My new Canon EF 70-200 f/4L IS USM [Archive] - Canon Digital Photography Forums

strat666

12th of February 2007 (Mon), 01:53

Paid for it five days ago; after an eternity, it was in my hands today and quickly mated to my EOS 400D :-)

How good is it? Hmm ... evaluate this test shot. f/4, 1/15 sec, @ 75mm hand-held. No post-processing at all [except white balance and resize]:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/alexanderino/388779896/

Do you like what you see? Do you? :-D

orisky

12th of February 2007 (Mon), 02:03

can u show us a 100% crop?

strat666

12th of February 2007 (Mon), 02:14

Edit: I have updated my previous post with a link to the full-size image.

Ospi

12th of February 2007 (Mon), 03:10

Very sharp lens thats for sure. I think this is definitely the 70-200 ill be going for.

Collin85

12th of February 2007 (Mon), 03:12

Very nice lens. Sharp shot too.

strat666

12th of February 2007 (Mon), 03:30

I was debating whether to go for the f/2.8 IS instead, but there were too many reports of soft/underperforming copies for my comfort. And boy, am I glad I got this. Sharpness to die for, and stunning, consistent performance throughout :D

Couple more shots ...

1] http://www.flickr.com/photos/alexanderino/388780134/

2] http://www.flickr.com/photos/alexanderino/388780332/

strat666

12th of February 2007 (Mon), 03:49

One more!

1] http://www.flickr.com/photos/alexanderino/388780445/

It was a dreadfully gloomy day in Sydney ... quite an accurate depiction. Note the relatively poor resolution thanks to JPEG artifacts. This one has to be seen sans lossy compression! :)

rayzorb

12th of February 2007 (Mon), 03:53

Nice sharp shots.
Did you get the lens from Oz?
If so, where from and how much did you pay?

Ray

strat666

12th of February 2007 (Mon), 04:05

Yeah, got it from JB Hi-Fi in Sydney for AUD 1650.

Collin85

12th of February 2007 (Mon), 04:23

I was on George St today with my 17-55. What a bloody terrible day! Lucky my Lowepro bag has the all-weather mesh wrap thingy.

Oh, and I never knew JB Hi-Fi even sold lenses, let alone good deals! 1650 is a pretty surprising price from a chain like them. Was it a special you got via the salesman? That's an even better price than the grey-imports d-d-photographics in North Sydney.

strat666

12th of February 2007 (Mon), 04:26

Yep, knew the salesperson there :-) Had to order it in specially. $1650 is very little over what Canon charged them.

Collin85

12th of February 2007 (Mon), 04:29

So you basically got it near wholesale price? Guess what buddy, I flippin' hate you! :lol:

Tell you what though, would of been awesome if by fluke you managed to catch a lightning shot for that AMP/Centerpoint Tower shot.

Jim G

12th of February 2007 (Mon), 04:35

Darn nice. Lovely bokeh.

Luke_1983uk

12th of February 2007 (Mon), 05:22

i have the same lens and i love mine too! i also have just used it for sports and although people dont recommend as much as the 2.8, it did a great job and i was more then happy with it.
even though the lighting was'nt all that great!

here are a few

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/137/381018927_43bac01e77.jpg?v=0

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/98/381018929_5369bcf1f7.jpg?v=0

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/131/381018915_3be38441b0.jpg?v=0

strat666

12th of February 2007 (Mon), 05:23

Bloody good, mate :)

Luke_1983uk

12th of February 2007 (Mon), 05:23

the full size shots are here, they look alot better!
http://www.flickr.com/photos/44537595@N00/sets/72157594520718883/

Ukuleleman

12th of February 2007 (Mon), 06:28

You got a cracker there mate, I got mine a couple of weeks ago but we've had grotty weather, however I got out with it eventually, never having held a camera with a lens this big before, took a couple of duck shots (links) have fun and enjoy it, btw, have you enjoyed the cricket on TV! only joking, I couldn't care less who wins, it's like watching paint dry to me.
http://i113.photobucket.com/albums/n220/Ukuleleman_2006/2007_0203S90000055.jpg
http://i113.photobucket.com/albums/n220/Ukuleleman_2006/2007_0203S90000058.jpg

Tareq

12th of February 2007 (Mon), 07:02

Are those jpeg out of camera or RAW converted to jpeg?

