70-200 F4 L on Rebel XT

[xmetal2001]

I'm thinking about buying the Canon 70-200 F4L lense for my Rebel XT. Couple Questions.

First, this is a pretty big lense right? How is it going to feel on the little Rebel XT, I don't want to pick up the camera and feel like the lense is going to break off.

Second, Does anybody have a picture of this lense on their camera(even better if its a XT).

Thirdly -- How does this lenses compare to the consumer level 100-300 lenses that Canon offers, I was looking at that lenses(around $280) but recently I've been leaning towards an L so i can utilize full potentential of my camera. What is a good quality lenses a step down from the L?

Thanks.

[tim]

I don't have an XT so I can't help much, but i've used one. The F4L isn't a large lens, but it's not small either, on an XT body I think it'd be ok, espeically if you had the battery grip. Personally I wouldn't buy an XT because they're just too small.

The 100-300 would be a step down, but not too badly, the 75-300 isn't usually a good choice.

[FScott]

Well I can't help you with an XT but here are a couple of quick shots of my 20D with my old PowerShot S100. The lens is not too large and balances nicely on the 20D. It does look HUGE however when you put the lens hood on. I thought I wouldn't need the tripod collar however. It turns out I'm going to get one. The whole thing sags just a little too much on my ballhead and I have to compensate for it.

[mrclark321]

Here is a pic of the 70-200 f/4 on my silver XT. Sorry they are kind of dark.
This lense is a little heavier than normal but I do not find it bad to carry arround, in fact a lot of time I hold it just by the lense. It is a great lense and very sharp, should have been my first purchase but live and learn this is why the forum is here!

Dan

http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y200/mrclark321/IMG_0041.jpg



http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y200/mrclark321/IMG_0040.jpg

[xmetal2001]

Well I can't help you with an XT but here are a couple of quick shots of my 20D with my old PowerShot S100. The lens is not too large and balances nicely on the 20D. It does look HUGE however when you put the lens hood on. I thought I wouldn't need the tripod collar however. It turns out I'm going to get one. The whole thing sags just a little too much on my ballhead and I have to compensate for it.

Thanks a bunch for the pictures:D When you say it sags, do you mean the forward weight causes your tripod to tilt down?

[mrclark321]

BTW I sold the 100-300mm Canon to get this lense, not the same reach but way sharper and colours are more vibrant.

Dan

[FScott]

Yeah well, not on my big tripod with the pan-tilt head but on my portable with a ball head. It works and is nice and stable but sags a little. It wouldn't be noticeable with a shorter lens but at 200 mm x 1.6 it moves down about 5% of the frame. It just annoys me and one can buy the black tripod collar for $90. For me it's worth it. It also balances a whole lot better. With the 20D the balance point is just about where the tripod collar attaches (funny that...).

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=productlist&A=details&Q=&sku=211436&is=REG

[tim]

I just want to comment on the pictures above - taking a picture of a black camera on a black background isn't so helpful! Since you're shooting a black camera and a white lens then a grey or colored background would be best, not a black or white one. I know they were probably quick shots, so it's not so important.

[FScott]

I just want to comment on the pictures above - taking a picture of a black camera on a black background isn't so helpful! Since you're shooting a black camera and a white lens then a grey or colored background would be best, not a black or white one. I know they were probably quick shots, so it's not so important.
Which part wasn't helpful, the quick reply or the fact that it wasn't "artistic"? The 20D+lens was already out on my desk since I was out shooting. I reached one foot to my left and grabbed my P&S. It had enough battery power to take the two pictures I shot and no more. I then rescaled and uploaded them. Took less than 5 minutes total. You can see the relative scale of the camera and the lens just fine. Did they help you with your question xmetal2001 or would you rather I waited until I found a nice background and a few hours for the battery to charge?

[xmetal2001]

Which part wasn't helpful, the quick reply or the fact that it wasn't "artistic"? The 20D+lens was already out on my desk since I was out shooting. I reached one foot to my left and grabbed my P&S. It had enough battery power to take the two pictures I shot and no more. I then rescaled and uploaded them. Took less than 5 minutes total. You can see the relative scale of the camera and the lens just fine. Did they help you with your question xmetal2001 or would you rather I waited until I found a nice background and a few hours for the battery to charge?

