 |
|
|
Per Zangenberg
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jan 17, 2007
Location: Denmark
Posts: 11
|
|
 Aug 9, 2007
|
|
Binh Ly
Offline
Buy and Sell: On
Registered: Feb 24, 2007
Location: United States
Posts: 3172
|
|
Review Date: Aug 6, 2007
|
Recommend? |
Price paid: Not Indicated
|
|
i've previously posted a review of this excellent lens. just to give you an idea of the quality of this lens, i put the 1.4 canon teleconverter on and took it out to the philly zoo yesterday.
http://flickr.com/photos/blypix/sets/72157601246635381/detail/
all shots are were hand held with the 1.4 tc on all the time. notice that some of the shots (monkeys) were made at iso 1600 and the shutter was still not fast enough for handholdability but the IS saved me on those shots.
as you can see, even with the tc on, the pic degradation is minimal to none. this is a very high quality lens that produces excellent results.
|
|
|
Aug 6, 2007
|
|
Erwin Foo
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: May 3, 2007
Location: Singapore
Posts: 0
|
|
|
Aug 5, 2007
|
|
oek2
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Aug 9, 2005
Location: Canada
Posts: 6
|
|
Review Date: Aug 4, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
light weight, sharp, fast focus.
|
|
Cons:
|
bit pricey.
|
|
|
amazing lens, very sharp in all focal range, also very light compare to my 24-70.
|
|
|
Aug 4, 2007
|
|
DLP
Offline
Buy and Sell: On
Registered: Apr 17, 2007
Location: United States
Posts: 2432
|
|
Review Date: Jul 30, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $950.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Light, Stunning IQ, BQ, IS
|
|
Cons:
|
Cheap lens case, Tri-pod ring not included
|
|
|
I was so undecided between the F4 IS and the f2.8 IS that I bought both to compare side by side. For me the F4 IS was the clear winner. All images I tested were just as sharp if not sharper than the f2.8 IS. The newer generation IS on the F4 closes the normal disparity between f4 and 2.8. Sadly at the loss of some shutter speed. The lens is light and the AF is blistering fast. A real joy to use. Also noteable in the two copies I compared the f4 IS displays no visible CA even at 100% crop.
|
|
|
Jul 30, 2007
|
|
John Squillace
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Sep 30, 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 3
|
|
Review Date: Jul 22, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Stunning sharpness; breathtaking color rendition; astonishingly effective image stabilization.
|
|
Cons:
|
None.
|
|
|
This is the first review I've ever posted here; I simply can't keep quiet about this lens any longer. Utterly sublime in use and delivery; an extension of your mind and hand in every sense, with achingly beautiful output.
With this lens, suddenly, I am Kertesz - I see the thing; I feel the thing; I make the thing.
You must please buy one immediately.
|
|
|
Jul 22, 2007
|
|
EveningSky
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Feb 6, 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 209
|
|
Review Date: Jul 14, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,000.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Very sharp, very good contrast, IS really works!
|
|
Cons:
|
None
|
|
|
Truly a remarkable lens. Supprisingly sharp, especially considering that the lens contains 20 elements. Even at F4, very sharp. IS really works. Tripod mount is expensive, but a quality product and very useful. Wish that there was a mark on the lens for portrait mode to line up with the tripod mount. Lens is relatively light, in comparison to the F2.8 models in this focal lenght, helpful to me and my back. Highly recommended, truly a remarkable engineering achievement (IMO).
|
|
|
Jul 14, 2007
|
|
Underground
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: May 21, 2004
Location: Canada
Posts: 17
|
|
Review Date: Jul 13, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
As everyone has already stated color, contrast and sharpness is fantastic.
|
|
Cons:
|
None.
|
|
|
Do I wish this lens was less expensive? Yes, of course! I wish my car was cheaper as well. If you make your living or even just some extra $$$ from photography then this lens is for you. I shoot events and enviromental portraits so this lens is just about as good as it gets. VERY sharp at f4, easy to hold and I.S. I really could not ask for anything more. It is worth every penny.
|
|
|
Jul 13, 2007
|
|
sven rose
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jul 9, 2007
Location: Switzerland
Posts: 17
|
|
Review Date: Jul 9, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
sharp, colours, contrast
|
|
Cons:
|
would prefere to have it in black, quite impressive with the huge lens hood on it.
|
|
It is the best lens I have with best and most reliable results.
