70-200 f/4.0 L Users?

[dennykyser]

I have read lots of reviews on this lens and have yet to find a bad review, Yet so many say to go with the 2.8. I realize this is a grea lens but for someone like myself that uses this type of lens a lot wouldnt this be a good choice. I have heard a few people say that the extra weight of the 2.8 made it harder to use.

One more thing, to I spend the $ for the tripod ring?

[robekert]

FYI
You can use Canon's Tripod Mount Ring "A"(B) which is black. It is made for the EF 200mm prime lens but will fit the EF 70-200 f/4. Best of all it is only $79.00 at B&H. You will save $35.00. I had one for mine.
Rob

[Vegas Poboy]

I left a comment on the following link http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=25125
Hopefully it'll help

[BCdives]

Of ALL my L glass it is my favorite, a little big yes, but you will more than make up for it in image quality. Great for low light situations as well. The IS version is the one I have and I wouldn't trade it for anything....well maybe a new MarkII body, but that's it.

[aeroshots2003]

I've had the 70-200L f/4 for some 18 months now and, although a great lens with super quality images, I regret not having bought the 2.8 despite of the extra cost - and weight.

Using it for aviation photography I sometimes need the extra speed in the more hectic situations. Furthermore, shooting on the platform in low light situations creates a problem, since tripod use is a no-go if you're in between taxiing aircraft. If needed I solve this by switching to a pro ISO 400 (I'm STILL a wet film dinosaur) with a downside of more grain in the images.

My word : spend the extra money and go for the 2.8, if not I still have the f/4 on sale.


Johan

[boBquincy]

I am happy with the 70-200 f4. After looking at the extra size and weight (and price) of the f2.8 I doubt I would carry it as often.

I am into carrying as little as possible. For someone who doesn't mind carrying the f2.8 it would probably be a better choice for low light photographic situations. For bright light I can't see where the f2.8 would have any advantage.

I almost always use a monopod and have not found the one less stop of the f4 lens to be a problem.


boB

[BCdives]

Rent a 70-200/2.8... Take your digits home and look at them and then you decide!...Ultimatly, you are the one will have to live with your choice. I wouldn't trust anything but my eyes....Im sure the F4 is a great lens, however I will say....Same light,same situation, you WILL Appreciate the difference and the stoping ability.

Again....Thats just me!

BC

[BCdives]

Server issues, Broken link!

:oops:

[Whaler]

What handlebars?

[dtrayers]

What handlebars?

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

[BCdives]

You guys are crackin me up... We donnn neee no stinkin handlebars! :wink:

[samdring]

I've had the 70-200L f/4 for some 18 months now and, although a great lens with super quality images, I regret not having bought the 2.8 despite of the extra cost - and weight.

and go for the 2.8, if not I still have the f/4 on sale.

Johan

Johan
Where is it for sale please?

ps I used to live in Lier near Antwerpen - does that mean I get a good or bad price?

[Whaler]

While we are on the subject of the 70-200 f/4, what is the slowest shutter speed you will hand hold the camera? I know the rule is twice the focal length i.e 200mm = 1/400 shutter speed. Have you any problems at 1/200?

[Vegas Poboy]

1/15 but I have not tried it with this lens. With my Sigma 28-70 f2.8 it works fine.

[TwoBuells]

I've had the 70-200L f/4 for about a year, works great
It is my first "L" lens
here are some Motorcycle pictures with the lens
http://www.dotphoto.com/go.asp?l=TwoBuells

http://home.att.net/~mikey394/Ride4LifeXB9R.jpg

[Tapeman]

One thing to consider. If you use a circular polarizer a lot, that will cost you about 1 to 1 1/2 stops.

Do the 2.8L if you can.

[Joytek]

The 70-200mm f4 is a fantastic lens. I use it on the 10d and it yields tack sharp images. it is a nice and light lens and quite affordable too. I did however spend a small fortune on that tripod ring. This is the sharpest lens that I have ever used. It's buid qualtiy is superb too.

thumbs up for this one. Sofar (7months of usage) no negative comments.

w.

[aeroshots2003]

Johan
Where is it for sale please?

ps I used to live in Lier near Antwerpen - does that mean I get a good or bad price?

At my place - I live near Hasselt. Having lived near Antwerpen "Het Stad" would result in a good price... for me that is :D

If interested, drop me a line.

Are you Belgian / emigrated to the Isle?

[aeroshots2003]

While we are on the subject of the 70-200 f/4, what is the slowest shutter speed you will hand hold the camera? I know the rule is twice the focal length i.e 200mm = 1/400 shutter speed. Have you any problems at 1/200?

I'm only aware of the rule "focal length = shutter speed", so 125mm would equal 1/125. I barely adhere to this rule : with the 70-200 f/4 I will shoot minimal 1/60 at 200mm. Moreover, I use the Av menu and try to stick to an aperture preset of f/8.

[dpanicc1]

I own the 70-200 f/4 and I too agree that it's a great lens. I love it! Yes, f/4 is a little slower than I'd like, but the lens is a whole bunch cheaper than the f/2.8 and the image quality is at least as good as the f/2.8. If you need a couple of extra stops, raise the ISO. The 10D is great at higher ISOs. I'd stick with the f4.0 unless you could go all the way and get the IS version.

[aeroshots2003]

[quote="TwoBuells"]I've had the 70-200L f/4 for about a year, works great
It was my first prime lens
here are some Motorcycle pictures with the lens
http://www.dotphoto.com/go.asp?l=TwoBuells

[quote]

Prime lens? I thought this is the term for fixed focal length lenses? I agree with the fact that it's a great piece of equipment. Light weight, good Q glass, pro look and pro quality.