Worried about buying 70-200 f/4L

[friscomgm]

So I am thinking about buying the very highly regarded 70-200 f/4L for my DRebel. Fred Miranda and many other sites hold it in very high regard.

However, there have been a fair number of documented cases of backfocusing both on these forums, dpreview, and many others. I could really use the lens this weekend, but do not want to deal with the possibility of backfocusing on my DRebel.

Seems that the lens works great on a Mark II or other higher end DSLR's but a lot of 10D / DRebel users have reported issues.

So is it worth it for me to take the chance and pick one up? Or should I just keep saving up for the 2.8? How many here are perfectly happy with their 70-200 f/4L or can report PERFECT focusing right out of the box with their 10D or DRebel?

Thanks!

[eric1]

i've had good results on my Dreb
http://www.pbase.com/image/30114668.jpg
don't believe everything you read on DPR

[friscomgm]

Eric - great shot! If I get enough responses like this...I'll be swayed. :)

[DReb-MO]

Sell it on eBay. Plenty of knuckleheads out there willing to pay full price on a used lens. :evil:

[RikWriter]

Mine has worked great so far.

http://img78.photobucket.com/albums/v260/RikWriter/Duckling_Reflection_Cropped_small.jpg

[dtrayers]

How about this:

http://home.comcast.net/~dtrayers/photos/crw_5486.jpg

Handheld at 200mm f/4, 1/125 sec.

[friscomgm]

Dave - love the bokeh on that shot!

[Mike H]

So I am thinking about buying the very highly regarded 70-200 f/4L for my DRebel. Fred Miranda and many other sites hold it in very high regard.

However, there have been a fair number of documented cases of backfocusing both on these forums, dpreview, and many others.

Mine focuses very well. Along with the excellent focusing, the lens is built like a brick and gives razor sharp images, even wide open. It's a joy to use.

Mike H

[maderito]

200mm, f/8, 1/500s, ISO 200, focused on subject's left eye
http://www.pbase.com/image/30373417.original.jpg

[blinking8s]

i got mine for my 300d last week, havent had a chance to play with it much, but its a very very nice lens...and man do heads turn when you pull it out...i actually get sort of embarrased when i have it on there, people are not used to big ass cameras and lenses around here or something...maybe i should move to camera land or something

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=35508 is the thread i started when asking about it...some awesome image results were posted

[Malaxos1]

I have had the lens for around five months and love it. I have yet to have one back focusing problem with it. However I did have that with a Tamron 19-30mm 3.5-4 lens. The worst thing is that I used it at a wedding I was shooting. It was the first time I have experienced beck focus...Dean

[robertwgross]

It would be correct to state that there is a fair number of reported cases of backfocus. Note that reports don't always turn out to be substantiated.

First of all, with any system like this, there is one hell of a lot of room for user error. Either the shooter picked an odd Depth of Field, or the shooter picked an odd focus point, or some similar problem. Even if it isn't the shooter's mistake, and if it is a hardware problem, then it can still be a fault of the camera body or it can be a fault of the lens itself. Now, if your camera body has zero problem with other lenses, then it isn't likely going to be a fault of the camera body. I don't think I would have any problem taking my chances with a new lens that is straight out of the Canon factory, but once you run it around the block with eBay and some of the other vendor companies out there, you don't know whose problem it is.

---Bob Gross---

[mjordan]

Here is my example of a 70-200 4.0L on a D30:

http://www.sitnprettyphoto.com/display/1500work.jpg

Excellent lens.

Mike

[tommykjensen]

A few of my good shots with this lens on a 300D

http://www.klein-jensen.dk/external/HarrisHawk.jpg

http://www.klein-jensen.dk/external/notasquirrel2.jpg


EDIT: Linking instead of embedding on CDS request.

[friscomgm]

Wow - I think I may be making a purchase tomorrow. :) I'll let you guys know how my lens turns out. I hope it is okay!