Works well with Kenko Teleplus 300 TC 1.4X and / or extension tubes for macros.
The IS ist amazing. I very shortly use before a non-IS, non L-Zoom 70-200 f/4 - what a difference, what more versatility with IS. And of course nothing to compare in terms of IQ
The IS is also very useful when taking macros with extension tubes or +3 close-up lens, when I need to step down the aperture. So the 70-200 L f/4 IS becomes my macro-lens.
(with extension tube of 20mm:
http://svenrose.smugmug.com/gallery/3077963 - 167943605
with Hoya +3 lens: http://svenrose.smugmug.com/gallery/3077963 - 167957796
both without any processing other then resizing to 1600x1200)
I read one review that compare the sharpness of the lens with other high-quality lenses ( canon 85 f/1.2, 100 f/2, 135 f/2.0, Sigma 70-200 f2.8)the result was, that from f/4 to f/12 the zoom lens is quite equal, only the 85 f/1.2 was a little sharper. Considering this, it's worth the high price, because if you don't' need greater aperture than f/4 you don't need primes (without IS!) in the range from 70-200mm.
p.s.: finaly I find the URL of the review: http://www.slrgear.com/reviews/showproduct.php/product/999/cat/11
|
|
|
Jul 9, 2007
|
|
anil kumar
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jun 25, 2007
Location: India
Posts: 4
|
|
Review Date: Jul 9, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Great color, contrast and handling capabilities
|
|
Cons:
|
Seriously searching for them.
|
|
|
Simply a superb lens. This is the first time i got my hands on a 70-200 L zoom. Weight is not at all an issue. Build quality is top notch. At all apertures, this lens quality is great. Sharpness, contrast, color u name it. only limit is my photographic abilities. If u have the means and want to take ur photo IQ to the next level, i strongly suggest buying this lens.
|
|
|
Jul 9, 2007
|
|
Binh Ly
Offline
Buy and Sell: On
Registered: Feb 24, 2007
Location: United States
Posts: 3172
|
|
Review Date: Jul 4, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,000.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
sharp, light, contrasty
|
|
Cons:
|
|
|
i've had this lens for almost a year now. i use this primarily for portraits, zoos, and flower shots. this lens is sharp and contrasty right out of the box. i love this lens as much as the canon 17-55, i.e. i know it will give me consistent and good results whenever i use it.
the following set of pics are some sample closeups that i've recently done using this lens (except for a few shots, most of these were taken with the 70-200):
http://www.flickr.com/photos/blypix/sets/72157600642625653/detail/
i did try the f/2.8 version a couple of times at the store and found out that that one is a real brick to carry and handhold. i know some people think the f/2.8 feels like the "real" lens but i do a lot of walking (sometimes continuously for 4-6 hours a day) and the f/2.8 is not something that i would want to lug around unless i have at least a monopod. other than the missing extra stop, the f/4 seems every bit as good as the f/2.8 - at half the weight of the f/2.8.
|
|
|
Jul 4, 2007
|
|
Bob Seifert
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Oct 15, 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Jul 3, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $984.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharp, lighter than it looks, not at all obtrusive.
|
|
Cons:
|
none
|
|
|
Wanted IS in an L @ 70-200. I am pleased that I went with the f4 over the f2.8. If for any other reason that I was able to buy B+W UV, B+W CP, Canon 2x TC and the tripod lens mount ring. The accessories were the difference in price between the f4 and f2.8.
I'm old and not a pro so I'm happy.
|
|
|
Jul 3, 2007
|
|
Gaspar Andres
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jun 24, 2007
Location: China
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Jun 24, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,000.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharp, IS, bokeh, low weight
|
|
Cons:
|
Quality really varies from lens to lens
|
|
|
Well, after reading this and other forums I was decided but also a bit concerned about the Quality Control from Canon.
