LOG IN    OR   REGISTER TO FORUMS


Canon EF 70-210mm f/4

FORUMS Sample Photo Archives Lens Sample Photo Archive
Thread started 14 Jun 2009 (Sunday) 03:41   
LIST NEARBY THREADS
 
kandyredcoi
Goldmember
kandyredcoi's Avatar
Joined May 2009
1,611 posts
So. Cal. (951)
[MORE/SHARE]

well, did a search didnt really see a thread for this lens so here it is...lets show some love for Canon's old school 70-210 f/4 push/pull zoom lens

i guess i can start, here are a few shot with my 5d2

IMAGE: http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v476/fluxmr2spyder/nature%20landscapes/IMG_9411.jpg
IMAGE: http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v476/fluxmr2spyder/nature%20landscapes/IMG_9412.jpg
IMAGE: http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v476/fluxmr2spyder/transportation/IMG_9408.jpg

Post #1, Jun 14, 2009 03:41:54


Unique Custom Watch Straps--> www.CTDesigns.usexternal link

LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)
friz
Goldmember
friz's Avatar
Joined Oct 2008
1,595 posts
[MORE/SHARE]

I'll add a couple

IMAGE: http://i47.photobucket.com/albums/f184/frizz1/IMG_1983-2.jpg

IMAGE: http://i47.photobucket.com/albums/f184/frizz1/IMG_1438.jpg

Post #2, Jun 14, 2009 08:57:24




LOG IN TO REPLY
kandyredcoi
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
kandyredcoi's Avatar
Joined May 2009
1,611 posts
So. Cal. (951)
[MORE/SHARE]

^sweet pics!!!

Post #3, Jun 14, 2009 12:33:19


Unique Custom Watch Straps--> www.CTDesigns.usexternal link

LOG IN TO REPLY
friz
Goldmember
friz's Avatar
Joined Oct 2008
1,595 posts
[MORE/SHARE]

I bought this lens to try out the focal length before investing in the L lens. I am now finding it hard to part with this one to buy the L lens. Go figure.

Post #4, Jun 14, 2009 14:51:43




LOG IN TO REPLY
Rudeofus
Senior Member
Rudeofus's Avatar
Joined Sep 2007
502 posts
[MORE/SHARE]

It's one of these lenses you get at some point in your life and then you're stuck with it for the rest of your life. You get all the big glass, but unlike the big glass the 70-210 sits in your bag when you need it. There are sharper lenses in this range, but they don't do 1:4 macro or weigh 3 times as much and more (hence you don't take them with you casually). You think you need a lens with faster AF but realize that even fast paced sport activities can be covered well with this lens.

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos.

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos.

Post #5, Jun 15, 2009 05:44:05


Discovery is not accidental. We discover only when we make ourselves ready to receive and photographers seek discovery by mastering their craft. But it begins somewhere else. It begins with daisies, kids, awful scenes, falling in love, or growing old. It begins with that which matters to you. And it ends with visual statements that express what matters to you about these things. It is not sight the camera satisfies so thoroughly, but the mind. - Christian Molidor

LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)
Rudeofus
Senior Member
Rudeofus's Avatar
Joined Sep 2007
502 posts
[MORE/SHARE]

So to conclude this double post: this lens is an excellent cure against gear aquisition syndrome and has saved me a lot of money. I accept that the 70-200 F/4 L IS is a better lens but I wouldn't spend the price difference on it.

And to state it again: because it is so small and light weight this lens is there when you need it and when you least expected that you will need it.

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos.

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos.

Post #6, Jun 15, 2009 05:48:23


Discovery is not accidental. We discover only when we make ourselves ready to receive and photographers seek discovery by mastering their craft. But it begins somewhere else. It begins with daisies, kids, awful scenes, falling in love, or growing old. It begins with that which matters to you. And it ends with visual statements that express what matters to you about these things. It is not sight the camera satisfies so thoroughly, but the mind. - Christian Molidor

LOG IN TO REPLY
kandyredcoi
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
kandyredcoi's Avatar
Joined May 2009
1,611 posts
So. Cal. (951)
[MORE/SHARE]

Rudeofus wrote in post #8112076external link
And to state it again: because it is so small and light weight this lens is there when you need it and when you least expected that you will need it.

+1

unless your hardcore and dont mind lugging the long white lenses around

this lil lens is great especially outdoors!!!

Post #7, Jun 15, 2009 18:11:23


Unique Custom Watch Straps--> www.CTDesigns.usexternal link

LOG IN TO REPLY
kandyredcoi
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
kandyredcoi's Avatar
Joined May 2009
1,611 posts
So. Cal. (951)
[MORE/SHARE]

took this pic on the MACRO setting in my home built mini studio

IMAGE: http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v476/fluxmr2spyder/camera%20gear/IMG_1572.jpg

Post #8, Jun 23, 2009 12:04:42


Unique Custom Watch Straps--> www.CTDesigns.usexternal link

LOG IN TO REPLY
Mike ­ Deep
Goldmember
Mike Deep's Avatar
Joined Apr 2008
1,667 posts
Tampa, FL
[MORE/SHARE]

I had this lens and hated it so much I gave it away after replacing it with a 70-210 USM and a 70-200 f4L.

