 |
|
|
bonera
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Sep 25, 2005
Location: Italy
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Jul 20, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $584.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
very sharp even wide open, relatively light, not a burden to carry for long periods of time, solid built, high quality, focuses very fast, very quietly and very accurately, bokeh, contrast and color, price.
|
|
Cons:
|
none
|
|
|
My first "L" canon lens! I love it. It is perfect for me.
|
|
 Jul 20, 2006
|
|
Christopher-J
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jun 9, 2006
Location: Canada
Posts: 320
|
|
Review Date: Jul 13, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $578.00
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
Tack sharp IQ! One size, doesn't extend outward! Light weight and easy to use.
|
|
Cons:
|
It's white! The hood is somewhat ugly and cheap.
|
|
|
I bought this lens as a replacement for my 75-300mm IS lens. I canned that lens because it wasnt sharp. Even the loss of 100mm with the 70-200 f4L was well worth it. Its so sharp that I can crop better then ever before. I like everything about this lens except the color and the monster sized hood.
|
|
|
Jul 13, 2006
|
|
borderlight
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Dec 6, 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 1753
|
|
Review Date: Jul 12, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Right size & weight, IF, fast AF, great color/sharpness
|
|
Cons:
|
Hood is rather large.
|
|
|
I once owned the 70-200 f2.8L so I figured that if one stop was the only difference I knew quality wouldn't be an issue. The f4L version is a joy to pick up and use without all the size and weight associated with the f2.8, something that gets to be a drag carrying all day. Beyond that it had to fit in my small Domke bag (it does), and it had to be easy to hand-hold (it is).
The white color is not really as noticable as I thought because my hand cradles under a major portion of the white base. As for potential low light problems with an f4 lens, I don't rule out going to ISO 800, or using a tripod/monopod. The f2.8L is not going to help you indoors anyway, and the f2.8 IS version is very big and heavy. I am trying to keep the camera bag under 7 pounds. I bought the f4L mainly for outside shoots, and studio strobes. I have an 85 f1.8 and a 17-55 f2.8 IS for the low light stuff.
With the inclusion of a hood, rebate, and the fact that I owned a lot of 67mm filters from my Mamiya 6 days, I saved over $100 over the 70-300 IS version, a lens I was also considering. This is a great lens to own.
|
|
|
Jul 12, 2006
|
|
vin14
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jun 28, 2006
Location: Ireland
Posts: 302
|
|
Review Date: Jul 10, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
weight, price, AF
|
|
Cons:
|
it's white, it takes 67mm filters, hood is huge
|
|
|
This lens replaced my Nikon 80-200f2.8 when I switched to Canon. I bought it because I felt it's lighter weight and lower price was worth loosing a stop for. It produces very good images, perhaps I would say excellent if I hadn't previously owned the 80-200. Despite that, I still feel it has been an acceptable compromise.
|
|
|
Jul 10, 2006
|
|
aero145
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jul 1, 2006
Location: Germany
Posts: 333
|
|
Review Date: Jul 9, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Light, white, strong, sturdy, small.
|
|
Cons:
|
No Image Stabilizer.
|
|
|
This is a lens which I recommend everybody to have.
It is strong and light, and small, so its size wont bother most people, it is white, which I like.
Though told to be softer than its uncles, 70-200 2.8 non-IS and IS, it is really sharper. I have tried the 70-200 2.8 IS on a 5D and 20D, the photos weren't sharper than taken with 70-200 f4 on a 20D. I also tried the 70-200 2.8 non-IS on a 1D II N, and they were even worse than from the 70-200 2.8 IS.
Everything about the 70-200 2.8's surprises me - because of the bad quality.
If the 70-200 f4 would have had an Image Stabilizer, it would be a killer!
A little bigger tripod collar would be nice to be in the kit of 70-200 f4 IS.
Here's my idea of the 'kit':
The Lens
Lens Pouch
Tripod Collar
A Petal Shaped Hood
|
|
|
Jul 9, 2006
|
|
bollywood1970
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jun 29, 2006
Location: Canada
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Jul 9, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $799.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Almost every shot is a keeper, unlike the Canon EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 III USM which I got rid of. The lens is simply fast, sharp and provides contrast. I am definately sold on the L series lens!
|
|
Cons:
|
The lens bulkyness especially with the hood on.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jul 9, 2006
|
|
dasselbergs
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Apr 9, 2006
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 2
|
|
Review Date: Jul 4, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Finally. My first "L". Let me compare it with my EF 100mm F/2.0. That's a very sharp lens with incredible bokeh en DoF possibilities. This is even sharper and the build quality is a bit better.
However... After having shot a couple of hundred of photo's, something strange happened. I sat in the sun for a while, took some shots and rested the camera + lens against my leg. Some 2 minutes later I raised the camera, picked a subject and -wanted- to zoom in... I turned the zoomring, but nothing happened?! It completely lost drive. I turned the lens to look into the front side and the sound of rolling bits and pieces reached my ears. Nice...for a 2 week-old lens.
I returned it to my dealer yesterday and he kindly gave me a new one right away. I'll ask him what the problem was. If he ever hears back from Canon.
I was oh-so-glad that I went for a new one (600 euro's) in stead of a second hand one (580 euro's)...
My first shots with this lens:
http://www.dennisasselbergs.com/joom/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=18&Itemid=2
|
|
|
Jul 4, 2006
|
|
Glassbottle
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jan 17, 2006
Location: South Africa
Posts: 567
|
|
Review Date: Jun 29, 2006
|
Recommend? |
Price paid: Not Indicated
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharp, contrasty, colourful, brilliant on full-frame (5D), lightweight, fast accurate focus
|
|
Cons:
|
None, other than f/4, but we knew that
|
|
|
I previously left a rather lukewarm review of this lens. I was feeling a bit cheated that the famous L quality was not quite as marvellously better than ordinary lenses as I'd been led to believe.
