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 12 Jan 2010 (Tuesday) 05:30
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

70-200 F/4 NON-is - Good start for L?

 
Guapo
Senior Member
Avatar
548 posts
Joined Jan 2005
Location: Dallas, TX
     
Jan 12, 2010 12:30 as a reply to  @ post 9379078 |  #16

Enjoy it. I know I do mine.


- Steven
Canon 7D MkII

Nifty Fifty - Canon 17-55 f2.8 - Canon 70-200 f2.8
L IS MkII -

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
itmfl
Member
Avatar
226 posts
Joined Sep 2007
Location: Bay Area, CA
     
Jan 12, 2010 12:34 as a reply to  @ post 9379078 |  #17

For it's price, the 70-200 F4L is one of the best-value L lenses that Canon has to offer.


XTI | G10 | 24-105L | 30 1.4 | 85 1.8 | 430EX II

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ducatiwv
Goldmember
Avatar
2,585 posts
Likes: 159
Joined Sep 2006
Location: WV
     
Jan 12, 2010 13:32 |  #18

itmfl wrote in post #9379189 (external link)
For it's price, the 70-200 F4L is one of the best-value L lenses that Canon has to offer.

I agree, it was my first L lens and you can't beat it for the money spent


Current Equipment list: 5d/30d/24-105 f4/L IS USM / 70-200f4L/ Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 XR DI II/sigma 10-20/canon 50 1.4

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
eelnoraa
Goldmember
1,798 posts
Likes: 37
Joined May 2007
     
Jan 12, 2010 13:36 |  #19

Rubberhead wrote in post #9378998 (external link)
I'm a hiker/hunter that takes a lot of pictures. I got the non-IS 70-200mm f/4L as my first "L".

It was a very frustrating lens. I always needed more light. I never felt that I was prepared for anything. There were a lot of situations where the 70-200mm non-IS just wasn't getting it done.

As soon as the IS version came out, I got it. It has been a joy. There's not a thing I can complain about.

I am totally with you on this one. It was my first L too, but I quickly found out that it is a highly over rated lens. It is a L series, it looks great and professional. It can produce good IQ in good light. But you need a lot of light for this lens. I do not recommand this lens at all.


5Di, 5Diii, 28, 50, 85, 16-35II, 24-105, 70-200F2.8 IS

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
carpenter
Goldmember
2,631 posts
Gallery: 12 photos
Likes: 461
Joined Jul 2006
Location: Green Bay, WI
     
Jan 12, 2010 13:38 |  #20

bluefox9er wrote in post #9378664 (external link)
even though i own the ultimate 70-2000 f2.8 IS L.

Great lens, but I couldn't afford the dumptruck to haul it around in :(


5D Mk IV | 24-105L | 85 1.8 | 70-200L 2.8 IS MkII | 100-400L MkII

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
garysblim
Member
Avatar
49 posts
Joined Dec 2005
     
Jan 12, 2010 13:41 |  #21

well, it was my 2nd (my first my 200 f2.8L). The image quality is just fantastic. I think the color is slightly better than 2.8 (just a hair). I'm sure you'll enjoy it. :)




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
hdruxpin
THREAD ­ STARTER
Mostly Lurking
13 posts
Joined Sep 2009
     
Jan 12, 2010 15:02 |  #22

eelnoraa wrote in post #9379546 (external link)
I am totally with you on this one. It was my first L too, but I quickly found out that it is a highly over rated lens. It is a L series, it looks great and professional. It can produce good IQ in good light. But you need a lot of light for this lens. I do not recommand this lens at all.

Wow.

So what do you recommend for £455?




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mcgong
Member
118 posts
Joined Nov 2009
     
Jan 12, 2010 16:03 as a reply to  @ hdruxpin's post |  #23

70-200 F4 was my first L Glass too. If you are going to shoot indoors with it though, I'd suggest maybe spending a little more and getting the IS version. At 200mm, the IS could really save the day. I upgraded to the IS version immediately after because of that reason.