IMAGE NOT FOUND IMAGE IS A REDIRECT OR MISSING!
http://mikedeep.smugmu​g.com/photos/443344694​_vciTb-L.jpgexternal link
HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO


IMAGE: http://mikedeep.smugmug.com/photos/500173642_iH3aC-L.jpg

IMAGE NOT FOUND IMAGE IS A REDIRECT OR MISSING!
http://mikedeep.smugmu​g.com/photos/528356489​_LFCJg-L.jpgexternal link
HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO

Post #9, Jun 24, 2009 00:02:26


www.mikedeep.comexternal link | SportsShooterexternal link
[ 1D Mk III | 1D Mk II | 40D | 30D ] [ 50/1.8 Mk I | Sigma 8-16 | Sigma 24-60 | 70-200/2.8L | 100-400L ] [ Rokinon 14/2.8 | Zuiko 24/2.8 | Pentax 50/1.4 | Vivitar S1 90/2.5 | Tamron 300/2.8 ] [ Arca-Swiss B1 | GT1541T | 700DX | Tiltall 4602 ]

LOG IN TO REPLY
kandyredcoi
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
kandyredcoi's Avatar
Joined May 2009
1,611 posts
So. Cal. (951)
[MORE/SHARE]

^i can tell how much u hated it ;) great shots

Post #10, Jun 24, 2009 05:02:45


Unique Custom Watch Straps--> www.CTDesigns.usexternal link

LOG IN TO REPLY
Rudeofus
Senior Member
Rudeofus's Avatar
Joined Sep 2007
502 posts
[MORE/SHARE]

Mike, nobody would doubt the 70-200 F/2.8 L IS to be better/faster/quicklie​r focusing/sharper/offer​ing IS/whatever, but not to the degree that I would spend 15 times the price of my 70-210 F/4 on it. Nobody would doubt the 70-200 F/4 L to be better/quicklier focusing/sharper/whate​ver, but not to the degree that I would spend 5 times the price of my 70-210 F/4 on it. And the thrill of lens uber sharpness wears off pretty quickly IMHO. The thing many owners hate about this lens is knowing there are better lenses out there (call it gear acqisition syndrome if you want).

Post #11, Jun 24, 2009 05:29:07


Discovery is not accidental. We discover only when we make ourselves ready to receive and photographers seek discovery by mastering their craft. But it begins somewhere else. It begins with daisies, kids, awful scenes, falling in love, or growing old. It begins with that which matters to you. And it ends with visual statements that express what matters to you about these things. It is not sight the camera satisfies so thoroughly, but the mind. - Christian Molidor

LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)
Mike ­ Deep
Goldmember
Mike Deep's Avatar
Joined Apr 2008
1,667 posts
Tampa, FL
[MORE/SHARE]

My biggest problem with this lens was the horrific CA, especially in OOF transition areas. Second was the focus speed, that annoying noise it made, and the awful manual focus ring (It's like it shipped with sand inside). Third was the schizophrenic bokeh, which looked like a mirror lens at times. I would probably put sharpness fourth on this list. It wasn't terribly sharp, but that alone wasn't enough to ditch the lens.

FWIW the 70-210 USM I found only cost about half ($60) of what I paid for the f4 ($135) and is better in almost every respect. The only thing I haven't really tried with it is close focus, since I have several lenses better suited to those tasks now. The L's are in a different league, of course.

Post #12, Jun 24, 2009 11:36:46


www.mikedeep.comexternal link | SportsShooterexternal link
[ 1D Mk III | 1D Mk II | 40D | 30D ] [ 50/1.8 Mk I | Sigma 8-16 | Sigma 24-60 | 70-200/2.8L | 100-400L ] [ Rokinon 14/2.8 | Zuiko 24/2.8 | Pentax 50/1.4 | Vivitar S1 90/2.5 | Tamron 300/2.8 ] [ Arca-Swiss B1 | GT1541T | 700DX | Tiltall 4602 ]

LOG IN TO REPLY
kandyredcoi
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
kandyredcoi's Avatar
Joined May 2009
1,611 posts
So. Cal. (951)
[MORE/SHARE]

Mike Deep wrote in post #8166497external link
My biggest problem with this lens was the horrific CA, especially in OOF transition areas. Second was the focus speed, that annoying noise it made, and the awful manual focus ring (It's like it shipped with sand inside). Third was the schizophrenic bokeh, which looked like a mirror lens at times. I would probably put sharpness fourth on this list. It wasn't terribly sharp, but that alone wasn't enough to ditch the lens.