That was true on a 1.6x crop camera.
But now I have a 5D and the true quality of this lens has become strikingly evident. Where other lenses go blurry at the borders or have their lack of resolution revealed by the 5D's big sensor, the 70-200 f/4 L just gets better and better.
It's comparable in sharpness to the 50mm/f1.4, and probably better in colour rendition and contrast.
Interestingly, my f/4L version is appreciably sharper at all f-stops than an acquaintance's Holy Grail, the f/2.8L IS. That fact just underscores what excellent value this lens truly is.
If I could I would withdraw my previous score of 8 and replace it with a 10, thanks to the lens's stellar performance on a 5D.
|
|
|
Jun 29, 2006
|
|
Allen Ko
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jan 22, 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 59
|
|
Review Date: Jun 23, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $580.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Excellent picture and build quality, light weight
|
|
Cons:
|
F4 may not be sufficient for low light indoor
|
|
|
Excellent lens for outdoor use and travel. Very sharp, nice contrast and rich color for $580. What else can you ask for? For indoor and low light the f2.8 IS will be better if you don't mind the weight (and price). According to Phtozone, the F4 has slightly better resolution that the f2.8 and f2.8 IS on the bench. I like light kit for travel so I did not buy the f2.8 version.
|
|
|
Jun 23, 2006
|
|
Yanber
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Sep 9, 2005
Location: Belgium
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Jun 22, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $600.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Everything about it is perfect
|
|
Cons:
|
Don't see any reproach to do
|
|
|
Excellent quality / price ratio, and light enough to be used almost in all situations. I hesitated with the 2.8, but the price and the weight of this one made my choice.
There's nothing better than an "L" serie, this one has all the positives aspects of an "L" serie with an accessible price.
|
|
|
Jun 22, 2006
|
|
rthrbfshn
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Oct 21, 2005
Location: N/A
Posts: 39
|
|
Review Date: Jun 16, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $550.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Light, great pictures, mine works fine with 1.4 TC
|
|
Cons:
|
None
|
|
|
Great lens for the money. I liked this lens so much I am upgrading to the f2.8. Only weakness is low light shooting.
|
|
|
Jun 16, 2006
|
|
ottsmart
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: May 16, 2006
Location: Canada
Posts: 53
|
|
Review Date: Jun 12, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Never lets you down
|
|
Cons:
|
tripod mount
|
|
|
Will give you what it says. No disappointments.
|
|
|
Jun 12, 2006
|
|
el-richie
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Apr 20, 2006
Location: Spain
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Jun 4, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $725.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Light, performance, price. Really fast focus.
|
|
Cons:
|
no is O:-)
|
|
|
This is my first L series and I'm amazed. I think it's perfect (for the price). Very sharp photos, superb colors and very fast focus.
|
|
|
Jun 4, 2006
|
|
dyane
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jan 1, 2006
Location: Canada
Posts: 34
|
|
Review Date: Jun 4, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
light to carry, sharp, good colour
|
|
Cons:
|
none
|
|
|
I agonized over which zoom lens to buy between the 100-300 is and the 70-200 f4 was my final choice after trying it out on my 30D in the shop. I wanted the 70-200 f.28 is but it was a tad heavy for my hand as a carry around. I don't regret the choice while IS would have been good to have I am finding I can hold the camera steady enough without it. I went for the 1.4 extender because the 2x doesn't have auto focus ability and for wildlife I want fast shooting.
For me its a good choice and I am very pleased with the sharp shots and colour the weight is good enough to carry around and its built very sturdy.
I highly recommend this lens and I wanted to thank everyone who has posted previously it really did help me in my decision.
|
|
|
Jun 4, 2006
|
|
Pow Wow
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jun 3, 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Jun 3, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $580.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
sharp, good contrast, pleasing color, solid build, reliable auto-focus, light-weight, affordable.
|
|
Cons:
|
none at all.
|
|
|
I love this lens.
|
|
|
Jun 3, 2006
|
|
Nickerjo
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: May 28, 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 133
|
|
Review Date: Jun 2, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $544.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Everything - but i'm a hobbiest trying to learn the ropes.
|
|
Cons:
|
Nada - as of the first day
|
|
|
I read all of the reviews on various sites and also have a colleague who is quite knowledgeable. I had purchased my D30 about a week ago and was not very pleased with the kit lens. Although after some research and figuring out where it's "sweet spots" were (mm/f combos) I had a number of great PICS. The person mentioned above suggested the 55mm 1.8. I bought the model II immediatley and thought I had something great.
Waiting for my 70-200 to arrive I was quite paranoid RE: the back focus postings I had reviewed.
By the time I got to the new lens it was almost dark, so I tried some shots and really could not fairly judge the lens or focus.
The next day when the sun came out I did a quick 15 min tour of my yard with the lens in Ap P. I could not take a bad
picture.
I just "paid my dues" for pic uploads so I can't send any examples now. Tomorrow I will send one of the first four to hit the card - It is great.
My research made me curious. I chose the F4 version more on weight than $$. The IS might be great, but it seems that the
extra size and weight would balance out with the F4 if hand-held.
|
|
|
Jun 2, 2006
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reviews
|
Views
|
Date of last review
|
|
379
|
889771
|
Dec 30, 2022
|
|
|
Recommended By
|
Average Price
|
|
93% of reviewers
|
$591.78
|
|
|
Build Quality Rating
|
Price Rating
|
Overall Rating
|
|
9.64
|
9.35
|
9.5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
