70-200 f4L

greenspun.com : LUSENET : Canon EOS FAQ forum : One Thread

I am shopping for my first Canon zoom (that kit lens my wife bought me doesn't count). I shoot mostly scenics, and some portraits. I would like to start shooting events such as weddings and my kids' sports. I have Canon primes - 28 2.8, 50 1.4, 100 2, 200 2.8 - an EOS 3, and Elan 7E. Given this setup and a low budget, I'm considering the 70-200 f4L. I could mount it on one body (at a wedding, for exaple) and the 50 on the other, and be versitle enough to cover things. I would like to have the 70-200 f2.8L IS (who wouldn't?), but it's just too expensive. Considering that I already have the 200 2.8 and 100 1.4, I don't think I could justify spending an extra $500 for one stop on the 70-200 2.8L, and the size/weight of the f4 vs, the f2.8 appeals to me.

Tips on technique or strategy are appreciated, but I would especially like to hear from those who have used the gear in question, or gear like it, and give factual feedback about how it may or may not help me. Thanks.

-- Derrick Morin (dmorin@oasisol.com), October 17, 2001

Answers

I'll wholeheartedly recommend the 70-200 F4L. It's a brilliant lens. Great optics (as good as the F2.8), light weight, amazing price for what you get. You can not go wrong with this lens. As you say, you have faster primes, which would make the fast zoom unecessary. You may also wish to look in to getting the 1.4X TC, to give you a 100- 280 range which might be more appropriate for sports.

-- Isaac Sibson (isibson@hotmail.com), October 18, 2001.

Ditto that bro. The EF 70-200 4L USM is an extremely fine lens both optically and mechanically. At 6 7/8 inches it is a bit long, but doesn't grow or contract when you zoom. The manual focus ring is large and smooth turning, almost as good as the focus action of many moons ago (slightly loose). I wish the focus ring was closer to the zoom ring but I've gotten used to it. It feels well balanced on my A2 with vertical grip, but is a bit front heavy on my Elan 7E.

My only complaint is I wish it was black as the white finish draws attention.

There's a $100 rebate until 1/31/02, making the final price about $560 at B&H.

-- Puppy Face (doggieface@aol.com), October 18, 2001.


Yes, the rebate is certainly a factor.

"It feels well balanced on my A2 with vertical grip, but is a bit front heavy on my Elan 7E"

I have the BP for the Elan 7E, but I would likely use the lens on the EOS 3 (w/o grip) for the faster AF. I'll buy the TC before I buy a grip for the 3.

Here is a folow-up question: How does the build quality compare to the 200 2.8 (I like how the 200 handles and feels)? This will be my only base of comparison as it is unlikely I'll get my hands on the 70- 200 before buying it.

I am looking for a deal breaker - if I can't find one my checking account will be taking a $560 hit. Additional comments are welcome.

-- Derrick Morin (dmorin@oasisol.com), October 18, 2001.


I own the 70-200 f4L, and completely agree with everyone who posted above. In fact, I have yet to see any negative comment from anyone who owns this lens.

I rented the f2.8L zoom for a week, so as far as build quality, its like the f2.8L, except much lighter and not nearly as fat. With that big lens hood and tripod collar, it takes up almost as much space in my bag as it's big brother.

For outdoor photography in good light (and indoor flash), it could displace your 100mm and 200mm lenses. The 100mm would still make a better portrait lens.

That being said, 200mm is a bit short for most kids sports (300mm is too short for soccer). For events such as weddings, the 28-70 f2.8L & 100mm & 200mm should be more versatile than the 28mm & 50mm & 70- 200. For events and kids parties, I still use the 28-105 as my primary lens.

-- Kenneth Katz (socks@bestweb.net), October 18, 2001.


Hm. I read somewhere that the 70-200 2.8L has better weather sealing than the 70-200 4L. Can anyone comment on this?

-- NK Guy (tela@tela.bc.ca), October 18, 2001.


The new 70-200/2.8L IS may have better weather sealing than the 4L, but I don't think the 2.8L non-IS does. The 2.8L non-IS pre-dates the 70-200/4L as well as Canons fairly recent campaign to increase weather-sealing on their L lenses. It's likely that the 2.8L and 4L have the same degree of weather-sealing.

-- PeterP (pphan01@hotmail.com), October 19, 2001.

So would the weather sealing on the 70-200 f4L be comparable, or beyond that of the EOS 3? And what about Canons 1.4x TC vs. the 1.4x II - is the weather sealing of the MK II TC lost on this lens body combo? Does anybody know?

-- Derrick Morin (dmorin@oasisol.com), October 19, 2001.

The sealing of the barrel of the 70-200 F4L I assume is similar to that on the older 70-200 F2.8L. Neither lens has the seal on the mount, and the EOS 3 does not either, and so the 70-200 F4L/EOS 3 combo would not take advantage of the mount sealing on the 1.4X mk II.

-- Isaac Sibson (isibson@hotmail.com), October 19, 2001.

That answers my question perfectly. A fine combo none the less, I think. Based on responses above and other resources, I'll likely buy this lens (f4L) as soon as I can save the cash for it. Thanks all.

-- Derrick Morin (dmorin@oasisol.com), October 19, 2001.

Moderation questions? read the FAQ