The real purpose of the 70-200mmf/4

[mrclark321]

I have asked about this lense and there has been a lot of discission about it.
What is this lense mainly for? Can you use it indoors? The most pictures I'm going to be taking is going to be of the family. Can you call this lense a general purpose walk around lense starting at 70mm? When I buy something I usually research the hell out of it and all comments are welcome.

Dan

[mrclark321]

Input??

[tommykjensen]

You probably need the 2.8 IS version for indoors shooting. The f4 version is great outdoors.

[Steve Parr]

The real purpose of the 70-200mm f/4L is to torment me until it sucks my money from my wallet, thereby casting me into the inescapeable pit of L-glass purchases.

Oh...

You meant where can you use it. Sorry... can't really help you there...

Steve

[tim]

The 2.8 IS version's too heavy for most people to carry for more than 5-10 minutes. I do a lot of upper body weights and I still struggle. Get the Tamron 28-75, you'll need wider than 70mm inside, that Tamron's the lens I use most by far.

[JuStDaVe]

i use it all the time for anything .... great for overcast days outside .. i found it great ... best investment

[mrclark321]

I think the 70-200mmf/4 is spending pushing the limits for me!!

[Eric DeCastro]

the f/4 version's purpose is to make you feel like yuo have a good lense by pretending it's a 2.8 IS. lol get the IS and call it a day, no questions, no excuses.

[mrclark321]

Hey....I don't see it in your signiture.....lol

[Eric DeCastro]

Hey....I don't see it in your signiture.....lol
I don't need to list anything, but "we" as a company have it. i don't need that focal length except race events, so don't need it for myself. but since you were asking...thus my responce.

[Raj]

I have asked about this lense and there has been a lot of discission about it.
What is this lense mainly for? Can you use it indoors? The most pictures I'm going to be taking is going to be of the family. Can you call this lense a general purpose walk around lense starting at 70mm? When I buy something I usually research the hell out of it and all comments are welcome.

Dan

At 70 mm I wont call it a general purpose walkaround lense. And for indoors f2.8 version is better, non IS version if you cant afford f2.8 IS version.

I personally went for sigma EX HSM f2.8 as it placed close to f4l in terms of price but gives nice pictures comparable (if not better than) L lens.

You can use 70-200 for portraiture & medium range animal/birds shots. Its a bit short at 200 mm but you can use extenders (all the more reason to get a f2.8 lens). It can also fill frame for closeup photography.

I bought it for telephoto but am sort of discovering more uses after purchasing.

Hope this quenches your thirst a bit.

[Andy_T]

I find that f/4.0 with ISO 800 or 1600 (with noise reduction, e.g. noiseware) on the 20D is quite usable indoors. It's not perfect, but it is usable. 70 mm might be a tad long, though.

I have the Tamron 28-75/2.8 which is an incredible lens (especially for the price), and use it at f/3.5 or f/4.0 most of the time as it is *really* sharp there (more than at f/2.8 ).

Best regards,
Andy

[deedas]

I've noticed that the f/4 is just to hold people tight till they save enough for the f/2.8 IS.


This is my case anyway. :p

[willg]

I've noticed that the f/4 is just to hold people tight till they save enough for the f/2.8 IS.


This is my case anyway. :p

well it will keep its value pretty well so you aren't really losing anything

[deedas]

Yeah, you can sell it for practically the same price you got it for and use that towards the 2.8 IS. Or you can do what anyone else in here would do and buy another L lens to go along with the 2.8 IS. :lol: :lol:


I know I would! :cool:

[condyk]

This is a great question ... I had a nice example and hardly used it. I had a even nicer Sigma f2.8 and hardly used it. When I did they were superb, but the length is too long for a lot of daily stuff and too short for a lot of wildlife stuff. It is a juicy worm on a hook ... before you know it you've been reeled in and your life has become a living 'L'.

[lancea]

If it were just a price thing then I'd agree that people would only buy the f/4 because they can't afford the 2.8 (definitely out of my range)- but the weight difference is significant. Not just between the 4 and the 2.8 IS but also for the plain 2.8. I'd call it a good walk-around moderate telephoto :)

[MAD DOG]

This is worth a look at when you really want an idea of the quality of the F4 against the F2.8.

http://www.slo-foto.net/reviews-56.html
You may have may have seen it already.

Undeniably the F2.8 will work under more arduous lighting conditions than the F4, but there isn't very much in the image quality between them.

Have a look and see which you think's the better.

I opted for the F4, and yes MONEY was a serious consideration.

Mine should arrive in the next 24 hours.

Can't wait :D

[TonyKInTexas]

I own the Tamon 28-75 F2.8 and the Canon 70-200 F4L. Both have been used indoors when I am photographing concerts. The ISO has to be pushed to 800 or 1600 to get any use out of the F4L lens. It gives wonderful results though.