[drisley]

Get it!
It is awesome, and probably better optical quality than even the F2.8L for much less money (although quality difference is probably not noticable in either case).
I once blamed my 70-200F4L of back/front focusing, but upon further inspection, it was user error.
The problem was due to the Rebel's AI Autofocus where the AI Servo mode did not kick in. Now that I have the latest hacked firmware, and can actually select AI Servo, my pictures are sharp as a tack!
I suspect that atleast 90% of the cases where people complain of focusing problems are due to user error (that may even be conservative).

[Cadwell]

Superb lens. I love my one.

[friscomgm]

My lens is on it's way! FYI I ordered from Onecall (same place I ordered DRebel from) and they matched Beach Cameras price - ended up being about 580 shipped w/3-day Fedex. I should have the lens by Friday. Decent deal for a new lens IMO - I know that used they go for about 450-500 depending on condition.

[FrenchAmateur]

Here is my example of a 70-200 4.0L on a D30:

http://www.sitnprettyphoto.com/display/1500work.jpg

Excellent lens.

Mike

I am glad to see that you have Bouviers des Flandres in the US !
Nice picture, in addition...

[mjordan]

The Bouvier des Flandres is alive and well in the US (and I have a LOT of pictures on my web site to prove it)... a bit different than those of the same breed in Europe because they are bred more for show here than working dogs like they were intended. We have 7, and one of the ones that came from our litter is ranked #2 in the US for agility and has several agility titles that are a first for Bouviers and is blowing away the Boarder Collies almost every time she runs. We have 2 service dogs that took to it naturally with very little training and almost all of our dogs pull carts, either the two wheeled version you see here or a 4 wheel mushing cart. These dogs love to work (most of the time :lol: ) and are smart enough to learn just about anything. And I'm glad to see someone from the area where they originated from know about this breed. Thanks for mentioning them, FrenchAmateur.

Mike

[FrenchAmateur]

Thank you for your message.
Of course we see bouviers in France, but they are less and less working as the style of life has changed.
My parents used to have several schnauzers, a cousin of the bouviers, that I am sure you know and you must have in the US. They come in three sizes : giant, medium and dwarf... A very good worker also, and very effective to protect homes and other properties in its "big" version... but less flexible than the bouvier. But both breed mix very well with horses...
Kind regards,

[blinking8s]

well, the sun finally broke out today, so i pulled the 70-200L f4 out to give her a test run, i havent pulled the pics off the card yet, but this is the first one i took when i got out of my car on campus

http://www.blinking8s.com/photos/flower_03.jpg

i know its a little..."exaggerated" you might say :) but i wanted to test out the lens...ive had it over a week and rain and work have kept me from doing much

with my blind eyes, I always have more than a few pics that turn out blurry, there appears to be some from my walk on campus with the 70-200...but I wont blame it on the lens, I'll blame it on the fact i dont like being around girls when I am standing in front of a flowerbed with the massive ass lens...so i rush it :roll:

[Belmondo]

massive ass lens..

You're definitely in the right forum.


By the way, you're not from Canada are you? There, they like to sneak up behind things with massive a$$es and take their pictures. No doubt that would include your lens.

[blinking8s]

haha...nope, Tennessee...where when I go in public with my camera...esp the when it has the lens with the red stripe attached....EVERYONE wonders what the hell I am up to

[yb98]

How about this:

http://home.comcast.net/~dtrayers/photos/crw_5486.jpg

Handheld at 200mm f/4, 1/125 sec.

There is something I don't understand with this shot...
at 200 mm handhold, I thought one should use a speed of 1/(200*1.6)=1/320 sec to avoid blur...
So how did you get so a sharp shot with 1/125 sec ??? ??? ???

[dtrayers]

There is something I don't understand with this shot...
at 200 mm handhold, I thought one should use a speed of 1/(200*1.6)=1/320 sec to avoid blur...
So how did you get so a sharp shot with 1/125 sec ??? ??? ???