I have to go and test my 70-200 f2.8L IS without pp to see if it is a good copy or bad, or is it soft or sharp.

strat666

12th of February 2007 (Mon), 13:45

These are RAW files converted to JPEG [quality 6] in Digital Photo Professional 2.2 with no post-processing [except for white balance in one or two]. I almost fell out of my chair when I examined them on my monitor.

Tareq

12th of February 2007 (Mon), 13:49

strat666

12th of February 2007 (Mon), 14:03

It's amazing how consistently good the f/4 IS has been in lab tests and users' posted images. To date, I've heard of only one non-optimised copy [check fredmiranda.com]. I suspect that with this lens, Canon have managed to fix the QC issues plaguing their lens production. Or so I'd like to think :p

anthonyl

12th of February 2007 (Mon), 15:56

Ive seen that exact shot over on OCAU..I guess it must be you...hahaha!!

Nice lens..im thinking of taking my new 70-300 IS back and getting the 70-200 f/4 IS.

spitfirejd

12th of February 2007 (Mon), 16:15

strat666

12th of February 2007 (Mon), 16:17

anthonyl: that's me, all right :) And the trade-in is worth it, even though the 70-300 IS is optically very good.

spitfirejd: go for it :)

stevelew

12th of February 2007 (Mon), 21:50

Man, that lens is sharp! I have the 2.8 IS and I doubt of my lens is that sharp. Fantastic!

strat666

13th of February 2007 (Tue), 00:19

From many accounts, the 2.8 IS is nowhere as sharp, even at f/4. This is why I went for the f/4 IS. Truly a legendary lens.

More pics from today's wanderings:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/alexanderino/388829065/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/alexanderino/388826896/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/alexanderino/388836643/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/alexanderino/388836836/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/alexanderino/388837078/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/alexanderino/388837545/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/alexanderino/388837744/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/alexanderino/388837845/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/alexanderino/388838054/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/alexanderino/388838161/

Ukuleleman

13th of February 2007 (Tue), 08:14

All of the posted shots are excellent. This lense is on my list right after the 10-22. Nice pics Ukuleleman, but I hate to tell you those aren't ducks, they're geese :oops: (do they count for the POTN tradition?). They are good geese shots, but I'd PP the PooPoo on the second pic :lol:
Well spotted! I thought it was pond weed, but what do I know. Are you an expert on goose droppings? ha hahttp://photography-on-the.net/forum/images/icons/icon7.gif only joking, I really did think it was weed and added a sort of ambiance, how wrong can you be!

BBrat

13th of February 2007 (Tue), 08:24

very, very sharp! nice pics. i sometimes wonder if i should unload my 2.8 for the 4?

decisions....decisions....

Tareq

13th of February 2007 (Tue), 12:12

very, very sharp! nice pics. i sometimes wonder if i should unload my 2.8 for the 4?

decisions....decisions....

Whatever the results with new lenses here so amazing i won't replace my lenses, so i love my 70-200 2.8IS and 24-70L so why i change them.

BBrat

13th of February 2007 (Tue), 13:12

Whatever the results with new lenses here so amazing i won't replace my lenses, so i love my 70-200 2.8IS and 24-70L so why i change them.

i agree, i love my 24-70 and 70-200 as well.

spitfirejd

13th of February 2007 (Tue), 14:00

Well spotted! I thought it was pond weed, but what do I know. Are you an expert on goose droppings? ha hahttp://photography-on-the.net/forum/images/icons/icon7.gif only joking, I really did think it was weed and added a sort of ambiance, how wrong can you be!

Everybody has to be good at something...:lol:

Treat me like a tourist

13th of February 2007 (Tue), 14:23

Tareq should you change your mind about your 70-200-2.8is let me know :)
How is your 1d working out? i still havent purchased the 8mm sigma yet.