Fortunatelly, I live now in China, so here if you spend 1000 bucks on a lens (which is what the shop attendant will make in 2 years) you are allowed to hang around and bother the shop far beyond the point where in US or Europe they would "send you home".
I took a test paper, hang it into the shop wall, and set up a tripod, my 30D, and tested 5 brand new 70-200 f4 L IS that I unsealed myself for more than 3 hours.
2 of them looked ok but had defects (1 had a strange defect in the lens close to the camera, like a coating problem, the other one had dust inside the outer lens).
From the other 3 there was a clear Best: the other 2 were respectively soft at 70-135 and 200 mm.
The one I picked was simply amazingly sharp at all ranges, and I could prove it consistantly in the test.
I shoot with a good tripod (from the shop :-), remote switch, mirror locked-up, 3 focal distances (70-135-200) and 5 shoots per focal distance, with and w/o IS (although the IS "test on a tripod" turned out irrelevant for obvious reasons) . No room for missinterpretation, same camara, light, person, day, target test paper, distance, simply all taken care.
I even code the names so that I would not know which lens shoot what photos to avoid a placebo effect.
I could test in a very well controlled environmen and just can tell you that even if all the lens were kind of OK, there are clear differences, and some are good, some are awesome.
I agree with the people that was not happy to pay 1000 bucks and needing to change the lens several times.
Maybe after this report more people will ask Canon to test lens before buying, but somehow they put themselves into this, isn't it?
|
|
|
Jun 24, 2007
|
|
JohnJ80
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: May 11, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 5645
|
|
Review Date: Jun 22, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,000.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharp, great IS, light weight and very portable.
|
|
Cons:
|
price.
|
|
|
Very sharp. Hard to believe but lens to lens with my non IS version, it is sharper.
The newest IS from Canon is really quite amazing. You an handhold this lens with ease. It is a wonderful travel lens and probably Canon's best zoom out right now.
J.
|
|
|
Jun 22, 2007
|
|
Alexander Adin
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Apr 20, 2007
Location: Sweden
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Jun 21, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Image quality, Build quality, Circular aperture, Size, Amazing image stabilization and Versatility.
|
|
Cons:
|
The included lens bag is close to useless.
|
|
|
This is my first L-lens for my Canon 30D and I, as many other, now have a bad case of the L-fever. The lens is amazing in every aspect.
I had a hard time figuring out which one of the 70-200mm lenses I would get but went for this one in the end, and I'm very glad I did. Since I basicaly do all photography outdoors I simply don't need the f/2.3 for light sensetivity. I at least haven't come up with any scenario where I have needed it so badly I just couldn't crank up the ISO one step.
If you are wondering about the bokéh I think it's incredible, the circular apreture sure gives the blur a good look. And yes, there is enough blur to isolate objects if you go up to the tele part of the lens. No doubt about it.
And I have to say that the image stabalizer that is in this lens is amazing! I had no idea that they could make something so efficient at reducing shakes, taking pictures at 200mm without having to care for you shaking is very nice I assure you.
The only think that dissapointed me was that the lens bag they included is really useless. It's just a leathery pouch in which you can carry the lens around, it doesn't protect the lens even from minor impacts or events like that. In my oppinion they should put at least some kind of padding inside it just like sigma do with their EX series of lenses.
Still, this is a great lens and I would recomend it to anyone looking for a 70-200mm.
|
|
|
Jun 21, 2007
|
|
dbren
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Dec 6, 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 57
|
|
Review Date: Jun 17, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,100.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
A feeling of quality comes from using this lens. The pictures are sharp and very high quality.
|
|
Cons:
|
No tripod collar, but then I haven't been tempted to use a tripod yet.
|
|
|
At first I thought the lens was not focusing well and some shots were not that good. But then I got used to the narrow depth of field from some shots, adjusted and started to get some great pictures. I am sold on the "L" lenses now and my only regret is that this lens makes my other lenses seem inferior, and will likely cost me many $ as I purchase oter "L's".
IS is fantastic as I am getting a little shake in my 50 something old age.
Just get it, you won't regret it.
dbren
|
|
|
Jun 17, 2007
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reviews
|
Views
|
Date of last review
|
|
221
|
410691
|
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
