 |
|
|
tomKphoto
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: May 1, 2007
Location: United States
Posts: 556
|
|
Review Date: Jul 8, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,025.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
size, reach, image quality
|
|
Cons:
|
no tripod ring included
|
|
|
I prefer carrying this lens all day to the legendary 2.8 version - the weight savings are dramatic (the F4 IS "little white" weighs less than a 24-70L).
Super sharp wide-open on EFs and full-frame
I was very disappointed that no tripod ring was included at this price.
|
|
 Jul 8, 2008
|
|
Dreamliner
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jul 11, 2007
Location: Greece
Posts: 320
|
|
Review Date: Jul 8, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Mobile, very nicepicture quality, very effective stabilizer.
|
|
Cons:
|
Not up to my expectations after reading all those reviews...
|
|
|
After reading all those reviews, I had very high expectations from this lens. People that I highly respect from the forum, gave it the best of the ratings and I decided to give it a chance. Since then, I had already tested 3 copies of this lens and and none of 'em conviced me because of quality control. The centering was so and so and sharpness was very high in some focal lengths and average in others. Overall I was dissapointed from this lens. The potential of the design was high but the chances to buy a product that wasn't up to the standards of the design team was also high.
Then I found two new copies (UV code) that were more promissing, and I decided to enter the testing (torture for me!) again. First I tested them on Provia and Velvia slide film. Then I borrowed a 5D, and tested both and my 2,8L non-IS with it. I also repeated the test with my 1D mkII and 40D. The digital results were very close to the film results and revealled some differences. I 've kept the best shots from each lens -the subject was a block of flats at 85 meters away because I intend to use it for aviation and landscape photography. My results: this lens is certainly better than my 2,8L at 70mm in most apertures ( except at f/4 ),it's slightly worse at 100mm up to f/5,6, it lags behind my 2,8L at 135, and it's on a par with it at 200mm. The only area that it really shines, is at closer distances where it's increased micro-contrast give the pictures it takes a punch ! Probably that's why "The-Digital- Picture" and "The Photozone" gave it so good reviews. It also vignietes and has more distorsion than the 2,8L. My ranking is based on it's average performance at at far and close distances, because if I had to rank it regarding it's optical performance at far distances I would gave it a 9. What I forgot to tell you is that I bought it already after selling my 180L which was collecting dust...and I 'm still searching for a better copy than the very good one I already own !
|
|
|
Jul 8, 2008
|
|
Peter Kotsa
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Nov 1, 2007
Location: Australia
Posts: 265
|
|
Review Date: Jul 7, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,000.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
weight, size, IS, IMAGE QUALITY
|
|
Cons:
|
$$$
|
|
|
What can I say, I have had all four versions of the 70-200 models.
This is by far the sharpest, and most pleasing to use (very lightweight)
The only downside of this beast is f4. In every other area this lens is a freak. Well done Canon, at last.
|
|
|
Jul 7, 2008
|
|
graemeak
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Mar 30, 2008
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 313
|
|
Review Date: Jul 5, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
White, weight (compared to f2.8), build quality, IS, super sharp, low distortion, versatile and just generally an awesome lens! Oh and it works with 1.4x!
|
|
Cons:
|
Not f2.8, but the weight difference justifies it for what I use it for the IS compensates enough.
|
|
When it comes to zooms, the 70-200mm L's are really great. Not only are they sharp, but they are very well built and super fast. There's no doubt about it, if you want superior quality and a lens that's gonna impress you a lot of the time - this is it.
If you're a gig photographer, go for the f2.8 IS, otherwise, go for this one! Its not too heavy and is fairly good to walk around with (although don't take it to the wrong neighbourhood or you might get mugged  )
For portraits its awesome! I'd say on a parr with my 50mm f1.4 and that's sharp! For flower photography, again its great, you can get a pretty shallow DOF at f4.
Basically - Buy it.
|
|
|
Jul 5, 2008
|
|
wbm1874
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Feb 14, 2008
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 1
|
|
Review Date: Jun 19, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Super-sharp, low distortion, great IS, reasonable size/weight.
|
|
Cons:
|
White! Have to pay extra for tripod ring.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jun 19, 2008
|
|
montymoe
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jul 8, 2006
Location: Canada
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Jun 18, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,064.95
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Wicked sharp corner to corner and at all ranges and apertures. Fast, lightweight and great IS. Solid build.
|
|
Cons:
|
None
|
|
|
I live in Canada where the price of this lens was over $1500 when I bought it. I was very happy, therefore, to get it from Amazon for just over two thirds that and without tax (don't tell the border gestapo!). Man, the things I can do with this lens! I bring it out to my daughter's soccer games where I get great action shots and look cool. Outdoor dusk and night time shots are great too. I tried it at my daughter's dance recital recently and found it to be just fast enough. If she becomes a star I might need something faster. You need a standard zoom like this and with 4 stops of IS and L quality you can't beat this lens. Ok, you could get the 2.8 but you'd better hire a shurpa to carry all your gear.
|
|
|
Jun 18, 2008
|
|
halse
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Oct 29, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 150
|
|
Review Date: May 29, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,000.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
consistent, has a very high percentage of keepers and is quite versatile
|
|
Cons:
|
not 2.8
|
|
|
like most of the others I have found this to be a superb lens.... went through the usual 2.8/4 comparison and rented both and went with the 4 since I found that the weight of the 2.8 more than overcame the extra light.... the 4 is consistent, has a very high percentage of keepers and is quite versatile and use it for the kids' baseball & soccer as well as for flowers and some portraits... works well with the 1.4 Canon teleconverter as well (in good light)
|
|
|
May 29, 2008
|
|
Bert 1969
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: May 13, 2008
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: May 16, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $950.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Good build, weight, great colours and contrast, fast, very good IS and sharp, sharp and sharp again straigth from f/4.0.
|
|
Cons:
|
IS little bit loud but this is hardly a negative point considering the positive aspects.
|
|
|
What a joy to use this lens, it is the best zoom lens of Canon I've ever owned. Before this lens I had the 70-200 f/2.8 IS.