For the record, I'm not complaining:) Taking pictures just to help me was absolutely great and unexpected. While from a photography standpoint they weren't award winning, they did allow me to see what I needed and the quick response of a picture I wanted to see was worth squinting a little bit to see the details.
Thanks again FScott and mrclark.

[93octane]

Someone should make an 3rd party tripod ring for this lens. $100+ for a new one ouch. :mad:

[ddelallata]

Someone should make an 3rd party tripod ring for this lens. $100+ for a new one ouch. :mad:

I'm working on it. How does 99 dlls sound? j/k

[felix21685]

lol seriously..but thats why correct me if im wrong ..its the cheapest L out there

[tim]

Which part wasn't helpful, the quick reply or the fact that it wasn't "artistic"? The 20D+lens was already out on my desk since I was out shooting. I reached one foot to my left and grabbed my P&S. It had enough battery power to take the two pictures I shot and no more. I then rescaled and uploaded them. Took less than 5 minutes total. You can see the relative scale of the camera and the lens just fine. Did they help you with your question xmetal2001 or would you rather I waited until I found a nice background and a few hours for the battery to charge?

I meant my comment to be helpful, not critical. Your picture was helpful, but paying a little more attention to the background would have made parts of the picture easier to see.

Backgrounds are one thing that distinguish a photographer from Joe Public with a point and shoot camera - a poor background can ruin a shot, and a great background can enhance it.

[ddelallata]

lol seriously..but thats why correct me if im wrong ..its the cheapest L out there

you've got a good point there Felix.

[FScott]

I meant my comment to be helpful, not critical. Your picture was helpful, but paying a little more attention to the background would have made parts of the picture easier to see.

Backgrounds are one thing that distinguish a photographer from Joe Public with a point and shoot camera - a poor background can ruin a shot, and a great background can enhance it.

All true, and I can't say I was "happy" with the result. I probably would have taken more if the P&S had a properly charged battery, probably trying the beige rug as a background. Oh well, next time.

-- Scott.

[mrclark321]

Well I snapped 3 more and my battery died...lol
Hope it helps!! If you like I will snap some more with out the lense hood but I do not have a filter and keep it on all the time.

Dan


http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y200/mrclark321/IMG_0003.jpg


http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y200/mrclark321/IMG_0001.jpg

http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y200/mrclark321/IMG_0002.jpg

[mrclark321]

Boy I wish I could have got the Black version!!

Dan

[kram]

It does look like the lens has the camera as the attachment :)

Another 2 months and the lens gets my Drebel !!!!

[elbirth]

It does look like the lens has the camera as the attachment :)

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

I seriously laughed out loud when I read that... it's so true!

also, I don't have a picture of the 70-200mm on my 20D (the pics above suffice enough anyway) but was it just me, or did anyone else feel that the lens looks dramatically smaller in person than it does in photos?

[felix21685]

aw..i want one..so bad :)
and u know if no tripod clamp mount whatever its called (sorry sad day for me today) lol cant believe i was almost at indy ..the trip of my life..and i would have been so disappointed)

anyways if it means 70-80 dollar cheaper L lens ill figure out a way to use a tripod :)

[ed rader]

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

I seriously laughed out loud when I read that... it's so true!

also, I don't have a picture of the 70-200mm on my 20D (the pics above suffice enough anyway) but was it just me, or did anyone else feel that the lens looks dramatically smaller in person than it does in photos?

the 70-200 is a lot smaller than i imagined. i compared it to the sigma 70-200 last week in a local camera store.

before seeing the two i was leaning toward the sigma and now i have the canon on the way.

the sigma seemed twice as big as the canon (it wasn't) and i really do prefer a light kit.

i think the canon 70-200L f4 will nicely complement my tamrons 17-35 and 28-75. and just in case i need a little more reach i have a kenko 1.4 TC on the way :cool: .

ed rader

[condyk]

While the lens is not so big and it's also reasonably lightweight I think you ideally need a tripod mount, which you pay extra for, to avoid strain on the body, and for most effortless use while carrying around you need a grip.

Cue alternative viewpoint from Canon 1200mm L user with an XT :lol: :lol:

[Medic1]

I let my friend put my 70-200 f4 on his XT because I thought it would be front heavy and feel awkward, but surprisingly enough it is not that bad.