Whats with the 70-200 f4?

[Medic1]

I have looked all over and cannot find a site that tells me what comes with each lens. I am going to be buying some lenses in the near future and would like to know what kind of cost I am going to be looking at for accessory equipment. Mainly, I would like to know if each lens comes with a lens hood, tridod collar, or softcase.

I thought I saw a website that said the 70-200 f4 came with a lens hood and softcase, but not collar. But everywhere I look says the hood, collar and case are optional. I know a couple people with the 70-200 2.8 that said their lens came with all three.

Anyone with the 70-200 f4 or the 100-400 IS let me know what came "in the box"

Thanks a million....

[Medic1]

Heres the only link I can find that says the hood and case are included.

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-70-200mm-f-4.0-L-USM-Lens-Review.aspx

[Cadwell]

Both come with hoods.
100-400 comes with a tripod collar, 70-200 f/4 doesn't.
100-400 comes with a lens case worth having, the 70-200 f/4 might have come with one of those silly draw-string "pouches" that Canon has the cheek to call a case, but I really can't remember - whatever it came with is pretty useless.

[MattGayton]

Thats right, the 70-200 f4 only comes with the stupid pouch thing. I chucked it in the drawer as soon as I took it out of the box and have never used it. Only kept it in case I ever sell the lens.(Hopefully never!)

[tim]

Go to www.bhphotovide.com, find the lens, click on accessories.

[epeace]

i am in the market for a good zoom lens in the range of 70-200mm and have decided to bite the bullet and save for the Canon 70-200 f/2.8L. I had considered getting the f/4L being that it is over $1000 cheaper for f/1.2 less but since I have aspirations of going pro I figured I might as well do it right the first time.

That being said, I was wondering if anyone could suggest a cheap (under $150) alternative to get me by in the meantime. I am considering Canon's EF 80-200 f/4.5 II but it doesnt necessarily have to be a Canon. Just something decent for for the price. . . .

[Citizensmith]

but since I have aspirations of going pro I figured I might as well do it right the first time.

The f/2.8 version isn't any more pro than the f/4. Lenses do not the photographer make.

Get the f/2.8 if you want the extra speed, IS, and don't mind a lot of extra weight.

Get the f/4 if you want to save some money and get a lighter lens. Optically its supposedly a touch above the f/2.8s, probably due to the simpler design required.

Or get yourself a few primes. Then you'll have better speed and optics.

Just don't assume owning a f/2.8 suddenly improves your validity as a pro. :)

Oh yeah, and the f/4 'case' is pretty worthless, the hood is perfect, and it isn't heavy enough to need a tripod mount.

[epeace]

nah . . wasnt looking for validation with the extra aperature range. . .

I just want to have the range available to me so I can be prepared for as many lighting situations as possible. The price is secondary to having the right gear when I need it.

Although, after looking into it a little more, I may stick with Sigma. They are great lenses (I love my 24-70mm f/2.8) and they are over 1/2 the cost.

I may just get the 70-300 f/4-5.6 to tie me over until I can drop the $800 for the 70-200 f/2.8. Will be nice to have both in my aresenal anyway : )

[Medic1]

Thanks everyone for the info......the hood was my main concern....I have a $200 Lowepro bag, so the case isn't a huge issue for now, although I would like to get the soft sided "grey" cases Canon sells. I also want the tripod collar, and as I already knew would have to buy separately for the 70-200....

[Andy_T]

Take a look at this thread, there are some ideas on a lower cost tripod ring for the 70-200/4: http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=41634&highlight=tripod+collar

The ideas range from the 200/2.8 L tripod ring (black, but cheaper) to a muffler bracket (must look interesting).

Best regards,
Andy