Then a friend of my gave my his f/4.0 IS version to try out and I was really amazed of the perfomance of this lens.
This lens outperforms the f/2.8 version lens when there both on f/4.0 especially on 200mm.
Not forgetting to mention the weight almost half the weigth of the f/2.8 version and that is very nice when you walk around for a couple of hours mounted on a EOS 1D.
Sold the f/2.8 and bought the f/4.0 version.
If you not absolutly need f/2.8 this is the lens to buy.
HIGHLY RECOMMENDED.
|
|
|
May 16, 2008
|
|
genefixer
Offline
Image Upload: On
Registered: Jan 22, 2007
Location: United States
Posts: 6178
|
|
|
Apr 11, 2008
|
|
sven rose
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jul 9, 2007
Location: Switzerland
Posts: 17
|
|
Review Date: Apr 7, 2008
|
Recommend? |
Price paid: Not Indicated
|
|
Pros:
|
everything, the more I use it, the more i like it
|
|
Cons:
|
white color
|
|
Excellent for birding and butterfly:
http://svenrose.smugmug.com/gallery/4675361_bLsy8/1/276328891_N2i6P
All pictures taken with this extraordinary lens. The light wasn't bright, but with this lens higher ISO pictures seems to turn-out better then with the other lens I have.
|
|
|
Apr 7, 2008
|
|
Santai
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Mar 19, 2008
Location: Germany
Posts: 2
|
|
Review Date: Mar 20, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,000.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Outstanding Image Quality, Image Stabilizer, Weight
|
|
Cons:
|
None
|
|
|
I was looking for a zoom to complement my 17-40 f/4 and 24-70 f/2.8 lenses. Given the excellent reviews of the 70-200 f/4 IS I bought it and am still impressed with the image quality. Sharpness, color and contrast are truly outstanding. The build quality is perfect.
I guess that all four versions of the 70-200 are a safe bet when it comes to image quality (I know it for this one). Which version you pick depends on your individual requirement. I picked the f/4 with image stabilizer over the 2.8 versions for it’s lighter weight (I was surprised how light it feels, given it’s size) and price. The IS gives me enough confidence in lower light situations when I do not carry the tripod.
|
|
|
Mar 20, 2008
|
|
terminator
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jan 28, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 272
|
|
Review Date: Mar 19, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Everything
|
|
Cons:
|
hope it is bigger, or shorter ;-)
|
|
|
This defines the "dream lens". IQ is even better than many L primes I used. Really, nothing to complain about it. If I have to, I hope it is either a little bigger or shorter because I feel I am holding a chalk stick in my hand!
|
|
|
Mar 19, 2008
|
|
Jman13
Online
Buy and Sell: On
Registered: May 2, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 8076
|
|
Review Date: Mar 5, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,059.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Incredible sharpness at all apertures, Image stabilization is phenomenal, light weight, very fast autofocus
|
|
Cons:
|
None
|
|
|
Quite possibly the perfect zoom lens. This lens is absolutely phenomenal in the image quality department. It is tack sharp, contrasty, with saturated colors at all apertures and all focal lengths. I am not exaggerating when I say that it is as sharp and contrasty as my old 135 f/2L, when BOTH lenses are at f/4.
The lens is light enough to carry at all times. Build quality is typical L class...excellent. The image stabilizer on this lens is amazing...I'm able to get tack sharp shots at 70mm and 1/6 sec, and 200mm and 1/25 sec. Outstanding performance. Autofocus is quick and accurate.
I owned the truly excellent Canon 80-200mm f/2.8L prior to this lens, and the 70-200 f/4L IS is better in every single respect except for maximum aperture, but given the light weight and IS, that's more than a great tradeoff for what I shoot.
The 70-200 f/4L IS is the very best zoom lens I have ever mounted to a camera, and I've tried a LOT of lenses. Superb.
|
|
|
Mar 5, 2008
|
|
oggywaffler
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Feb 29, 2008
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Feb 29, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
This a great lens.
|
|
Cons:
|
None.
|
|
|
Once you put this lens on your camera you will not want to take it off. It is sharp sharp sharp. Get one you will not be sorry.
|
|
|
Feb 29, 2008
|
|
ch4rli3
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Feb 17, 2008
Location: United States
Posts: 9
|
|
Review Date: Feb 27, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $984.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharp, lightweight, solid build quality
|
|
Cons:
|
doesn't come with a tripod collar
|
|
|
|
|
|
Feb 27, 2008
|
|
robbrowett
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Feb 22, 2008
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Feb 22, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,000.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Absolutely Love this lens. It's a fantastic lens and gives 10/10 results every time.
|
|
Cons:
|
Nothing but minor gripes
|
|
Got this in the U.S so it worked out half the UK price.
What's to say? It's a fantastic balance between weight and length but gives A+ results every time in almost all conditions. It's easy to carry as a day lens. Brilliant lens for close work. I've even has some good results with extension tubes.
Would be better if f/2.8 but you pay the premium for that! Minimum focus is 1.4M which is i tad too far but it is a tele lens so it's not that bad.
Works wonderfully with 1x4 II extender. AF is only about 15% slower and + 1 stop doesn't make a slight bit of difference outdoors.
Check out some examples at www.robbrowett.net/photos.
I'll post more pics as I get chance. Please check back
On the whole I can't recommend this enough.
|
|
|
Feb 22, 2008
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reviews
|
Views
|
Date of last review
|
|
221
|
410729
|
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