As to what you would use it for, that depends on your subject matter. If you are doing family shots outside, I would say it would be a good fit. Otherwise if you are photographing indoors, get a good F2.8 lens.

I have asked about this lense and there has been a lot of discission about it.
What is this lense mainly for? Can you use it indoors? The most pictures I'm going to be taking is going to be of the family. Can you call this lense a general purpose walk around lense starting at 70mm? When I buy something I usually research the hell out of it and all comments are welcome.

Dan

[Rebel]

I find the best use for this lens is for Portraits and panning shots. You will not be disappointed, although you will get the L fever that everyone here has been referring to...Here's a sample

http://www.pbase.com/image/43243346

[ssim]

The 2.8 IS version's too heavy for most people to carry for more than 5-10 minutes. I do a lot of upper body weights and I still struggle. Get the Tamron 28-75, you'll need wider than 70mm inside, that Tamron's the lens I use most by far.

Ya need to do more weights Timhttp://www.photography-on-the.net/forum/images/smilies/icon_lol.gif. I have the 70-200 f2.8 L IS and certainly don't find it too heavy. I am far from being in shape but can still walk most of the day with the 300 f2.8 L IS attached to a 1dMKII body so the 70-200 is a cake walk.

If your intent is to get a lens for mostly indoor and family stuff, I would certainly agree with Tim on the focal length that he is suggesting. I don't have any experience with the Tamron lens but have heard really good things about it. I have the Canon 24-70 f2.8 L and I find this focal length the best "walk around" lens. It's images are sharp enough that if you find that you need that little extra focal length you can crop the image so that it appears that way without any noticeable loss of quality.

[mdr]

I find it a fantastic travel lens. Not too big/heavy, and great for taking travel, particular people shots without them noticing (e.g. http://www.marcderidder.com/galleries/image.php?page=1&gallery_id=17&image_id=56)and detail shots (e.g. http://www.marcderidder.com/galleries/image.php?page=1&gallery_id=21&image_id=60).

With the 1.4x TC it is ok for wildlife, although the 300mm IS is next on my wish list.

[cfcRebel]

Hi Dan,
After more reading and research, I think 70-200f4L doesn't quite suit me. I seldom do partrait. It will be a little too long for my daily shots, such as friends, family, pets, playground, backyard shots. It definitely isn't suitable for pool party shots unless i have a Hollywood size pool. Try put on your 100-300 and use the shorter end for your family shots. I know 100mm is longer than 70mm, but that will at least give u an idea of the distance u need to take a good shot of your family. I know I can't do much at 100mm. Too short for butterfly, too long for my pet.

I've decided to "rollover" the 70-200f4L fund to Bigma 50-500 now. :D

[malum]

Hi Dan,
After more reading and research, I think 70-200f4L doesn't quite suit me. It will be a little too long for my daily shots, such as friends, family, pets, playground, backyard shots. It definitely isn't suitable for pool party shots unless i have a Hollywood size pool.
Conversely I find it perfect for all of the above

[slin100]

The real purpose of the lens is to be bought so the owner can post about it here. :)

At the time of this posting, there are 4 threads about the 70-200/4L. This lens seems to be experiencing a resurgence in popularity. I guess the Tamron 28-75 was stealing too much thunder.

[acroutzet]

I have the 70-200 F4 L and may think to sell it in the next couple of months as I find it far too short for wildlife and a bit too long for portraits and landscapes. It is also not fast enough for nice sunset lights or sports photo. That being said, it is a good lens (some good results in outdoor prortaits in day light) and the problem may come from my still limited photographic skills.:o That's why I am still giving it a chance. That's said, I recommend to think about what you really want to do with this lens before buying it. (I suppose the same is true with any lens. :D )

[napolar]

Currently I have the 70-200 F4 L on order, it will arrive on Thursday from B and H. I am using the "kit lens" for shorter shots as well as an old Canon 28-70. The Tamron 28-75 2.8 is next on the wish list. I have been using a very old 75-300 and I am finding that for most of my shooting I really don't go to the very long end of it. I think the 70-200 will fit me perfectly. Can't wait to find out.

[malla1962]

i think i would go for the f4 for outdoors and just buy a 50 f1.8 for inside there only about
$70.

[cfcRebel]

I have the 70-200 F4 L and may think to sell it in the next couple of months as I find it far too short for wildlife and a bit too long for portraits and landscapes.

That's exactly what my concerns are if i get that lens.

[rdenney]

What is this lense mainly for?

The 70-200/4L is a general-purpose telephoto zoom lens. You can use it anywhere f/4 is fast enough to provide enough light (unless you bring your light with you). It provides access to L quality at a lower price point for those who do not need the rather specialized low-light capability of the 70-200/2.8L.

It's a better lens for walking around than the 2.8, because it's much smaller and lighter.

