Canon 70-200mm f4 L or Canon 70-300mm USM IS

I was looking for a telephoto lens and both of these are within my budget... which one would be better? Does anybody have any comparison shots? I know you can't go wrong with the L lens in terms of photo quality and build, but I do like the reach of the 70-300mm and the IS... Mainly I would be taking shots of nature, zoo, etc. Right now I have the 55-250mm, but I'm gonna be giving it to my husband since he is into photography as well.

These are Best Buy prices:
Canon - 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM Telephoto Zoom Lens: $499.99 (on sale - was $649.99)

Canon - 70-200mm f/4L USM Telephoto Zoom Lens: $709.99

Any advice would be appreciated!

i have the canon 70-200 f4 and love it its sharp as and a nice size and light

Are you using the lens indoors/low light? You'll have to take IS into account although it won't help with moving objects as you are probably aware.

Don't purchase from Best Buy.

Here is a link with sample comparison images. Scroll about 2/3 way down. You'll see a noticeable difference compared ot the 70-200.

http://www.the-digital-picture.com …4-5.6-IS-Lens-Review.aspx

Tamron 70-300 VC USD. AND $50 rebate still in effect!!

arch.cm wrote in post #12434311
Canon - 70-200mm f/4L USM Telephoto Zoom Lens: $709.99

Any advice would be appreciated!

This lens is around $540 if you get it refurbished from canon. Not sure if that helps with the decision.
I have been debating between the L and the Tamron 70-300 with VC which after rebate is only $400

cfxjason wrote in post #12434475
i have the canon 70-200 f4 and love it its sharp as and a nice size and light

+1 here on that - the way to go.

Another vote for the 70-200 f4. Get it used or refurbished and you'll save some money for a flash

Pictures from a Canon 70-300mm IS USM lens.

Byte size: ZERO | Content warning: NOT AN IMAGE

Byte size: ZERO | Content warning: NOT AN IMAGE

Byte size: ZERO | Content warning: NOT AN IMAGE

Choose what's more important to you -- a fixed aperture + build quality or an additional 100mm on the long end + IS.

would go tamron over the canon 70-300 but the 70-200 is still superior in terms of IQ

dmagalhaes wrote in post #12435457
This lens is around $540 if you get it refurbished from canon. Not sure if that helps with the decision.
I have been debating between the L and the Tamron 70-300 with VC which after rebate is only $400

The refurbished one sounds like a good deal, but I'm not sure if it would be so reliable since it supposidly was sent in, in the first place because it had some kind of issue... Anybody know where you can buy one refurbished?

DC Fan wrote in post #12435781
Pictures from a Canon 70-300mm IS USM lens.

| Byte size: ZERO | Content warning: NOT AN IMAGE

| Byte size: ZERO | Content warning: NOT AN IMAGE

| Byte size: ZERO | Content warning: NOT AN IMAGE

Sometimes, pictures can show how a lens may perform.

Those are pretty sharp pictures!

arch.cm wrote in post #12436490
The refurbished one sounds like a good deal, but I'm not sure if it would be so reliable since it supposidly was sent in, in the first place because it had some kind of issue... Anybody know where you can buy one refurbished?

That is direct from canon
http://shop.usa.canon.​com …uct_10051_10051​_269492_-1
Alot of people have bout them refurbished from canon, I guess they go through a very thorough inspection after being refurbished.
You also get a 90 day warranty with it

Bokehlicious wrote in post #12435897
would go tamron over the canon 70-300 but the 70-200 is still superior in terms of IQ

Take a look at thedigitalpicture.com , not a bif difference between the 70-200 and the Tamron and your giving up IS and a 100mm extra reach. I am very satisfied with the Tamron.

I actually sold the Canon 70-300 IS USM for the 70-200 f4 IS. I thought I'd miss the extra 100mm, I don't. I'm going on a safari in a few months, and I picked up a 100-400L that I'll sell when I return, but it's only special situations like that where I need the reach.

IMO, get the 70-200, the sharpness and build quality alone are worth it.

GregoryF wrote in post #12436656
Take a look at thedigitalpicture.com , not a bif difference between the 70-200 and the Tamron and your giving up IS and a 100mm extra reach. I am very satisfied with the Tamron.

You may want to get your eyes checked.. Take a look wide open at 70mm and again at 200mm. The Canon is much sharper, even Canon 200mm @f4 vs Tamron @200mm @ f5.

There's no question the optics on the Canon are better, it's just whatever the OP finds more useful.. Sharper images and a continuous f/4, or the extra reach of the Tamron.