Anyone with Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L USM

[stevechoi]

How is this lens for its value? any other recomendations around that price? thanks

Steve

[CoolToolGuy]

The 70-200 f4L is one of the best values in the entire EF catalog. It is as sharp as its faster f2.8 siblings, yet small and lightweight. You can add Canon's 1.4x TC to it and get to 280mm without any loss in image quality (just the loss of one stop). You will not be disappointed.

Have Fun,

[Rokkorfan]

It is actually sharper than the 70-200mm f/2.8 IS L according to Canon's own tests. I highly recommend this and the 17-40mm as the best value L series lenses in the Canon lineup, closely followed by the 300mm f/4 IS L.

Cheers,

Antony

[IainB]

According to this forum, it seems to be one highly favoured lens in its range. I bought it and the 1.4 teleconverter based on this feedback. Very happy.

[FlyingPete]

Anyone flicked their 75-300 in favour of one of these? I would be afraid of missing the extra 100mm and IS?

[mgbeach]

I absolutely love mine. The 67mm filter size is a little strange but is also used on the 24-85 f/3.5-4.5, which complements the focal length range well.

[merrrrjig]

I am also planning on getting the 70-200L f/4 and the 17-40L f/4, I already have the 18-55 kit lens and a 28-135 IS USM. But im going to start replacing my lenses!

[ed2day]

This was my first L lens. Unbelievable value. I don't think I've ever seen anything negative written about it, except it's f/4 which isn't a valid complaint IMO. I hope to someday own the 2.8 IS version, but I'll probably still keep the f/4 for lighter weight.

[CoolToolGuy]

Anyone flicked their 75-300 in favour of one of these? I would be afraid of missing the extra 100mm and IS?

I did that exact thing. I was so unhappy with the 75-300 IS, especially at 300mm, that I was refusing to use it, and gave up certain shots because of it. I didn't miss it at all! With the image quality of the 70-200 f4L, you can get a better cropped image from it than you can a full-size (okay, 1.6 crop) image from the 75-300 IS.

As mentioned, the 67mm filter size is a little odd, but the EF-S 17-85 IS uses the same size, and they make a nice walkaround pair.

My 2 cents.

Have Fun,

[Jackal]

I've never read anything bad about it.

It's on my list. Oh trust me it is....

[HJMinard]

The best value in "L" lenses ... highly recommended.

[Mac]

I absolutely love mine. It tends to be on my camera more then any other lens I have. I am hoping to pair it up with a 17-40L sometime this summer. :D

[timmyquest]

Dont think, just buy. You'll love it to death!

In my opinion...best value in the lineup. If i'm not mistaken it's the cheapest L lens they make. And it is the sharpest telephoto lens they (maybe anyone?) makes.

[mezcal]

Love this as a walking around lens. A bit hefty but takes the sharpest photos. Got mine at B&H.

[lancea]

I'm almost decided on a 70-200 as my next lens, but this thread got me to revisit the prices. I have a high-quality 77mm polarizing filter, and might want the tripod ring (included with the f2.8 lenses only). If I need to buy new filters for the f4 and add the cost of a ring, the total price gets not too far from the cost of the f2.8. But - there is a big differnce in weight (1.6 vs 2.8 lb). Any owners care to comment on whether they've found a need for the tripod ring? My camera is a 20D and I would certainly want to use a tripod at times.

[Soumitra]

I think this is one of the most affordable with excellant quality lens , as i used it for 3 years & sold for 70-200 2.8L IS but Now i feel i would have kept that lens too anyway Its really gr8 piece of optics go for it, check even photo.com mtf curves its just as sharp as its elder brother & sisters (2.8L)Happy shooting

[the7ferret]

sold the 75-300 on ebay to help pay for my 70-200 f4.
best idea yet.

[mr.photoguy]

I love this lens.
I like the fact that it isn't heavy the most though. I tend to find myself packing my Tamron 180 macro, my Thrifty kitty (18-55), and my 70-200f4L .. not to mention the 550 flash, and sometimes a tripod or monopod. all in a Tamrac velocity 7. I need to get a bigger backpack though .. in due time.

The 70-200 f4 performs well in low light also. If you have way to slow of shutter speeds, I noticed that you can get away with mirror lock up, and hand holding as I did in the below photo.
http://www.pbase.com/brucescott/image/41415114.jpg
The lens is definetly a lens to have..

[tommykjensen]

This ws my first L lens and replaced my 75-300 IS.

I often use this photo to showoff this great lens.

http://photo.klein-jensen.dk/photohtml.php?n=falcon.jpg

[griff2]

Anyone flicked their 75-300 in favour of one of these? I would be afraid of missing the extra 100mm and IS?