FWIW the 70-210 USM I found only cost about half ($60) of what I paid for the f4 ($135) and is better in almost every respect. The only thing I haven't really tried with it is close focus, since I have several lenses better suited to those tasks now. The L's are in a different league, of course.

yea the slow focus is probably my only pet peeve about the lens :cool:

Post #13, Jun 25, 2009 04:11:48


Unique Custom Watch Straps--> www.CTDesigns.usexternal link

LOG IN TO REPLY
Rudeofus
Senior Member
Rudeofus's Avatar
Joined Sep 2007
502 posts
[MORE/SHARE]

Mike Deep wrote in post #8166497external link
My biggest problem with this lens was the horrific CA, especially in OOF transition areas. Second was the focus speed, that annoying noise it made, and the awful manual focus ring (It's like it shipped with sand inside). Third was the schizophrenic bokeh, which looked like a mirror lens at times. I would probably put sharpness fourth on this list. It wasn't terribly sharp, but that alone wasn't enough to ditch the lens.

I never noticed CA with this lens but to be honest I never looked too hard for it, it wasn't obvious to me at least (and yes, I own the 85L, so I know what CA looks like :)). We agree that sharpness is less than stellar, especially @210mm and wide open. The small manual auto focus ring could be better, but apparently small MF rings were the big rage back then when the lens was designed, just look at Canon's other ugly ducklings. AF clearly does not sound like USM but this hasn't bothered me so far. Hey, it's a 100 € lens after all.

What really surprized my was your complaint about bokeh. My sunset picture above shows beautiful blur which easily matches the bokeh of some lenses in the bokeh-thread. friz's tiger image confirms this, too.

Mike Deep wrote in post #8166497external link
FWIW the 70-210 USM I found only cost about half ($60) of what I paid for the f4 ($135) and is better in almost every respect.

In this case you got a special deal on this lens, in good ol' Europe the USM goes for 150-200 €, which is twice the price of the 70-210 F/4, plus the F/4 has macro and F/4 at the long end, which is nice to have.

Seriously, why would one compare this 100€ lens to lenses at five times the cost or more? The biggest competitors to the 70-210 F/4 are not Canon's other 70-2x0, it all the third party 70-300 lenses, which are similar in price and performance, offer more FL while being one stop slower.

Post #14, Jun 25, 2009 09:10:16


Discovery is not accidental. We discover only when we make ourselves ready to receive and photographers seek discovery by mastering their craft. But it begins somewhere else. It begins with daisies, kids, awful scenes, falling in love, or growing old. It begins with that which matters to you. And it ends with visual statements that express what matters to you about these things. It is not sight the camera satisfies so thoroughly, but the mind. - Christian Molidor

LOG IN TO REPLY
Mike ­ Deep
Goldmember
Mike Deep's Avatar
Joined Apr 2008
1,667 posts
Tampa, FL
[MORE/SHARE]

The CA (In my copy at least) was very frustrating, a diffuse purple or green glow around objects that were transitioning to out of focus. It wasn't like typical fringing you could just zap out in post. In focus areas didn't seem to show much CA, oddly enough. The problem disappeared stopped down too, but a lens that's only acceptable at f8 isn't terribly useful.

Re: bokeh, sometimes it was quite good, sometimes it was bad, and there was more variation than any other lens I've used so I suspect it was something about the lens. It definitely did not handle busier situations. Maybe it was my copy. Unfortunately I've long discarded the shots I didn't like.

As for the USM, I've also seen it go for about the same price as the f4 at KEH ($150 range). I came across a bargain but the comparison should still be valid I think.

Post #15, Jun 25, 2009 13:54:22


www.mikedeep.comexternal link | SportsShooterexternal link
[ 1D Mk III | 1D Mk II | 40D | 30D ] [ 50/1.8 Mk I | Sigma 8-16 | Sigma 24-60 | 70-200/2.8L | 100-400L ] [ Rokinon 14/2.8 | Zuiko 24/2.8 | Pentax 50/1.4 | Vivitar S1 90/2.5 | Tamron 300/2.8 ] [ Arca-Swiss B1 | GT1541T | 700DX | Tiltall 4602 ]

LOG IN TO REPLY


LIST NEARBY THREADS
54,692 views & 0 likes for this thread
Canon EF 70-210mm f/4
FORUMS Sample Photo Archives Lens Sample Photo Archive



NOT A MEMBER YET? CLICK HERE TO REGISTER TO FORUMS

CHANGE BODY TEXT SIZE FOR ALL THREAD PAGES
POWERED BY AMASS 1.0version 1.0
made in Finland
by Pekka Saarinen
for photography-on-the.net


SEND FEEDBACK TO STAFF  |  JUMP TO FORUM...  |  FORUM RULES


Spent 0.00087 for 4 database queries.
PAGE COMPLETED IN 0.02s
986 guests, 823 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 3341, that happened on Dec 11, 2014
Latest registered member is alexgr

COOKIES DISCLAIMER: By using this site you agree that some cookies will be stored on your browser. For unlogged users we store one session id cookie. For registered members we store (in addition to login session cookie) only cookies that are essential for required functionality, we do not store any personal tracking data in cookies or other browser's data storage methods.