|
Build Quality Rating
|
Price Rating
|
Overall Rating
|
|
9.72
|
8.76
|
9.7
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
