Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
Thread started 27 Feb 2013 (Wednesday) 04:41
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Canon 70-200mm f/4 L IS vs Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 L IS for landscape/travel photo?

 
lsquare
Goldmember
1,933 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Apr 2008
     
Feb 27, 2013 04:41 |  #1

I was thinking of potentially pairing either of these lenses with a Canon 24-70mm f/4 L IS lens. Naturally I'd be tempted to go with the 70-200mm lens. It's relatively light (owned one a few years ago). The 70-300mm lens is heavier, but it have a greater reach. Let's take cost out of the equation. If you guys were to go on a 1-2 month trip, which lens will you go with? How often is 200-300mm is used for landscape and travel photography? I wouldn't mind the extra reach, but the weight is more of a concern to me than cost. Opinions?




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
pdrober2
Goldmember
Avatar
2,318 posts
Joined Nov 2010
Location: Durham, NC
     
Feb 27, 2013 05:34 |  #2

tough decision. the 70-300 is not that heavy and it is a beautiful lens. if you will be shooting any wildlife on your trip, i would buy it hands down. if you are going to be under 200mm the majority of the time, the the 70-200 will be fine. however, the 70-300 adds versatility and is amazingly sharp wide open, even at 300. i sold my 70-300L to get the 70-200ii and i miss it dearly.


Fujifilm X-T1 | 23 | 27 | 56 | 90 | 55-200
Feedback

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
CJSmith
Senior Member
Avatar
390 posts
Joined Jul 2009
Location: Chicago Suburbs
     
Feb 27, 2013 05:50 |  #3

I sold my 70-200 II to get the 70-300L. It's awesome for landscape stuff. I've also owned the 70-200 f4 IS. I think the big advantage besides 300mm is that the 70-300L is much shorter when packed. Here is my "review" http://outofchicago.co​m/canon-70-300l-review/ (external link)


6D, Σ15 FE, 17mm TS-E, 24-105, 70-300L, 40mm 2.8, 85mm 1.8, 100L, 600EX-RT, Kenko 2X MC4, Kenko Tubes
www.OutofChicago.com:external link The Chicago Photography Experience
Flickrexternal link

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
pdrober2
Goldmember
Avatar
2,318 posts
Joined Nov 2010
Location: Durham, NC
     
Feb 27, 2013 06:22 |  #4

CJSmith wrote in post #15657048 (external link)
I sold my 70-200 II to get the 70-300L. It's awesome for landscape stuff. I've also owned the 70-200 f4 IS. I think the big advantage besides 300mm is that the 70-300L is much shorter when packed. Here is my "review" http://outofchicago.co​m/canon-70-300l-review/ (external link)

nice review.


Fujifilm X-T1 | 23 | 27 | 56 | 90 | 55-200
Feedback

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ceegee
Goldmember
2,320 posts
Likes: 7
Joined Mar 2008
Location: Montreal, Quebec
     
Feb 27, 2013 08:05 |  #5

I have and love the 70-200 f4 IS, and recently rented the 70-300L for a while, to try it out. I was blown away by the 70-300: focusing, IQ and an amazing IS system. It's a fantastic lens. I want one. Problem is, I can't bring myself to sell my 70-200, mainly because of its versatility. It's a small, light lens that I can carry anywhere, and it always produces outstanding results. It's fine for 90% of my needs. I'm just going to have to save up for that 70-300 ...

If weight and size are real factors, get the 70-200. However, if I was starting from scratch today, and could buy just one of these lenses, it would be the 70-300L. In your situation, for travel, that's what I'd recommend.

Either way, you can't go wrong.


Gear: Canon 7D, Tokina 12-24 f/4, Canon 24-105L f4, Canon 70-300L, Canon 60 macro f/2.8, Speedlite 580 EXII, 2x AB800

Website (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Sirrith
Cream of the Crop
10,545 posts
Gallery: 50 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 36
Joined Nov 2010
Location: Hong Kong
     
Feb 27, 2013 09:25 |  #6

Buying new today, I would pick the 70-300L.

I have the f4 IS myself, and as above, I love it because of its weight and IQ. I also love the fixed aperture and non-extending zoom. I would dearly love to trade it for a 70-300L to try it out, but cannot bring myself to do so because of those few things that the 70-300 lacks. Maybe one day when used 70-300L's are cheaper I'll be able to do it, but at the moment the price difference is too great for me to give up those features of the f4 IS.


-Tom
Flickr (external link)
F-Stop Guru review | RRS BH-40 review

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Christina.DazzleByDesign
Goldmember
Avatar
1,973 posts
Likes: 3
Joined Mar 2012
     
Feb 27, 2013 09:55 |  #7

If I was going on a 1-2 month trip, without a doubt I would take the 70-300L - but not just for the additional reach. Mainly because of the excellent travel size and weight, its not going to wear me down over hours of walking around where ever I am. The 70-300L would live on my camera during the day. The IS is incredible too :)

Here are some photos I've taken with the 70-300L, shows a variety of subjects from zoo wildlife, to actual wildlife, street portraits and other stuff if you wanted to take a look :)
http://www.flickr.com …n/sets/72157632​438436756/ (external link)


5D3 | 7D | 85L II | 70-300L | 24-105L | Nifty Fifty | 600EX-RT_______________
| Facebook (external link) | Website (external link) | Gear List |Flickr (external link) |

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Billginthekeys
Billy the kid
Avatar
7,359 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Nov 2005
Location: Islamorada, FL
     
Feb 27, 2013 12:21 |  #8

I had the same choice and went with the 70-300L. I do shoot wildlife, so having the 300mm without carrying TC's is great. Although it weighs more, it is shorter when stowed, making it actually more compact while traveling. I have a small shoulder bag that fits a body, the 70-300L, and 17-40L perfectly. IQ, AF, and IS are great on both lenses. You can't really go wrong with either, but I would still get the 70-300L if I were to do it again.