Certainly did. The 75-300 was just too soft, and the chromatic aberration at the long end was terrible; so, it just stayed in my bag 'till I Ebayed it towards the cost of the 70-200 f/4L.

The images from the 70-200 f/4L are in a league of their own, and now that I have L fever, I currently have a 17-40 f/4L being shipped over the pond from B & H:mrgreen:

[dphotomania]

No doubt it is one of the best value lense Canon offer. Fast, light weight and cheap. You will not feel sorry for buying it.

[CoolToolGuy]

I'm almost decided on a 70-200 as my next lens, but this thread got me to revisit the prices. I have a high-quality 77mm polarizing filter, and might want the tripod ring (included with the f2.8 lenses only). If I need to buy new filters for the f4 and add the cost of a ring, the total price gets not too far from the cost of the f2.8. But - there is a big differnce in weight (1.6 vs 2.8 lb). Any owners care to comment on whether they've found a need for the tripod ring? My camera is a 20D and I would certainly want to use a tripod at times.

A couple things about the ring (sorry for the rhyme):

You can probably get by without it, as the lens is not that heavy. It does improve the balance, however.
If you want to get one, buy the 'Tripod Ring A' in black. It is made for the EF 200 f2.8L, but it is the same ring other than the color, and it is around $30 USD cheaper.
The current 300 f4L and the 400 f5.6L come with the white ring, and it is the same ring, so if you get one of those you can switch.
I have the grip on my 20D, and I use the Manfrotto RC2 quick release system. You cannot use the QR setup on the tripod ring if you are using the grip, as the grip is in the way of the release lever. A spacer between the tripod ring and the QR plate can solve that - or use the QR plate on the grip.
As for filters, I have a UV on every lens and a C-POL for every size. The C-POL is the only one that is duplicated, and it fits on the EF-S 17-85 IS.

Hope this helps.

Have Fun,

[antaine]

Steve, you could also look at the Sigma 70-200/2.8 EX - about £70 dearer than the 70-200/4 with an extra stop. I have never used it (or the 70-200/4), but was speaking to a guy the other day and he highly recommended it - he used all Canon L's and this was his only non-Canon lense.

The Canon L's hold their value, but you might pick up a Sigma for a good price.

[Andy D]

I love this lens!

AndyD

This is a Bateleur Eagle called Captain Scarlet! Taken on Monday with my 70-200 f4L USM.

[mgchan]

... and now that I have L fever...
The fever must be highly contagious... I just got the 24-70 f/2.8L yesterday so that my 70-200 f/4L won't be lonely!

[lancea]

A couple things about the ring (sorry for the rhyme):

You can probably get by without it, as the lens is not that heavy. It does improve the balance, however. [etc]
Thanks very much for those thoughts and tips. Ultimately it will come down to how many $ I have "spare" when I visit the US late in the year. I would definitely buy another UV filter to keep on the lens as they're not too expensive. But a colour clash with the white lens? Almost inexcusable :)

[eosster]

Excellent for me as I should mostly with tripod. Really really need to get a Gitzo. Mine getting little too heavy.

[rich59]

In my opinion the 70-200 f4.0 L is the best lens value in existence. I own this lens as well as a 70-200 f2.8 L IS and a 70-200 F2.8 L. The 70-200 f4.0 L is razor sharp, focuses very fast and it is lightweight. In fact, the f4.0 is my lens of preference if I don't need the extra stop and if I am shooting in the 70-200mm focal length.

[Lucky]

I posted this in another thread. I just received my 70-200mm F/4 L today. My first L glass. Will also buy the 17-40 L next month. Hopefully I will be able to try it out in a couple of days as the forecast is calling for heavy rains on Saturday here.

[thomasrhee]

None better for the money, period. Go for it, you won't regret it. Unless you have a fat wallet and/or need the extra speed or IS, get the f/4L.

tyr

[Ray.Petri]

Hi everyone
I bought the 70-200 F4 L two days ago - I got a good deal on it.

I took a few test snaps around the garden - all very good. Excellent in fact.

Yesterday I took it to a local castle to get some shots from about half a mile away and geuss what? I forgot to take the lens hood. The sun was coming from a 90 deg angle at the side and I am sure this possibly gave me unuseable results - they were under exposed -very dark - did not seem sharp and took some rather desperate editing to rescue one or two. There was also a very slight haze in the air at a distance. Could this have caused the problem? I will reshoot as soon as possible. The results were not as good as the 28-300 I dumped back on the dealer for CA and poor focus and soft image. I am sure it was all my fault and not the lens.

I would like comment on telephoto lenses and Haze.

Regards