'L' lenses size comparison

[lawmans3]

Does anyone know of a site or have personal pics of some Canon L lenses sitting side by side. I'm looking at getting a 70 200 but I don't know if I want f4 or 2.8. I'm also looking at the 100-400 L but most users seem to think this is a monster. It's hard to look at a picture on the web without some type of reference to know how big it actually is. It would be nice to have a relatively good idea how much weightlifting I need to do before it gets here. I live in Wyoming and we do not have any top flight camera stores, so almost all of my info comes from the web. Any help will be greatly appreciated. I currently have a 28-135 IS lens if that helps any (for comparison).



Thanks..mitch

[Jarrad]

I think http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Default.aspx does that for most of their Lens "reviews". :)

Example:

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Images/Other/Canon-Telephoto-L-Zoom-Lenses.jpg

"The above picture shows the Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS USM Lens (http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-70-200mm-f-2.8-L-IS-USM-Lens-Review.aspx) (left) compared to the Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 L IS USM Lens (http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-100-400mm-f-4.5-5.6-L-IS-USM-Lens-Review.aspx) extended and retracted along with their lens hoods (http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Canon-Lenses/Lens-Hoods.aspx). Both lenses have Wimberley P20 Lens Plates (http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Wimberley-P20-Lens-Plate-Review.aspx) mounted on them. "

[lawmans3]

Thanks Jarrad! That's just what i was looking for!

[rfreschner]

Those pictures pretty much tell the story. I have the 70-200 f/2.8 and thought that was a beast until a friend brought in the 100-400 today. That thing is a monster when it's extended!!! :D

[fdi]

Personally, I love the 70-200L IS f/2.8
I dont own it, just rent it now and then when I know I wont mind lugging it around. When I shoot in door shows (no flash allowed), the f4 just won't cut it.

[CyberDyneSystems]

Just FYI,. the 70-200mm f/2.8 IS is in fact heavier than the 100-400mm IS... the 100-400mm just looks "bigger" because of how long it gets when it zooms.

the 70-200mm f/4 is substantially lighter and smaller then either of the above.

[21farms]

here's the 70-200/f2.8L superimposed over the 70-200/f4L:
http://www.pbase.com/norm/image/35004008/large.jpg

full size: http://www.pbase.com/norm/image/35004008/original

and here they are with their hoods on: http://www.pbase.com/norm/image/35004029