Lots of rounds expended on 300 yd targets at the range ... :wink:

I have to admit, I was seated at the time, but the all the basics of accurate rifle shooting apply to handholding lenses.

I held the lens in my left hand with the palm facing upward and tucked my left elbow into my ribcage. I took a breath, exhaled a little, held it, then squeezed the trigger, er, shutter release.

If I was standing, I don't think it would be this sharp. I generally follow the 1/focal length rule, but the light was getting low and I wasn't paying attention to the ISO or shutter speed. I just wanted to get the shot before the deer moved on.

[drisley]

There is something I don't understand with this shot...
at 200 mm handhold, I thought one should use a speed of 1/(200*1.6)=1/320 sec to avoid blur...
So how did you get so a sharp shot with 1/125 sec ??? ??? ???

No caffiene!!!

Since friscomgm has finally ordered his lens, would now be a good time to tell him that the 70-200F4L really isnt very good and that we were just kidding? :wink:

[friscomgm]

There is something I don't understand with this shot...
at 200 mm handhold, I thought one should use a speed of 1/(200*1.6)=1/320 sec to avoid blur...
So how did you get so a sharp shot with 1/125 sec ??? ??? ???

No caffiene!!!

Since friscomgm has finally ordered his lens, would now be a good time to tell him that the 70-200F4L really isnt very good and that we were just kidding? :wink:

hehe - as I watch my lens travel from Washington to AZ and my bank account shrink. :)

Dang I need a monopod still! :)

[drisley]

Ahh, yes, a monopod.
Although, be aware, the 70-200F4L doesn't come with a tripod ring.

Is a ring really necessary with this lens?

[dtrayers]

Is a ring really necessary with this lens?

Depends on how heavy your tripod is. I have a lightweight tripod for hiking and the camera/lens balances a lot better with the ring. On my heavier tripod it isn't as much an issue, but it still balances better.

IMO, the greater advantage of the ring is the ability to switch from landscape orientation to portrait faster without having to flop the camera to the side.

[MarkH]

How about this:

<Deer Pic>

Handheld at 200mm f/4, 1/125 sec.

I look at a shot like that and think "great pic, I wish I had a 70-200 f4L" but then I consider:

Maybe I can't hold the camera steady enough and would have blurred the same shot.
With a 70-200 f2.8L the same shot could be tried at f2.8 1/250.
With a 70-200 f2.8L IS the shot at 1/250 would be as steady as if shot at 1/2000, holy ****! That's the lens for me!

Of course it's easier to decide to buy a 70-200 f2.8L IS then it is to pay for one. It occurs to me that the f4 costs half as much and would do the job more than well enough over 90% of the time. It also occurs to me that if I spend a lot of money buying a L lens that I am not happy with 10% of the time, maybe I would wish I had spent more.

Of course the main thought recurring in my brain is - "I wish I had more money"

One thing to think about is that some people don't like to use a really heavy lens, the f4 is smaller, lighter and cheaper than the f2.8. Personally I like having a solid heavy camera and lenses, I'd buy a 1D MkII and 400 f2.8L IS if money was no object.

[2new]

just an FYI on the Tri pod ring. If you want to save~$40 US - order the black Tripod Mounting Ring A for 200mm f/2.8L II. It's the same as the white one for the f/4 70-200 only about 40 bucks cheaper.

Michael

Tripod Mounting Ring A for 200mm f/2.8L II Mfr # 2888A002
Price : $ 78.95 (B&H Photo NYC)

[friscomgm]

Of course the main thought recurring in my brain is - "I wish I had more money"


It ALWAYS comes down to that. Damnit. Oh well - while it would be nice to run out and grab a 1D MKII and a 70-200f/2.8IS we've got to compromise somewhere. Although I do know at least one individual who bought a camera instead of a car lol.

