Opinions on 70-200 f/4.0L Please

[Belmondo]

I'm waiting for one of the Dell $1,069 70-200 f/2.8L IS lenses. I should have it in another month according to the recorded message they left recently.

In the meantime, I really have a need for a good quality lens in that focal range, so I was thinking of buying the f/4.0L non-IS lens which I can pick up for around $539.00 in Los Angeles. I figure I can always sell it when the new lens comes, OR, if it's a good enough lens, I might keep it as a backup or to use on a second body.

Also, I have a 100-400 f4.0-5.6L IS on order, and Canon is offering rebates on all three lenses. If I purchase all three before January 31, 2004, I'll get triple the rebate on each of them. I haven't figured out how much that is, but it's significant enough that I want to make as many of my lens purchases as possible while the program is in effect.

My question is, is it as good a lens as the 'L' designation implies? For that matter, aside from image stabilization, is the 2.8 that much better?

I appreciate your opinions.


Thanks,

Tom

[CyberDyneSystems]

I have no fisrt hand experienc,. but from what I have heard almost unanymously the 70-200 f/4 is every bit as good a lens as the f/2.8 version,. it lacks only the extra aperture.

That said,. Dell told me the 70-200mm IS's would ship November 14th....

[Belmondo]

I've heard good things about both lenses, and it seems I've even heard some people claim that the 4.0 takes better pictures. Somehow I doubt it, but the price is right for an L lens.

By the way, I figured out that the rebates will work like this:
100-400 rebate = $50.00
70-200 f/2.8 rebate = $40.00
70-200 f/4.0 rebate = $20.00

Total rebate $110.00 times 3 = $330.00

Too good to pass up. It's like getting another 15% off.

[Dans_D60]

I have both lenses [non IS on the 70-200 2.8]. With bright outdoors where speed (sports) in not a factor, I actually prefer the f4 to the f2.8. Lighter and just as fast to focus and just as sharp.
Dan
http://www.pettusphoto.com

[Vegas Poboy]

I too chose the f/4 lens over the 2.8 IS and it is a great lens. I felt that one stop difference was worth saving the extra $$$$ mainly with digital. I took it out last week to shoot a track meet (I had to use film) and the prints came out great. I have not pushed it to the limits yet with the 10D but all reviews are @ 4+ stars.

[bwb s30]

I love my 70-200 f4 L .... Its compact enough to leave on the camera almost all the time, well balanced and the results are amaaazzzing!! for me, the extra bulk and cost of the f2.8 was not worth it

[Belmondo]

Thanks. That confirms what I suspected. It looks like I'll hang onto it even though it will be redundant. The image stabilization will be nice later on, but I rarely find myself in low-light situations, so the 4.0 will work just fine in the vast majority of my daytime pictures.

[contaxs]

I own a 70-200mm f4. It is one of the sharpest lenses I have ever owned in 60 years in photography. My benchmark long lenses are the 100mm Leitz APO Macro and the 180mm f3.4 Leitz. I would rank this lens along with those. If the f2.8 Canon IS is as sharp as the f4 consider yourself lucky. Incidentally, the 50mm f1.4 Canon is sharper than the 50mm f2 Summicron R. I bought a Novoflex adapter for the Summicron, thinking it would be a great landscape lens. I wasted $175 on the adapter. The Canon is not a lot sharper but it is definitely sharper at all apertures.
Jeff

[Sketcher]

I loved my 70-200 f/4.0L.

Lightweight, rugged, fast AF, smooth bokeh, sharp images and exceptional price for an "L". The light weight makes it a GREAT hiking and walkaround lens. It's light enough that you do not need to use the fairly expensive tripod mount collar (but I used the collar and liked being able to rotate between horizontal/veritical framing w/out having to adjust the tripod head). I've heard there is an alternate collar for about $80.00 less, it's just not "L" white.

My budget's pretty slim and I wanted the 2.8 IS version so for sale it went (Dell deal notwithstanding). Not a day's gone by however that I haven't questioned selling. A small consolation is that it went to a good home.

(I realize the triple lens discount is available but if you hold out a while longer there are very likely going to be more f/4.0L's being put up for sale at good prices once the Dell 2.8 IS's come through)

[boBquincy]

It's a very sharp, very good lens! The included hood is kinda' large for a 1.6x camera, I'm looking for another hood that fits but covers "112-320"mm.

http://groups.msn.com/DisneyWorldPhotographers/galleryq.msnw?action=ShowPhoto&PhotoID=533

[jazt]

Sketcher wrote:

.... I've heard there is an alternate collar for about $80.00 less, it's just not "L" white.
....


I'd be interested in the non-L mount. Does anyone have any info?


And...yes it's a great lens.

[Belmondo]

I picked up the f/4.0 today and am very encouraged with the first experiments. It's immediately obvious I'll want the tripod mounting ring, so I've ordered it from B&H. They're on vacation this week, so I won't have the hardware until next week at the earliest, but I intend to go out and play anyway. Size and weight are excellent.

[bwb s30]

I *think* the tripod ring for the Canon 200 mm lens is the same as for the 70-200 f/4L .. and its cheeper (but its black)!
(someone else can verify this ?)

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=productlist&A=details&Q=&sku=211436&is=REG

[Belmondo]

According to the Canon catalog, they both use the identical ring, so the price is the same. This is one of those things I'd really like to find a cheap solution to, but it probably isn't worth the extra time it would take to figure out how to save a few dollars.

The ring is annoyingly expensive ($170 list/$110 street), and not including it is no doubt a small part of why the f4.0 is such a bargain. I just don't have the time to be running around trying to find a cheap solution, so I just bit the bullet and ordered the thing.

I really believe it's anecessry item, especially for the f4.0.

[boBquincy]

For a sample photo from the 70-200 f4 please see my photo in "10D AF - Body, Lenses or Both ".

I made a mounting ring from a 2-1/2" muffler clamp, covering the hoop with sleeving (tape will work) and covering the lower clamp with tape. I welded a 1/4-20 nut in the bottom to thread the tripod screw into but welding is probably not necessary.

It works ok but looks cheap (and at $2.50 it is). It is a pain to use but for very occasional use it saves about $80.


boB

[Belmondo]

boB:

What a great shot! Is that Mark Donahue's old car?

[boBquincy]

Thanks!
I'm trying to find some information on the car. I took the photo at a Sportscar Vintage Racing Association weekend at Virginia International Raceway, 12 October.

Once they post the results I can contact the owner and find the car's history.

The photo was taken with a 10D and 70-200 f4 @200. Strangely, the data showed the focus distance as 655m but it was obviously much less, like 50m. I had the focus mode set to Servo and tracked the car for about 100m, the Servo mode did a great job of keeping it in focus.


boB