Personally, I think it's too long for indoor use, especially with a smaller sensor. And I think it's too short for many typical telephoto applications, such as sports and wildlife. But it's great for taking pictures of people outdoors or in large, well-lit interiors, and for telephoto landscapes. And it's good enough for those other applications to provide considerably utility.

The only reason you should consider the f/4 over the f/2.8 is if the weight or cost of the latter exceeds what you will tolerate. If the extra three stops of low-light coverage (provided by the extra stop of the aperture and the image stabilization) is critically important to you, then deal with the weight and cost. Otherwise, the f/4 meets most people's needs.

I would (and did) buy this lens after already being satisfied with my coverage of moderate wide angle to moderate telephoto (which, with a small sensor, is 18 or 20 on the wide end to 70 or 100 on the long end).

Rick "who thinks with ebay prices where they are, the cost of making a wrong decision to buy a popular lens is near zero" Denney

[mrclark321]

Thanks everyone for all the input....Some may find all the posts about this lense annoying but to some of us who are seriously considering this lense as a purchase,
the monetary value of it is not a spit in the bucket and it warrants some research.
I would of hated to spend $900 Can only to find that this not what I really wanted!

Dan

[rdenney]

I would of hated to spend $900 Can only to find that this not what I really wanted!

Even if you knew you could get $875C on ebay if you didn't like it?

Rick "who thinks experimentation is cheap with good lenses for Canons" Denney

[BlueTit]

For family shots, surely 70mm would be too long a lot of the time and indoors the 2.8 would be better. What about the 24-70 for family shots and a walkaround lens, though it is quote heavy, it does not stand out as much as it is not white.

[mrclark321]

That does make it a little easier!!! lol

I wish my G6 held it's value like that because I would sell it in a heartbeat!!

Dan
Even if you knew you could get $875C on ebay if you didn't like it?

Rick "who thinks experimentation is cheap with good lenses for Canons" Denney

[RbrtPtikLeoSeny]

Hahaha yea, sure! Get $875C back for it BEFORE ebay and paypal rob you blind in fees! :) But from what I've seen, as long as you buy them from like, bhphoto.com and stuff where the prices are really low the lenses do hold their value quite well. Some people buy there stuff from places like ritzcamera where they charge hundreds more than bhphoto.com then when they try to resell the equiptment they get screwed. So, make sure you get it cheap!!!!

Also, I've been looking into this lens as well..... really worried about it's reach though..... Is it good for shooting animials at the zoo? The critters probably would be between 5ft, and 30ft away at any given time. And.... sea gulls, and ducks at the beach? I'd like to get some great shots of them in flight...... what about Macro photography? If I stand back a few feet and point the sucker at a pretty flower will I be able to get a good shot? Thanks for any help!

[mrclark321]

I can buy this lense for $829 Can. plus shipping and taxes
Came to $879 Can if I want it! I've checked other places in Ont. and
they want $980 Can. plus 15% tax. $829 Can is the same price it would
cost from B&H after shipping exchange and any other fees plus you
don't have to worry about warranty problems.

Dan

[RbrtPtikLeoSeny]

Awesome then! Good price it sounds like. Geez though, everything is so expensive outside of the US. I feel bad for all you other countries out there!!!!

[Bill Ng]

For the same price as the Canon 70-200 f/4, you can get the Sigma 70-200 F/2.8 .... end of story.

Bill in Brooklyn

[Raj]

I find the best use for this lens is for Portraits and panning shots. You will not be disappointed, although you will get the L fever that everyone here has been referring to...Here's a sample

http://www.pbase.com/image/43243346

Beatifully done Rebel. This is a very inspiring shot !

[mrclark321]

Sigma is $800?????

[Raj]

Sigma is $800?????
Sigma is indeed close to f4L in price. I dont know about states but here in Japan price difference between canon f4L & sigma f2.8 EX HSM is ~$100 only.
They are coming with the new DG version of sigma EX HSM soon though.

[symes]

I just got the 2.8 and I am very pleased with its performance indoors with Theatre lights...I manged to take some really good shots from a long ways back without interrupting anyone by being close...

but if you want it for indoor use the f4 will be tough to hold and get a decent shot without a high ISO and a lot of post processing...

Yes it is heavy but really you can hold it for a while or spend the 50 bones on a monopod..
Cheers...

[cfcRebel]

For the same price as the Canon 70-200 f/4, you can get the Sigma 70-200 F/2.8 .... end of story.

Bill in Brooklyn

The prices at B&H look very different to me. Am i looking at the wrong one?
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=productlist&A=details&Q=&sku=183198&is=USA

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=productlist&A=details&Q=&sku=148317&is=USA

Raj, is yours the one shown above?

Thanks.