[ijohnson]

I just brooded over the 2.8 and 4 decision for about 8 months. I went back and forth about 700 times considering every possible aspect from f-stop to how cool I would look.

In the last week I switched 5 times until at the last second I bought the 2.8, after I had it on my camera in the store. My final justifications were as follows:

1) The extra stop (you need faster shutter speeds for 200mm)
2) 77mm filter size (saving a lot of money when you would have to buy separate filters for your other L's).
3) It looks so nice on camera and feels so damn substantial
4) The size is good compensation for me (you know what they say)
5) The bigger 2.8 might scare other f4s away when it counts.
6) Both of them are too sharp for my 10d anyway, so who needs flourite
7) I hate saving money, so I have to spend too much on camera equipment.
8) The guy at the camera store whinced when I mentioned the f/4
9) The weight is ok because I could just lose 1 of the 30 pounds that I need to lose and the difference is negligible for hiking.

I would have had an equally long list of I had bought the f/4. Just buy one and rely on the resale being very high.

[drisley]

Why would the guy "whince when you mentioned the F4"?
Because he gets less sales commission?

[RikWriter]

Why would the guy "whince when you mentioned the F4"?
Because he gets less sales commission?

Most likely.

[roanjohn]

4) The size is good compensation for me (you know what they say)


What???? did????? they............say????

:twisted:

Ro1

[ijohnson]

Why would the guy "whince when you mentioned the F4"?
Because he gets less sales commission?

Probably because he is a struggling camera shop that could use the extra money.

It's not that his whince was justified, it may have only been my perception. It was just another reason to spend more money. I must have gone there to buy the 2.8.

My Dad always said "you get what you pay for". Ok, Dad, tell me about the 50mm 1.8. Must be the worst lens that Canon makes.

[Danny Boy]

ljohnson,

Why do you think the 50mm f/1.8 is such a horrible lens???

[roanjohn]

ljohnson,

Why do you think the 50mm f/1.8 is such a horrible lens???

I think he was being sarcastic.

...........or.............

He could be talking about its build quality.

Ro1

[CyberDyneSystems]

PLEASE NOTE

Post LINKS!

Try to keep embeded images to a bare minimum in discussions on these forums. These threads are taking 10 minutes to load and obviously cause a tremendous burden to the server.

The Share forum is there for just such embedded images and we are blessed to have a forum and servers that can accomodate such bandwidth.

Obviously at times images directly embedded in a post on the discussion forums is fine.. but when we all get into a case of show-off one-upmanship in a discussion thread like this one,.. things are getting just a little out of hand. There is no need to choke our bandwidth in this way.

If an image is pertinant to a discussion.. by all means post a link :)

Thank you

CDS

[PJ]

I just got mine 2 days ago and am absoutly in love with it. So much so that I wish they would legalize human-inanimate object marriges here in OHIO.

This is the first shot I took with the lens on my Drebel.
Nothing really artistic but I love the quality.

Nothing is altered.
orginal size and everything straight off the cf card.

http://www.chamberbox.com/pimp/digitalphotos/hugedad.JPG


Also, i hate to sound like a total idiot, but what is BackFocusing?

thanks
PJ

[friscomgm]

Got the lens this morning, one day ahead of schedule. I love Onecall / Fedex. :)

No backfocusing at all - focused dead on exactly where I wanted it to everytime. Focusing is fast, smooth, and accurate, and the lens is a LOT lighter than I recall the 2.8 being. The lens hood is a lot bigger than I anticipated - and adds a lot of length (looks wise) to the lens, but so long it functions as it's supposed to - no worries.. Overall couldn't be happier!

[friscomgm]

Sample shot - this guy was just outside my garage today:

http://members.cox.net/jama1/bug.JPG

[ijohnson]

ljohnson,

Why do you think the 50mm f/1.8 is such a horrible lens???

Sorry, sarcasm. Just making fun of good old Dad.