Tareq

13th of February 2007 (Tue), 15:05

Tareq should you change your mind about your 70-200-2.8is let me know :)
How is your 1d working out? i still havent purchased the 8mm sigma yet.

Soon i will do tests, just be patient
you asked me about 1D? which one, 1DN or 1Ds2?
Both are great and i kicked those 5D and 30D and xt in the bags, only showing 1-series the top of both worlds, one with white lens with red line on, and the other one with black glass with red line on. ;):lol:

anthonyl

13th of February 2007 (Tue), 17:20

I am in a quandry as to whether to go with a 70-200 f/4 IS or a 70-200 f/2.8 NON IS.....HELP ME DECIDE NOW..I need to make up my mind in the next 30 minutes!!!!!!

strat666

13th of February 2007 (Tue), 17:41

anthonyl

13th of February 2007 (Tue), 17:56

Easy. Get the f/4 IS. It's weather-sealed, weighs less [a plus for most people], has a fantastic image stabiliser, and has superior image quality. It will hold its resale value better, though I doubt many will get rid of it.

Thats the one...Im off to the shop RIGHT NOW.....back in 30 minutes!! (Hopefully with an f/4 IS tucked under my arm)!!!!

Collin85

13th of February 2007 (Tue), 18:15

The only reason I got the f/4 IS over the f/2.8 was the weight. But I'am highly pleased with the f/4 IS. The IQ is excellent and that 4-stop IS is immensely effective. I find myself constantly able to take blur-free shots at shutter speeds as low as 1/13th second at 200mm.

Treat me like a tourist

13th of February 2007 (Tue), 18:46

Soon i will do tests, just be patient
you asked me about 1D? which one, 1DN or 1Ds2?
Both are great and i kicked those 5D and 30D and xt in the bags, only showing 1-series the top of both worlds, one with white lens with red line on, and the other one with black glass with red line on. ;):lol:

Such a show off now- Have you sold all but the 1's now? I am in the market for a 5d but i want to see what canon have planned this year, hopefully all will become clear soon.

digitaljoe

13th of February 2007 (Tue), 20:52

That new f4 70-200mm knocks spots off the 2.8mm. It is just so sharp with brilliant contrast. To my eyes that 2.8 is not the best at that aperture - I would not choose to use it at that f stop. Consider it was designed years ago and technology has improved radically. QC on the 2.8 also seems to be a problem.

Canon has a winner in this new f4. If you have ever shot with a 70-200m 2.8 for an hour solid you will know what I mean about the weight of that lens. It is just too heavy for comfort (and I find the 24-70mm light!)

anthonyl

13th of February 2007 (Tue), 21:29

Im back! 70-200 f/4 IS in hand........took a few shots and so far I am impressed.

Took some shots of things I took photos of with the 70-300 IS and compared them..the 20-200 f/4 IS..is waaay better and sharper!

Thats it for me for now..2 lenses in the bag (Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 and the Canon 70-200 f/4 L IS)...next purchase will be a 1.4X converter and a tripod ring!

Collin85

13th of February 2007 (Tue), 21:56

20-200 f/4 IS..is waaay better and sharper!

A 10x zoom L with better IQ than the 70-300? Tell me the store now! :lol: :lol: :lol:

Tareq

14th of February 2007 (Wed), 00:21

A 10x zoom L with better IQ than the 70-300? Tell me the store now! :lol: :lol: :lol:

just mistake in typing, its happen when someone so happy like a crazy.
I will type alot of mistakes when i will get 300 and 400 and 600.:D;)

anthonyl

14th of February 2007 (Wed), 07:02

A 10x zoom L with better IQ than the 70-300? Tell me the store now! :lol: :lol: :lol:

Huh?

samnz

14th of February 2007 (Wed), 07:34

Buggaya Buggaya Buggaya!!! I can see another night in the dog box comin up cause I'm gonna trade up my F4L for the F4LIS. Thanks guys! (I think)???