[AJ Montgomery]

I own an absolutely love the 70-200 F/4L. I often shoot it with the EF 1.4x II as well and get great results. I use it on my 20D and find it indespensible. Day, night, indoors and out. Here are some examples:

Model = Canon EOS 20D
Exposure Time = 1/250"
F Number = F8
Exposure Program = Aperture priority
ISO Speed Ratings = 400
Date Time Original = 2005-04-16 12:52:59
Shutter Speed Value = 7.97 TV
Aperture Value = 6 AV
Exposure Bias Value = 0EV
Metering Mode = Partial
Flash = Flash fired, compulsory flash mode
Focal Length = 280mm
http://www.kajmonty.com/gallery/albums/Squirrels/IMG_2977.sized.jpg

Model = Canon EOS 20D
Exposure Time = 1/1000"
F Number = F5.6
Exposure Program = Aperture priority
ISO Speed Ratings = 200
Date Time Original = 2005-04-24 10:33:10
Shutter Speed Value = 9.97 TV
Aperture Value = 4.97 AV
Exposure Bias Value = 0EV
Metering Mode = Partial
Flash = Flash did not fire, compulsory flash mode
Focal Length = 280mm
http://www.kajmonty.com/gallery/albums/GBH_Olalla_042405/IMG_3623.sized.jpg

Model = Canon EOS 20D
Exposure Time = 1/500"
F Number = F4
Exposure Program = Aperture priority
ISO Speed Ratings = 1600
Date Time Original = 2005-04-26 19:05:45
Shutter Speed Value = 8.97 TV
Aperture Value = 4 AV
Exposure Bias Value = +0.33EV
Metering Mode = Partial
Flash = Flash did not fire, compulsory flash mode
Focal Length = 200mm
http://www.kajmonty.com/gallery/albums/wiggles/IMG_3790.sized.jpg

Model = Canon EOS 20D
Exposure Time = 1/160"
F Number = F5.6
Exposure Program = Aperture priority
ISO Speed Ratings = 100
Date Time Original = 2005-04-04 12:43:04
Shutter Speed Value = 7.32 TV
Aperture Value = 4.97 AV
Exposure Bias Value = 0EV
Metering Mode = Partial
Flash = Flash did not fire, compulsory flash mode
Focal Length = 122mm
http://www.kajmonty.com/gallery/albums/Color_flora/IMG_2030_3.sized.jpg

Model = Canon EOS 20D
Exposure Time = 1/1250"
F Number = F5.6
Exposure Program = Aperture priority
ISO Speed Ratings = 400
Date Time Original = 2005-04-09 15:46:24
Shutter Speed Value = 10.29 TV
Aperture Value = 4.97 AV
Exposure Bias Value = 0EV
Metering Mode = Partial
Flash = Flash did not fire, compulsory flash mode
Focal Length = 280mm
http://www.ajmontgomery.com/sports/gallery/albums/mrnrs_vs_rngrs_040905/IMG_2505.jpg

Model = Canon EOS 20D
Exposure Time = 1/1600"
F Number = F5.6
Exposure Program = Aperture priority
ISO Speed Ratings = 400
Date Time Original = 2005-05-04 18:11:03
Shutter Speed Value = 10.64 TV
Aperture Value = 4.97 AV
Exposure Bias Value = 0EV
Metering Mode = Partial
Flash = Flash did not fire, compulsory flash mode
Focal Length = 280mm
http://www.ajmontgomery.com/sports/gallery/albums/KPLL_050405/IMG_4355.jpg

[mrclark321]

Very pice pictures...That lense does nice!!! :)

Dan

[RbrtPtikLeoSeny]

Holy crap those shots rule! I was going to get that lens for my first, but I just got my 20D today, and I went with the 100mm f/2.8 Macro instead. and I LOVE IT SO MUCH!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Fantastic lens!!!!! So happy!!!!!!! Next on my list is definately the 70-200mm f/4L though, and then the 17-35mm tamron.

[clicky]

I've had the 70-200 f/4L and this is what I really liked about it:
- Lightweight, shooting handheld over a long period of time is no sweat compared to shooting with 70-200 f/2.8.
- Good build quality, not weathersealed though...
- Image quality in it's right conditions is very good - contrast/sharpness/color-wise.

To be honest though, I've just sold my f/4 and got the f/2.8 IS wich is another world compared to the f/4. But it's HEAVY and bulky, I've just started my own fitness-program to cope with the extra load :)

Why? The f/4 has a bit poor indoor performance in normal light-setting. But with a flash (high speed sync/direct/bounced) it's really great. The f/4 is a great lens if you learn to live with it's small limitations. You'll get a long way by crankin' up the ISO, use flash/extra light/tripod and so on. Don't forget the possibilities of shooting RAW/noise-reduction software. This saved my images many times while saving up the extra $ for the f/2.8.

If you "need" the extra aperture there is really no substitute.

[mrclark321]

Thanks again everyone.

Dan