5D2 - 20mm,50L,7-200L

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
hdruxpin
THREAD ­ STARTER
Mostly Lurking
13 posts
Joined Sep 2009
     
Jan 12, 2010 16:11 |  #24

I agree that I may want to upgrade to it, but cant afford that amount of money.

Im sure I can still get close to £400 when I sell it?




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Madweasel
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
6,224 posts
Likes: 61
Joined Jun 2006
Location: Fareham, UK
     
Jan 12, 2010 16:13 |  #25

I'm amazed that people say the f/4 non-IS is so demanding on light. I can only imagine they shoot in dark places. Especially in these days of excellent image quality at high ISOs there's no need for f/4 to be seen as a handicap. I've used it for indoor sports even - just wind the ISO up if you don't have enough light. The light weight, compact size and excellent image quality make this lens fantastic value for money.


Mark.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
vitacura
Goldmember
Avatar
1,514 posts
Joined Nov 2009
Location: Tampa Bay, Fl
     
Jan 12, 2010 16:27 |  #26

I am about to get the 100-400 for my upcoming trip to Alaska, but want a 70-200 for other uses. At first I was looking at the 2.8 is, but the price is a bit much, especially with the cost of the other lens. So I am now looking at the F/4 for $599 and it seems like a great lens for the price, can't really justify spending twice that for the IS version, or 3 times that for the 2.8 IS.


Gear & Feedback

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
hdruxpin
THREAD ­ STARTER
Mostly Lurking
13 posts
Joined Sep 2009
     
Jan 12, 2010 16:32 |  #27

vitacura wrote in post #9380541 (external link)
I am about to get the 100-400 for my upcoming trip to Alaska, but want a 70-200 for other uses. At first I was looking at the 2.8 is, but the price is a bit much, especially with the cost of the other lens. So I am now looking at the F/4 for $599 and it seems like a great lens for the price, can't really justify spending twice that for the IS version, or 3 times that for the 2.8 IS.

Exactly my inner monologue.

Im arguing with myself like mad. I could afford the 4 IS if I wait like 2 months.

I HATE GEAR LUST. LOL.

im sure f4 plus higher ISO's on my 50D will be fine........:oops:




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Guapo
Senior Member
Avatar
548 posts
Joined Jan 2005
Location: Dallas, TX
     
Jan 12, 2010 16:41 as a reply to  @ hdruxpin's post |  #28

Don't sweat it. It will be fine. Absolute worst case, you decide you need the IS and resell it down the road to fund the new one. These L's hold their value.


- Steven
Canon 7D MkII

Nifty Fifty - Canon 17-55 f2.8 - Canon 70-200 f2.8
L IS MkII -

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
PMan
Member
83 posts
Joined Sep 2006
Location: Oakville, Ontario
     
Jan 12, 2010 17:25 |  #29

hdruxpin wrote in post #9379078 (external link)
Spoil sport. :)

the thing is for the price I don't think there's going to be anything better or more useful. I'm not a pro and I'm learning. I know this lens will hold it's value when I decide to upgrade.

It is a killer lens - yeah low light, indoors it may not shine on older model cameras, but 98% of the time it outperforms my expectations.

Paul


Canon Rebel XT | Canon EF 70-200 f4L | Tamron 17-50 F2.8 XR DiII | Canon EF 50 f1.8 | Tamron 28-80 f3.5-5.6 | Canon Speedlite 430EX
Manfrotto 190XPROB + 804RC2 Head | Lowepro Orion Trekker II

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
stevenhasanuddin
Member
Avatar
117 posts
Joined Jan 2010
     
Jan 12, 2010 17:57 as a reply to  @ PMan's post |  #30

I've tried both 70-200/4 (non IS) and 70-200/2.8 (IS). Both are amazingly great lenses.

If you are not always shooting any low light situation images, then the 70-200/4 non IS is already a very great lens for the price.

If in any cases you do need to shoot low light situation images, why don't you buy 70-200/4 non IS and a monopod instead. :)




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

7,706 views & 0 likes for this thread
70-200 F/4 NON-is - Good start for L?
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 BLHdd
607 guests, 244 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.