Mr. the Kid.
Go Canes!
My Gallery (external link)My Gear
what the L. just go for it.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ateet
Senior Member
271 posts
Joined Jul 2011
     
Feb 27, 2013 13:06 |  #9

My choice was driven more by moving from crop to FF. I needed that additional distance on the zoom side of things and sold my 70-200 f/4L IS. Bought 70-300L and never looked back.

I miss the f/4 aperture once in a while, but I just bump up ISO to 6400 which is not too bad for FF sensor. It's an amazing lens.


Canon 5D Mk III | EF 24-70L II | EF 135L | EF 70-300L | EF 50mm f/1.8 | 580EX II

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
lsquare
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
1,933 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Apr 2008
     
Feb 27, 2013 18:44 |  #10

Thanks for the comments guys, but how did the extra 100mm helped out? I'm trying to think of some situations where the extra 100mm will come in handy.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ateet
Senior Member
271 posts
Joined Jul 2011
     
Feb 27, 2013 19:01 |  #11

lsquare wrote in post #15659341 (external link)
Thanks for the comments guys, but how did the extra 100mm helped out? I'm trying to think of some situations where the extra 100mm will come in handy.

Full-Face Portraits, Birding to an extent, pics in zoo, pics in parks and when I just feel lazy to move my bottom. Also works for macro shots to a degree.


Canon 5D Mk III | EF 24-70L II | EF 135L | EF 70-300L | EF 50mm f/1.8 | 580EX II

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
pdrober2
Goldmember
Avatar
2,318 posts
Joined Nov 2010
Location: Durham, NC
     
Feb 27, 2013 19:36 |  #12

lsquare wrote in post #15659341 (external link)
Thanks for the comments guys, but how did the extra 100mm helped out? I'm trying to think of some situations where the extra 100mm will come in handy.

zoo, daylight sports, peeping on neighbors, light birding, etc. for the record, i have never once said "i wish i didn't have an extra 100mm on this lens" :)


Fujifilm X-T1 | 23 | 27 | 56 | 90 | 55-200
Feedback

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
KingRiver
Member
43 posts
Joined Jun 2011
Location: Sweden
     
Feb 28, 2013 13:41 |  #13

Hi! May I ask as you are debating; I'm trying to decide between 70-200 f/4 L IS USM and 70-300 f/4-5.6 L IS. Coming from EF-S 55-250mm f/4.0-5.6 IS II ---> 70-200 f/4 L IS USM ----> Tamron af sp 70-300mm f/4-5.6 di vc usd. Long story in short version; did'nt really like the feeling of the 55-250 in terms of handling,weight or IQ. The 70-200 was a large step up in IQ,buildquality etc but money-issues came up and had to sell it. Bought the Tamron and its a bargain considering what it performs but starting to fade in IQ somewhere beyond 200mm, VC on this lens is perfect, focal length suits me perfect. I just sold it, wanting to buy one of Canon's L telezooms again. In my mind the 70-300 L sounds perfect but.....cons/pros versus them? Is the only difference size/weight,aperture and 200-->300mm? What did I miss ( if anything)? IQ? -Thanks! ......and CJS; great review.


EOS 60D = Sigma EX 10-20/4,0-5,6 DC HSM = Sigma 17-70/2,8-4,0 DC OS HSM = EF 50 1.8 II = Helios 44-2 F/2

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
jimewall
Goldmember
1,871 posts
Likes: 11
Joined May 2008
Location: Cleveland, Ohio
     
Feb 28, 2013 14:59 as a reply to  @ KingRiver's post |  #14

In general I'd rather have the reach and smaller packing size of the 70-300mm than the lighter (290g lighter IS version) but longer (29mm) in length 70-200.

If I didn't need (want?) an f/2.8, I probably would have went with the 70-300L or the 100-400L for the reach. Since you travel that puts and weight the 100-400L would be too big for you. Despite my first line here, I have no problem lugging around the f/2.8 on vacation.


Thanks for Reading & Good Luck - Jim
GEAR

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ed ­ rader
"I am not the final word"
Avatar
23,102 posts
Gallery: 4 photos
Likes: 435
Joined May 2005
Location: silicon valley
     
Feb 28, 2013 16:02 |  #15

lsquare wrote in post #15656962 (external link)
I was thinking of potentially pairing either of these lenses with a Canon 24-70mm f/4 L IS lens. Naturally I'd be tempted to go with the 70-200mm lens. It's relatively light (owned one a few years ago). The 70-300mm lens is heavier, but it have a greater reach. Let's take cost out of the equation. If you guys were to go on a 1-2 month trip, which lens will you go with? How often is 200-300mm is used for landscape and travel photography? I wouldn't mind the extra reach, but the weight is more of a concern to me than cost. Opinions?

camera?


http://instagram.com/e​draderphotography/ (external link)
5D4, 80d, 16-35L III, 24-70L II, 70-200L F4 IS II, 100-400L II, sigma 15mm FE, tc 1.4 III, 430exII, gitzo 3542L + markins Q20, gitzo GT 1545T + markins Q3T, gitzo GM4562

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

10,042 views & 0 likes for this thread
Canon 70-200mm f/4 L IS vs Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 L IS for landscape/travel photo?
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is bushpilot
866 guests, 325 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.